【作者】 顾和军；

【导师】 钟甫宁；

【作者基本信息】 南京农业大学 ， 农业经济管理， 2008， 博士

【副题名】江苏省农业税减免、粮食直补收入分配效应的实证研究

【摘要】 随着农业生产力的提高和农产品供应的增加,农产品价格不断下降、农民收入在大多数国家包括发达国家也长期低于其他居民,因而是全球性的问题。我国的市场导向改革首先从农业和农村开始。然而,尽管我国的农业在近30年的时间里创造了世界奇迹,农民人均收入尤其是务农收入仍然很低,而且农民内部的收入差距呈逐渐扩大之势。针对这一问题,国家农业补贴政策的目标也由提高农业生产转向支持农民收入(经济合作与发展组织,2005)。在这一时期国家出台了农业税减免、粮食直补、农机具购置补贴、良种补贴等一系列补贴政策,试图解决农民收入低而不稳的问题。但发达国家的经验表明,任何与生产有关的政策和补贴,最终必然转化为土地价格和地租的上升并且增加投资和经营成本,与农民作为劳动者的收入无关(B.Gardner,2000)。另外一些研究表明,除了刺激地价和地租的上涨、不增加农业劳动者的收入以外,发达国家的农业支持和补贴政策实际上可能扩大农民内部的收入差距,即大农场受益更多(OECD,1999)。据估计,欧盟和美国价格支持的基尼系数分别是0.74和0.98,即使是对农户的直接补贴,其基尼系数也分别高达0.56和0.61(J.von Braun,2005)。由此产生的一个问题是,上述政策能否有效的解决我国农民收入低而不稳、收入差距偏大的问题?任何收入都会分解归之于生产资源的所有者,农民收入的源泉是其拥有或可以控制的资源禀赋,包括其人力资本。经济学理论告诉我们,产出来自于投入的贡献,因而收入相应归之于资源的所有者,即一般分解为利润和工资;在农业部门则通常分解为地租、利润(经营收入)和工资(劳动收入)。农业总收入扣除农业生产的物质费用之后的净收入可以分解为对土地、经营(投资)和劳动三种要素投入的报酬。农业收入分解之后归之于农业资源的所有者,对农业生产提供公共支持,其收益也会相应分解为不同资源所有者的收入。上个世纪90年代中后期以来,随着农民工走出家门、走出家乡在城乡间、地区间的流动,使中国农村居民的收入分配摆脱了单一形式,其收入出现多元化的新局面。并且,随着市场化进程的推进,农户经营渐次分化,农民不再是一个高度同质的群体,而是一个分化了的、有着不同利益和生活水平的人群。农户之间在资源禀赋(包括人力资源)方面存在巨大差距,更重要的是,农民在生产中的角色已经开始分化,不同农户的收入来源已经有所区别。有的农户已经基本完成劳动力转移,其来自农业的收入基本上是出租土地的收入,取决于地租水平;有的农户主要靠做农业雇工获取收入,其来自农业的收入基本上是劳动收入,因而取决于劳动力的市场价格;另一些农户的角色分化不明显,但其收入仍然可以在理论上区分为地租、劳动力收入和资本收入三部分,而前两部分的收入可以从土地和劳动力市场价格得到参考。由于农民的角色分化,同样的农业政策在增加某些农户务农收入的同时可能对一些农户的收入完全没有作用,在当前情况下,农民中的低收入者(包括主要提供劳动力获得务农收入者和单纯务农或主要务农的小农户)应当是国内农业政策的主要目标人群。因此为了提高政策和公共支出的效率,有必要全面审视现有的和近期内可供选择的农业及相关政策的收入分配效应,根据构建和谐社会的目标确定制定和实施政策的优先序。因此,本研究的总目标是在我国农产品供需基本平衡、农民角色出现分化的大背景下,通过理论和实证分析考察我国现行的农业补贴政策对农民收入及其分配的作用,试图验证:现行的农业补贴政策对增加农民劳动收入的作用不大,补贴的收益会通过土地租金或资本报酬提高的方式分别被土地所有者或资本所有者获得,继而对农村居民内部收入分配产生新的影响。全文共分9个部分,主要研究内容和结论陈述如下:研究内容一:农民角色分化及收入来源分化现状农民收入的源泉是其拥有或可以控制的资源禀赋。在经济发展过程中随着土地转租、雇佣劳动和雇用机械的大量发生,农民逐渐分化为主要依靠地租收入的土地所有者、主要依靠工资收入的农业劳动者和主要依靠资本收入的农业资本持有者;农民间使用的资本劳动土地比虽然相似,但是其拥有的资本劳动土地比已经有所差别。农业生产资料雇佣的比例越大,农民拥有的资源和使用的资源越不一致,农民间资源禀赋结构(资本劳动土地比)的差异越大,农民分化程度越高。本文通过两种方法测量了农民分化程度:一是将农业资源所有者拥有的土地、劳动和资本根据使用情况划分为自我使用和出租,并计算出租的比例;一是将农民使用的土地、劳动和资本依据来源情况分别划分为自有的和雇佣的,并计算其雇用的比例。测量之后发现:(1)从农业资源所有者资源出租的情况来看,资本、劳动、土地的出租量占拥有量的比重分别为68.14%、9.41%、4.55%,说明在农民内部分化程度最深的是资本,其次是劳动,最后是土地;(2)从农民使用的资本、土地、劳动中雇佣的比例来看,分别有77.10%、38.09%和28.76%的资本、土地、劳动来源于农机服务市场、土地市场和劳动力市场;(3)农民使用的资本、土地、劳动中雇佣的比例要远远超过农村中农业资源所有者资源出租的比例,说明农民所使用的资源中有很大一部分来源于农民以外的群体;(4)在样本地区,分别有35.14%、21.37%和28.12%的土地、劳动和资本来源于样本县农民以外的群体,其中,土地主要来源于村集体,劳动主要来源于安徽等其他省份的农民,资本主要来源于城镇居民或机构。此外,对资源的分配状况进行描述之后发现:样本地区土地和农业劳动力分布较为均匀;资本分布最不平均,最富10%家庭拥有接近一半的农业资本。从低收入者拥有的资源来看,收入最低的20%家庭拥有较多的农业劳动力资源(16.79%),而拥有较少的土地(12.83%)和更少的资本(8.98%)。研究内容之二:农业补贴政策对农业生产要素价格的影响。农业补贴政策通过改变农业生产要素的供给和需求改变农业生产要素的价格,进而对农民的务农收入产生影响。本研究考察了近年来实施的两种典型农业补贴政策对农业要素市场的影响:1,农业税减免和粮食直补政策对土地需求的影响;2,讨论不挂钩的补贴政策(如农业税减免)通过改变农户预算约束和财富总量,进而对要素需求产生的影响。研究内容三:农业税减免、粮食直补政策的收入分配效应这部分在农民角色分化的背景考察了上述两项政策的收入分配效应。税费减免和粮食直补政策不会增加农业生产中资本和劳动的价格,农业资本和劳动所有者不会从这两项政策中受益,政策的收益通过土地市场的作用,转化为土地租金,被土地所有者获得。通过构建收入的洛伦茨曲线和政策支出归属曲线考察了上述两项补贴政策的收入分配效应,结果表明:这两项政策支出在农民间的分配比现有收入分配更平均,可以减少农民间的相对收入差距。但是,低收入人群获得的收益较少:收入最低的10%农户只获得了这两项政策支出归于农民部分的4.27%,收入最低的20%农户仅获得了归于农民部分的11.36%。因此,这两项政策尽管可以缩小农民收入的相对差距,但仍然会继续扩大农民收入的绝对差距。更多还原

【Abstract】 Along with the increase of agricultural productivity and supply of agricultural products, the price decline end to end、the income of farmer is under other resident in long term, thus it’s a globality problem. Although China agricultural create a globality miracle in the past 30 years, the income per farmer is still so lower, and the inequality is increase. For this problem, the aim of agricultural subsidy policy is support the income of farmer (OECD, 2005).In this period China come on a series of subsidy policy such as phase out agricultural tax and direct subsidies policy to resolve the problem. But the experience of developed country show, any policy and subsidy in reference to production, will turn to be the land rents and increase the cost of invest and management, and have nothing to do with the income of farmer as labor (B.Gardner,2000). Other study show, besides to increase the land rents、don’t increase the income of farmer, the subsidies of developed countries probably enlarge the inequality of farmer (OECD, 1999). According to estimate, the Gini index of E.U and U.S.A is 0.74 and 0.98, even if the Gini index of direct payment is 0.56 and 0.61 (J. von Braun,2005). And the question is whether the subsidy policy of China can resolve such problem?Any income will decompose and belong to proprietor of resources for production. The income source of farmer is the resource of them, along with labor resource. According to theory of economics,Output from the contribution of investment, thus corresponding income attributed to the owner of resources, that is generally divided into profits and wages in the agricultural sector is usually divided into rent, profit (operating income) and wages (labour income). Agricultural income deducted from the total agricultural production material costs after a net income of the land can be divided into operating (investment) and the three elements into the labor remuneration. After the decomposition of agricultural income attributed to the owner of agricultural resources, the provision of public support for agricultural production, the proceeds will be divided into different resources accordingly owner of income. In the mid to late 1990s, as migrant workers to leave their homes, out of his home in urban and rural areas, inter-regional flow of rural residents in China's income distribution from a single form of diversification of its revenue in the new situation. And, as the market process forward, farmers gradually operating division, farmers no longer a high degree of homogeneity of the group, but a divided with different interests and living standards of people. Between farmers in resource endowment (including human resources) there is a huge gap, more importantly, the farmers in production has begun to divide the roles of different sources of income farmers already are different. Some farmers have been basically completed labor movement, its income from agriculture land is basically the rental income, depending on the level of rent; Some farmers rely mainly on agricultural workers to obtain income, their income from agriculture is basically labor income, thus Depends on the labor market prices; some farmers the role of differentiation was not obvious, but their income can still theoretically divided into rent, labor income and capital income of three parts, and the first two parts of the income from land and labor market prices Reference. As the role of farmers differentiation, the same agricultural policies in some farmers to increase income of farmers may be the income of some farmers have no role in the current circumstances, farmers in low-income people (including the main providers of labor income and access to farming Simple farmers or small farmers mainly in agriculture) is the domestic agricultural policy should be the main target groups. So in order to improve policy and the efficiency of public expenditure, it is necessary a comprehensive review of existing and near term options for agriculture and related policies of the income distribution effect, in accordance with the goal of building a harmonious society determine the development and implementation of the policy priority order.Therefore, the overall objective of this study is in China basic balance of supply and demand of agricultural products, farmers role in the context of differentiation, through theoretical and empirical analysis of the current visit of China policy of agricultural subsidies to farmers income and its distribution role in trying to verify: the existing agricultural Subsidies to farmers to increase the role of labor income do not even have a negative effect, subsidized by the proceeds will pay land rents or capital increase, respectively, were the owners or land owner access to capital, and then the internal distribution of income of rural residents have The impact of the new. The full text is divided into 10 parts, the main contents and conclusions stated the following:Research 1: Farmers role differentiation and sources of income differentiation status.The income of peasants is the source of its possession or control of the resource endowment. In the course of economic development with land sublease, wage labour and employment in the large number of machinery, farmers gradually division as the main income on rent of the land owners, mainly depend on wage income of agricultural workers and rely mainly on capital income of agricultural capital holders; Farmers use the land than working capital while similar, but its possession of the land than the capital labor has had differences. The ratio of employment of means of agricultural production is, farmers have the resources and use resources more inconsistency between the resource endowment of farmers (land capital labour ratio) of the difference is, the higher the degree of differentiation farmers. By measuring the two methods of the peasants differentiation: First, will the owners of agricultural land resources, labor and capital under conditions of use for self-use and rental and leasing terms of the proportion of the other farmers use the land, labor And capital sources based on the respective divided into its own and employment, and calculate the proportion of their employment. Survey after that: (1) from the agricultural resources of the owner of rental resources, capital, labor, land rentals have accounted for the proportion of 68.14%, 9.41%, 4.55%, and that farmers in the internal differentiation of the most Is the capital, followed by labor, and finally the land, (2) from the farmers to use the capital, land, labor, employment in the proportion of the respective 77.10%, 38.09% and 28.76% of the capital, land, labor from the agricultural machinery Services market, land market and the labour market, (3) farmers to use the capital, land, labor, employment in the proportion is far more than the owner of agricultural resources in the rural areas the proportion of rental resources that farmers use the resources of a large part of the source To farmers outside the group, (4) in the sample areas, respectively 35.14%, 21.37% and 28.12% of the land, labor and capital from outside the samples County farmers groups, which mainly come from the village collective land, the main source of labor In the provinces of Anhui and other farmers, capital comes mainly from urban residents or institutions. In addition, the allocation of resources to describe the situation after the discovery: sample areas of land and more uniform distribution of agricultural labor, capital of the average, the richest 10% of households have nearly half of the agricultural capital. From low-income people have the resources, the lowest-income families have more 20% of the agricultural labor force (16.79%), but with fewer of the land (12.83%) and less capital (8.98%).Research two: The price effect of agricultural subsidies policy on agricultural production elements.Agricultural subsidies of agricultural production by changing the policy elements of supply and demand changes in the prices of agricultural production factors, then the farmers have an impact on the farming income. This study investigated the two in recent years implemented various policies typical of agricultural subsidies on agricultural markets for factors of impact: 1, the agricultural tax relief and food policy for land Zhibu the impact on demand 2, discussion is not linked to the subsidy policy (such as tax relief) Budget constraints and farmers to change the total wealth as well as on the impact of demand factors.Research 3: The income distribution of tax relief and direct payment policy.Role of farmers in this part of the background division inspected the above two policy of income distribution. Zhibu tax and fee reduction and food policy will not increase agricultural production in the prices of capital and labor, agricultural capital and labor owner will not benefit from the two policies, the policy proceeds through the land the role of the market and into land rent, The land owner was Construction of income through the Lorenz curve and expenditure policies inspected the attribution of these two subsidy policies of the income distribution effect, the results showed that: these two policy expenditure in the distribution of farmers income distribution more than the current average, farmers can reduce inter - The relative income gap. However, the benefits of low-income populations less: the lowest-income farmers received only 10% of the expenditures attributable to the policies of these two parts of the peasants 4.27%, the lowest income only 20% of rural households was attributed to the 11.36% of the farmers. Therefore, these two policies can narrow the income of the farmers despite the relative gap, but will continue to expand the absolute gap between the income of the farmers.更多还原