Abstract
PurposeAs the essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics, common prosperity stands for both the goal of and the approach to economic growth. Shared development is a new stage of the process of common prosperity. From the perspective of economic growth, it requires the low- and middle-income groups to gain more from the growth than high-income groups. The paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approachBased on provincial panel data, the random effect model and the dynamic panel model are used in this paper to analyze the path to achieve pro-poor growth.FindingsThe keys to achieve pro-poor growth are first to promote new urbanization with people at the center, diversify the forms of employment and improve the income structure of the residents, and second to improve the accuracy in designing redistribution policies.Originality/valueAfter the realization of “some get rich first” policy, it is important to swiftly adapt to a new mindset of shared development, which charters a new course to the Marxist common prosperity. There exist few established economic theories or action plans with respect to shared development. Pro-poor growth, however, offers a perspective to achieve both sharing and development.
Highlights
As the essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics, common prosperity stands for both the goal of and the approach to economic growth
As the essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics, common prosperity stands for both the goal and the final result
Shared development enriches the meaning of common prosperity as a goal and approach
Summary
As the essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics, common prosperity stands for both the goal and the final result. This paper uses the calculation of growth elasticity of poverty reduction to illustrate the necessity and urgency for China’s path to common prosperity to usher in a new stage. To this end, first the standard of poverty needs to be determined. Before 2005, economic growth cannot be considered highly pro-poor because 2002–2003 indices based on poverty depth and severity are less than 1, though the index based on poverty incidence is greater than 1.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
