Abstract
Different from the existing studies that examine the impact of the overall development level of urbanization on farmers’ income, this article empirically studies the impact of two aspects of urbanization level structure, “citilization” and “townization” on farmers’ income. Based on the empirical study of 31 provincial panel data from 2007 to 2018, it is found that “citilization” and “townization” can significantly improve farmers’ income, and the role of “townization” is obviously greater than that of “urbanization”. In terms of the impact of income components, “citilization” and “townization” have no obvious impact on wage income and operating income, but promote both property income and transfer income, and “townization” has an even greater effect. The policy implication of the research conclusion is that while using urban “engine” to drive economic growth, we should actively use the pivotal role of small towns to connect urban and rural development to promote rural revitalization and development.
Highlights
At present, our country is in the decisive stage of building a well-off society in an all-round way
Song (2010) used the national provincial panel data from 1985 to 2005 to conduct empirical research. He believed that education level has an increasing effect on farmers’ income, and the marginal effect of education on income had gradually increased; Li, Li, & Zhou (2018) constructed a dynamic panel data model, and the analysis showed that labor transfer could significantly promote the growth of farmers’ total income and non-agricultural income; Liu & Pan (2019) used the PVAR model to empirically showed that the impact of labor transfer on farmers’ income would increase with the increase of the number of labor transfers
In the Equation, incomeit represents the income of farmers in the i-th province in the t-th year, including total farmers’ income income 0), wage income, operating income, property income, and transfer income; The core explanatory variables are the citilization rate cityit and the townization rate townit of the i-th province in year t; Vit is the control variable; εit is the random error term; C, α, β, and σ are the parameter to be estimated
Summary
Our country is in the decisive stage of building a well-off society in an all-round way. Song (2010) used the national provincial panel data from 1985 to 2005 to conduct empirical research He believed that education level has an increasing effect on farmers’ income, and the marginal effect of education on income had gradually increased; Li, Li, & Zhou (2018) constructed a dynamic panel data model, and the analysis showed that labor transfer could significantly promote the growth of farmers’ total income and non-agricultural income; Liu & Pan (2019) used the PVAR model to empirically showed that the impact of labor transfer on farmers’ income would increase with the increase of the number of labor transfers. In the process of urbanization in a region, is “citilization” having a greater impact on farmers’ income, or is “townization” more able to promote farmers’ income? Based on this, this article uses 31 provincial-level panel data to deeply explore the impact of urbanization structure on farmers’ income and farmers’ income components from the two aspects of “citilization” and “townization”, and interpret its impact, so as to broaden the research fields of urbanization and farmers’ income
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.
