The Impact of Agricultural Digital Transformation on Income Inequality: Evidence From Rural China

The flood of economic information from China in recent years has permitted reassessment of the "Chinese model of development" and the extent to which China's own development experience has conformed to it. The prevailing consensus of the 1970s concerning the substance of the model itself-typically characterized in terms of the Chinese leadership's objectives and priorities and its strategy for pursuing them-has stood up quite well. The same cannot be said about past appraisals of the extent to which China's economic reality has been reshaped to accord with the model's prescriptions. One of the most widely remarked elements of the Chinese model is the high priority assigned to regional objectives and, more specifically, to "balance" in the distribution of productive capacity and equity in the distribution of income and, hence, consumption. During the Maoist era (i.e., prior to 1979), the central government pursued regional objectives through such measures as interregional transfers of investment resources (effected via the planning system), subsidization of health and education expenditures in poor regions, and attempts to maintain a safety net of state relief (effected largely via control of grain surpluses). In short, there is little doubt that prior to 1979 the Chinese leadership placed an unusually high value on the spread of modern growth and the improvements in welfare associated with it and persistently acted to limit the emergence or widening of interregional disparities.' Although China's post-Mao leaders have shown greater concern with efficiency and with the potential trade-offs between efficiency and such goals as balance and equity, their continuation of many redistributive policies indicates that they have not abandoned regional objectives. But how successful has China been in achieving these objectives?

When China's leaders launched rural reforms in the late 1970s, they acknowledged the nation's need to modify its commitment to egalitarianism.1 Slogans such as Tt is glorious to be rich!' and 'Some areas will lead; others will follow!' signalled this fundamental shift in ideology. Leaders backed up these exhortations with a series of concrete policy actions ? establishing the Special Economic Zones and implementing the East Coast-first policy, introducing financial reforms, and initiating the rural industrialization movement. In China's version of the 'trickle down' theory, certain core areas were to take the lead in the modernization process and provide models for other areas to later emulate. Adopting strategies that had been employed

Shenggen FanInternational Food Policy Research Institute and Institute of AgriculturalEconomics of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesLinxiu ZhangCenter for Chinese Agricultural Policy of the Chinese Academy of SciencesXiaobo ZhangInternational Food Policy Research InstituteI. IntroductionChina is one of the few countries in the developing world that has madeprogress in reducing its total number of poor over the past 25 years.

So What If There Is Income Inequality? The Distributive Consequence of Nonfarm Employment in Rural China

Reducing rural income inequality and its spatial convergence in China during the past two decades

This study aims to investigate the sources of income inequality in rural China. The regression-based decomposition approach is employed to measure the relative contribution of each determinant to net income of rural residents in China. The analysis is based on a unique database of financial development compiled at the county level. This study contributes to the literature on income inequality in China by filling a gap in existing literature which is based mainly on provincial and survey data. The results clearly reveal that financial development, industrialization, the development of the tertiary sector and employment are important income determinants and contributors of intercounty inequality in rural China. The findings may provide valuable information for combating inequality in the years ahead.

PurposeSince 1978, China has made tremendous economic achievements through industrial upgrading. However, these achievements are accompanied by an expanding income gap between rural and urban areas. The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between industrial structure and urban–rural income inequality in China.Design/methodology/approachUsing the fixed-effects model and provincial data for the period 1985–2019, this paper estimates a linear relationship between industrial structure and urban–rural income inequality. By decomposing total income inequality into four components, the paper then analyzes how industrial structure affects each component.FindingsThe results show that industrial structure imbalance and industrial upgrading are positively associated with urban–rural income inequality. The positive effect of industrial imbalance mainly comes from widening the wage gap, while that of industrial upgrading mainly comes from aggravating business income inequality and property income inequality. Moreover, industrial balance and upgrading are conducive to increasing the share of wage income at the cost of property income.Originality/valueBy progressively examining the total inequality and the inequality of income components, this paper provides a better understanding of how industrial structure affects urban and rural income inequality. The findings of this study highlight the “inequality cost” associated with industrial structure adjustment, which provide policy-related insights on the balance development of urban and rural areas.

Official data suggest only a modest increase in rural income inequality in China since 1978. However, these figures significantly understate the true extent of inequality. Using more reliable data, this article shows that an inexorable increase in inequality has been taking place in China over the last decade, a trend apparent both within and between villages. The final two sections of this article outline the underlying causal processes at work in the rural economy.

Despite income inequality in China being a heated topic in scholarship and public discussion, little research has explored the trend in income inequality since the mid-2010s or focused on the implications of household assets on income inequality. Using pooled cross-sectional data from the Chinese General Social Survey, we estimate income inequality at the household level from 2012 to 2021 and further examine the effects of two types of household assets (housing assets (HA) and financial assets (FA)) on income inequality in urban China, as well as the moderating effects of socioeconomic status (SES) and regional marketization. The results indicate that national income inequality was sustained at a high level between 2012 and 2021, while income inequality in urban households was higher than that in rural households. Both HA and FA were positively related to income inequality, and the latter assets had a stronger effect on income inequality. The association between the two types of household assets and income inequality strengthened along with an increase in family SES and regional marketization levels. The study highlights that FA, relative to HA, are a more important contributor to income inequality among urban households, thus extending the literature on inequality and social stratification in contemporary China by revealing the causes underlying rising income inequality from the household assets perspective.

ABSTRACTWhile correcting urban–rural income inequality is an essential challenge in China, rural e‐commerce may solve this problem. Our objective is to reveal the impact of rural e‐commerce on rural income and urban–rural income inequality. Using county‐level panel data from nine provinces for 2011–2021, we reveal that rural e‐commerce increases rural income and reduces urban–rural income inequality particularly in the eastern region. As a potential mechanism, rural e‐commerce is found to increase employment opportunities, the added value of the secondary sector, and the number of industrial enterprises above designated size. This study provides the evidence for promoting rural e‐commerce to increase rural income and reduce urban–rural income inequality in developing countries. Local governments are encouraged to further promote rural e‐commerce to increase rural incomes and reduce income inequality.

A Chinese geographer explores changes in inter-provincial rural income inequality in China since the late-1970s economic reforms by decomposing it into different component factors based on the Gini index (more specifically, into contributions by different income sources: wages, household operations, properties, and transfers). The influence of each factor on inequality changes is further decomposed into its structure effects and its real inequality effects. Quantitative analysis then makes it possible to determine the relative influence of each component on changes in rural provincial inequality over time.

Factor Decomposition of Chinese Rural Income Inequality: New Methodology, Empirical Findings, and Policy Implications

Rural resident's income gap is a key factor measuring the level of rural economy and national economy. This paper analyzes the status quo of rural income in different regions, and we conclude that there are inequalities in rural income distribution. The reasons of rural income inequality in China have some links with the transformation of China's dual economy structure and national systems and policies. Finally, the relevant countermeasures are put forward to prevent rural income from serious polarization. Index Terms - rural area; income gap; inequality

Discussions of rural development policy are for the most part focused on the tenurial, institutional, technical, infrastructural, and economic aspects of agricultural development. In contrast, nonfarm activities in agricultural regions receive little attention, and a number of models of agrarian economies with nonfarm activities have even predicted a decline of such activities with agricultural development.' In this paper we show that nonfarm activities in agricultural regions expand quite rapidly in response to agricultural development and merit special attention in the design of rural-and also of urban-development strategies. The poorest groups of the world's rural population include those who depend on nonfarm activities as a source of employment and income. Nonfarm activities also supply a range of goods and services to agriculture and the rural population, contributing to the growth of agricultural output and the improvement in living conditions in rural areas. Finally, the concentration and growth of nonfarm activities in rural towns localizes employment opportunities for people who leave agriculture and acts to stimulate a degree of decentralization of urban growth.

In this study, we construct a theoretical model and investigate the impact of agglomeration of producer services (APS) on urban–rural income inequality in China. The mediating effects are explored. Results indicate that the growth of APS can not only narrow China's urban–rural income gap directly, but also have an indirect negative effect on income inequality by promoting urbanisation evolution and human capital accumulation. Furthermore, the agglomeration of six sub‐industries is conducive to reducing the income gap. Among them, the agglomeration of the traffic, transport, storage and post has the greatest effect, while the effect of information transfer, computer services and software agglomeration is not significant. In addition, the results of regional heterogeneity show that only in the low APS region can APS and income inequality show bidirectional causality.