统计与数据科学学院知识库

21世纪以来，基于经济快速增长、初步具备工业反哺农业的发展现实，党中央对城乡关系做出一系列重大调整，但是主要采取城市带动农村、工业带动农业的发展模式，这种“以城带乡”的“单轮驱动”模式未能从根本上解决城乡发展失衡问题。在社会主要矛盾发生深刻变化的背景下，党的十九大提出城乡融合发展，明确将新型城镇化与乡村振兴协调发展（以下简称：双轮协调）作为重要抓手。党的二十大报告进一步指出要着力推进城乡融合和区域协调发展，可见城乡融合发展的空间均衡性成为中国区域协调发展的新重点。然而，现阶段中国城乡融合空间失衡问题显著存在，东部沿海与中西部内陆间的空间差异尤为明显，城乡融合发展的空间不平衡成为推动高质量发展、实现共同富裕面临的重大挑战。因此，准确理解城乡融合发展的科学内涵，科学合理地测度城乡融合发展水平及空间差异程度，厘清空间差异形成和变化的内在及外在原因，对于激活新发展阶段城乡融合发展的新潜能，促进区域协调发展具有重要的理论和现实意义。

本文从客观事实出发，进行理论方法构建、实证应用及应对策略研究。具体来看，客观事实是：新型城镇化战略立足于城市、根植乡村，乡村振兴战略聚焦于乡村，联动城市。城乡融合发展是两大战略协调共生所形成的新型城乡发展形态（生成逻辑），是涵盖城乡产业融合、城乡生态融合、城乡社会融合等五大要素的多维融合整体（运行逻辑），这为“双轮协调”引入测度框架提供现实基础。“双轮协调”的引入必然需要重新明晰城乡融合发展的测度逻辑，并对原有的评价指标体系进行优化。以此为基础，再结合中国实际数据进行实证，包括中国省域城乡融合发展测度、空间差异分解及空间差异成因识别。最后，提出城乡融合发展的政策建议。主要研究结论如下：

（1）中国城乡融合发展水平呈现稳定上升态势，并且存在明显的空间差异特征。中国城乡融合发展水平呈逐年上升的发展趋势，由期初的0.431增长到期末的0.652，按照增长率的大小分为平稳上升期（2010-2013年）和波动上升期（2013-2020年），中国城乡融合发展分维度水平均呈上升趋势，城乡产业融合、城乡生态融合和城乡空间融合发展水平的增速在2018年后明显提升；中国城乡融合发展水平以“胡焕庸线”为界，呈现东高西低的空间格局，并以“东部稳步提升、中西部快速崛起”的特征演化发展，中国城乡融合发展分维度水平均存在显著的空间差异特征。

（2）中国城乡融合发展的空间差异呈现缩小趋势。从相对差异来看，全国城乡融合发展的空间差异呈波动下降趋势，区域间差异是导致城乡融合发展空间差异的最主要因素，城乡融合发展分维度水平的空间差异也主要来源于区域间差异，目前，要解决城乡融合发展的空间差异问题，应以缩小区域间差异为重点；从绝对差异来看，全国城乡融合发展的绝对差异呈缩小趋势，存在一定的右拖尾和两极分化现象，东北地区城乡融合发展的绝对差异呈扩大趋势，东部、中部、西部地区的绝对差异则呈缩小趋势；从空间差异收敛性来看，全国城乡融合发展的空间差异同时满足σ收敛、绝对β收敛和条件β收敛，具有明显的收敛特征，东部、中部、西部地区亦是如此，东北地区不存在显著的收敛特征，绝对β收敛和条件β收敛速度由快到慢依次为西部、中部、全国、东部。

（3）五个内源结构性因素均对全国城乡融合发展空间差异存在显著的正向效应。分维度水平空间差异的存在均会引起城乡融合发展空间差异的扩大，城乡生活融合差异、城乡生态融合差异、城乡产业融合差异、城乡社会融合差异和城乡空间融合差异对城乡融合发展空间差异的正向影响依次减弱。各内源结构性因素对城乡融合发展空间差异的驱动强度存在区域异质性，城乡生态融合差异对东部和东北地区的影响最强，城乡空间融合差异对中部地区的带动作用最大，城乡产业融合差异则对西部地区的影响最大。不同时期、不同年份影响城乡融合发展空间差异的主要内源结构性因素有所不同。

（4）“人、地、钱”等外源驱动因素均对全国城乡融合发展空间差异存在显著效应。人口流动差异对城乡融合发展空间差异具有显著的负向作用，土地市场化规模差异、经济增长水平差异、地方财政支农支出差异、民生性财政支出差异四个外源驱动因素对城乡融合发展空间差异的影响显著为正，其中经济增长水平差异的作用程度最高，同时也是不同时期影响城乡融合发展空间差异的主要因素，对城乡融合发展空间差异的作用程度不断增强，民生性财政支出差异的作用程度亦是如此，人口流动差异、土地市场化规模差异的作用程度整体上呈现减弱态势，地方财政支农支出差异的影响变动不大。

相较于已有研究，本文主要的创新之处在于：一是基于“双轮协调”深入剖析了城乡融合发展的双重逻辑，从提出时间、地域范围和生成动力机制方面明晰了城乡融合发展的生成逻辑，在此基础上，从内部运行动力来源方面揭示了“双轮协调”推进城乡产业融合、生态融合、社会融合、空间融合和生活融合的逻辑机理，明确了城乡融合发展的运行逻辑。二是优化了城乡融合发展评价指标体系，与以往研究相比，该套指标体系同时兼顾系统论和复合论思想，较好地反映了城乡融合发展的双重逻辑，体现了时代特征。三是进一步识别了城乡融合发展空间差异的成因，首次基于内源和外源双重视角，借助关系数据分析范式，运用二次指派程序（QAP）探寻了内源结构性因素和外源驱动因素对城乡融合发展空间差异的双重作用机制。

Since the 21st century, based on the rapid economic growth and the initial development reality of industry feeding back agriculture, the Party Central Committee has made a series of major adjustments to the urban-rural relationship. However, the development model mainly adopts the urban driven rural and industrial driven agriculture development model. This “single wheel drive” model of “urban driven rural” has not fundamentally solved the problem of urban-rural development imbalance. Against the backdrop of profound changes in major social contradictions, the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed the urban-rural integration development, In the context of profound changes in the major contradictions in society, the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed the integrated development of urban and rural areas, and clearly regarded the coordinated development of new urbanization and rural revitalization (hereinafter referred to as: Two-wheel coordination) as an important starting point. The report of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China further proposes to promote urban-rural integration and regional coordinated development, indicating that the spatial balance of urban-rural integration development has become a new focus of regional coordinated development in China. However, at present, the issue of spatial imbalance in urban-rural integration in China is becoming increasingly prominent, and the spatial differences between the eastern coastal areas and the central and western inland areas are particularly significant. The spatial imbalance of urban-rural integration development has become a major challenge to promote high-quality development and achieve common prosperity. Therefore, accurately understanding the scientific connotation of urban-rural integration development, scientifically and reasonably measuring the level of urban-rural integration development and the degree of spatial differences, clarifying the internal and external reasons for the formation and change of spatial differences, has important theoretical and practical significance for activating the new potential of urban-rural integration development in the new development stage and promoting regional coordinated development.

Based on the objective facts, this thesis studies the theoretical method construction, empirical application and coping strategies. To be specific, the objective fact is that the new urbanization strategy is based on the city and roots in the countryside, and the rural revitalization strategy focuses on the countryside and links the city. Urban-rural integration development is a new form of urban-rural development (generative logic) formed by the coordination and symbiosis of two major strategies, and a multidimensional integrated whole (operational logic) covering five major elements such as urban-rural industrial integration, urban-rural ecological integration, and urban-rural social integration, which provides a realistic basis for the introduction of the measurement framework of “Two-wheel coordination”. The introduction of “Two-wheel coordination” inevitably needs to clarify the measurement logic of urban-rural integration development and optimize the original evaluation index system. On this basis, combined with the actual data of China, the empirical study was carried out, including the measurement of the urban-rural integration development in China’s provinces, the decomposition of spatial differences and the causes analysis of spatial differences. Finally, the thesis puts forward the policy recommendations of urban-rural integration development. The main findings are as follows:

1. The level of urban-rural integration development in China is steadily increasing, and there is obvious spatial difference. The level of urban-rural integration development in China is increasing year by year, from 0.431 at the beginning to 0.652 at the end of the period. According to the size of the growth rate, it is divided into a stable rising period (2010-2013) and a fluctuating rising period (2013-2020). The sub-dimensions levels of urban-rural integration development in China show an increasing trend. The growth rate of urban-rural industrial integration, urban-rural ecological integration and urban-rural spatial integration has been significantly improved after 2018. The level of urban-rural integration development in China is bounded by the “Hu Huanyong line”, showing a spatial pattern of high in the east and low in the west, and evolving with the characteristics of “steady improvement in the east and rapid rise in the central and western regions”. There are significant spatial differences in the sub-dimensions of urban-rural integration in China.
2. The spatial difference of urban-rural integration development in China shows a narrowing trend. From the perspective of relative differences, the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development shows a trend of fluctuation and decline. Inter-regional difference is the main factor leading to the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development, and the spatial differences in the sub-dimensions of urban-rural integration mainly come from inter-regional differences. At present, to solve the problem of spatial difference of urban-rural integration development, the focus should be on narrowing the inter-regional differences. From the perspective of absolute differences, the absolute difference of urban-rural integration development in China shows a decreasing trend, and there is a certain right-tailing and polarization phenomenon. The absolute difference of urban-rural integration development in northeastern region shows an expanding trend, while the absolute differences of eastern, central and western regions show a decreasing trend. From the perspective of spatial difference convergence, the spatial difference in the level of urban-rural integration development in China meets σ convergence, absolute β convergence and conditional β convergence at the same time, which has obvious convergence characteristics, and the eastern, central and western regions are also the same, while the northeastern region does not have significant convergence characteristics, and the absolute β convergence and conditional β convergence speed are successively from fast to slow in the western, central, national and eastern regions.
3. The five internal structural factors all have significant positive effects on the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development in China. The existence of spatial difference of sub-dimension level will lead to the expansion of spatial difference of urban-rural integration development , and the positive impact of urban-rural life integration difference, urban-rural ecological integration difference, urban-rural industrial integration difference, urban-rural social integration difference and urban-rural spatial integration difference on space difference of urban-rural integration development is weakened in turn. There is regional heterogeneity in the driving strength of each endogenous structural factor to the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development, and the difference of urban-rural ecological integration has the strongest influence on the eastern and northeastern regions, the difference of urban-rural spatial integration has the greatest impact on the central region, while the difference of urban-rural industrial integration has the greatest impact on the western region. The main endogenous structural factors affecting the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development are different in different periods and years.
4. “People, land, money” and other external factors have a significant effect on the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development. The difference of population flow has a significant negative effect on the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development, the impact of four external driving factors, the difference of land marketization scale, the difference of economic growth level, the difference of local fiscal expenditure for agriculture and the difference of fiscal expenditure for people’s livelihood, on the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development is significantly positive, among them, the difference of economic growth level has the highest effect, and it is also the main factor that influences the spatial difference of urban-rural integration development in different periods, as a whole, the effect of the difference in population flow and the difference in the scale of land marketization has weakened, while the effect of the difference in local fiscal expenditure on agriculture has not changed much.

Compared with the existing research, the main innovations of this thesis are as follows: First, based on the “Two-wheel coordination”, the thesis deeply analyzes the dual logic of urban-rural integration development, and clarifies the generation logic of urban-rural integration development from the aspects of time, regional scope and generating power mechanism. On this basis, From the aspect of internal operation power source, the logical mechanism of “Two-wheel coordination” promoting urban-rural industrial integration, ecological integration, social integration, spatial integration and life integration is revealed, and the operational logic of urban-rural integration is clarified. Second, the evaluation index system of urban-rural integration development is optimized. Compared with previous studies, this set of index system takes into account both system theory and compound theory, which better reflects the dual logic of urban-rural integration development and reflects the characteristics of The Times. Thirdly, the thesis further identifies the causes of spatial differences in urban-rural integration development. Based on the dual perspectives of endogenous and exogenous sources and the paradigm of relational data analysis, the thesis uses the quadratic assignment procedure (QAP) to explore the dual mechanisms of endogenous structural factors and exogenous driving factors on spatial differences in urban-rural integration development.