财税与公共管理学院知识库

2020年我国政府主导式的反贫困工程取得阶段性成果，党的十九届四中全会提出建立解决相对贫困的长效机制，指明了未来我国反贫困工作的方向。在以家庭为伦理观念基础的中国社会，将家庭作为贫困识别的最小单元，贫困认知和贫困缓解以整个家庭生活改善及其成员发展为标准有助于对相对贫困群体的瞄准与识别，对未来建立治理多维贫困体系具有重要意义。

首先，通过文献梳理，概括总结国内外关于民生支出与相对贫困方面的研究，界定基本民生支出与多维贫困概念，基于公共财政理论和减贫机制相关理论为后续研究提供理论基础。其次，分析基本民生支出与家庭多维贫困现状，并利用AF双界限法和数量统计方法，测算我国家庭的相对收入贫困和家庭多维贫困程度。最后，从家庭视角出发，运用xtlogit面板固定模型实证研究基本民生支出对我国家庭相对贫困的影响效应，同时，分析基本民生支出对家庭相对贫困的城乡以及地区差异性影响。

研究发现：（1）我国家庭贫困发生率逐年显著下降，扶贫减贫成效在各地区均显示出正向效应。分城乡标准下的人均可支配收入中位数50%标准更适合用来判断家庭相对收入贫困状况。家庭多维贫困指数的贡献率在整体上呈现农村>城镇、东部>中部>西部的特征，其中生活条件维度的贡献率最高，其次是主观福利维度，家庭房产权、高档耐用品对家庭多维贫困的影响作用也越来越明显，而家庭医疗支出、教育支出、受教育年限对多维贫困贡献率最低；（2）基本民生支出均会降低家庭陷入相对收入贫困和多维贫困的概率，但人均基本民生支出的投入对缓解家庭相对收入贫困的作用大于缓解家庭多维贫困的作用，并且随着维度的增加，基本民生支出对降低家庭多维贫困发生率的影响降低；（3）民生性财政对缓解农村地区家庭、西部地区家庭的相对收入贫困状况的边际报酬较高，而对缓解东部、中部地区家庭多维贫困状况的边际报酬高于西部地区家庭，基本民生支出在改善居民生活条件水平、提高基础教育、医疗水平的支出应更加惠及西部地区家庭，而对改善资产、主观福利等其他维度的贫困状况的民生支出应该更倾向于东部、中部地区家庭。

In 2020, China's government led anti poverty project achieved phased results. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China proposed the establishment of a long-term mechanism to solve relative poverty, indicating the direction of China's future anti poverty work. In Chinese society, where the family is the ethical foundation, treating the family as the smallest unit for poverty identification, poverty awareness and alleviation are based on the improvement of the overall family life and the development of its members, which helps to target and identify relatively impoverished groups, and is of great significance for establishing a multidimensional poverty governance system in the future.

Firstly, through literature review, summarize the research on livelihood expenditure and relative poverty at home and abroad, define the concept of basic livelihood expenditure and multidimensional poverty and use the theory related to the poverty reduction mechanism and the Public Finance theory, laying a theoretical foundation for empirical research. Secondly, analyze the current situation of basic livelihood expenditures and household multidimensional poverty and calculate the relative income poverty and multidimensional poverty level of households in China using the Alkire-Foster method and quantitative statistical methods. Finally, from the perspective of families, investigate the impact of basic livelihood expenditures on relative poverty in Chinese households using the xtlogit panel fixed model and analyzes the urban-rural and regional differences in the impact of basic livelihood expenditures on relative poverty in households.

Research has found that: (1) The incidence of family poverty in China has significantly decreased year by year. The effectiveness of poverty alleviation and reduction has shown a positive effect in all regions. The 50% standard of median per capita disposable income is more suitable for judging the relative income poverty situation of Chinese  households. The contribution rate of the multidimensional poverty index shows an overall trend of rural>urban, eastern>central>western. Among the five dimensions, the contribution rate of the living conditions dimension is the highest, followed by the subjective welfare dimension. The impact of family property rights and high-end durable goods on multidimensional poverty is becoming increasingly evident. While Family medical expenses, education expenses, and years of education have the lowest contribution rate to multidimensional poverty; (2) basic livelihood related fiscal expenditures will reduce both the probability of households falling into relative income poverty and the multi-dimensional poverty. But the per capita input of basic livelihood related fiscal expenditure has a greater effect on alleviating relative income poverty in family than on alleviating the multi-dimensional poverty in family. Moreover, as the dimensionality increases, the impact of basic livelihood related fiscal expenditure on reducing the incidence of the family multi-dimensional poverty decreases ; (3) Livelihood finance has a higher marginal return on alleviating relative income poverty in rural and western households, while the marginal return on alleviating multidimensional poverty in eastern and central households is higher than that in western households. The expenditure on medical care should be more beneficial to households in the western region, while the expenditure on improving other dimensions of poverty such as assets and subjective welfare should be more inclined towards households in the eastern and central regions.