首页> 外文OA文献 >Escaping from poverty trap: a choice between government transfer payments and public services
【2h】

Escaping from poverty trap: a choice between government transfer payments and public services

机译:逃离贫困陷阱:政府转移支付和公共服务之间的选择

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Abstract Background Anti-poverty has always been an important issue to be settled. What policies should be selected to help individuals escaping from the poverty trap: by directly offering transfer payments or indirectly providing public services? This paper is among the first to explore the effects of public anti-poverty programs system in China. Methods We Using unbalanced panel data of China Health and Nutrition Survey (CHNS) from 1989 to 2009, we demonstrate how the individual poverty status is determined through a four-staged simultaneous model. We choose the 3SLS (Three Staged Linear Squared) methodology to do the estimation. Results GTPs (Government Transfer Payments) don’t have positive effects on poverty reductions. The results demonstrate that GTPs increasing by 10% makes private transfer payments decrease by 3.9%. Meanwhile, GTPs increasing by 10% makes the household income decreased by 27.1%. However, public services (such as medical insurance, health services, hygiene protection etc.) have significantly positive impacts on poverty reduction. Public services share a part of living cost of the poor, and are conducive for people to gain higher household income. Conclusions GTPs given by governments are not effective in reducing the poverty, as a result of “crowd-out effect” and “inductive effect”. However, public services are suggested to be adopted by governments to help the poor out of the poverty trap.
机译:摘要背景反贫困一直是一个要解决的重要问题。应选择哪些政策来帮助个人从贫困陷阱中逃脱:通过直接提供转账支付或间接提供公共服务?本文是第一个探讨公共反贫及计划系统在中国的影响之一。方法采用中国健康和营养调查(CHN)的不平衡面板数据从1989年到2009年,我们展示了通过四分阶段同时模型确定个人贫困地位。我们选择3SLS(三个分阶段线性平方)方法来进行估计。结果GTP(政府转账付款)对扶贫没有积极影响。结果表明,GTP增加10%,使私人转移支付减少了3.9%。同时,GTP增加10%,使家庭收入减少了27.1%。但是,公共服务(如医疗保险,卫生服务,卫生保护等)对减贫具有显着积极的影响。公共服务分享了穷人的生活成本的一部分,有利于人们获得更高的家庭收入。由于“人群效应”和“归纳效应”,各国政府给予的GTP不有效地减少贫困。但是,建议公共服务被政府通过,以帮助穷人陷入困境。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号