广州市家庭收入与住房特征对应关系的区位差异性

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.02.002

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以广州市中心区(天河区)和郊区(南沙区)为研究案例,依托2010年中国(广东)家庭动态跟踪调查数据,基于家庭户住房的邻里特征、建筑特征、区位特征、家庭收入等13个指标构建路径分析模型,研究广州市居民家庭收入与住房特征的映射关系和影响方向。在此基础上,采用多群组路径分析方法研究区位因素对“收入→住房特征”的影响程度及其差异性。最后利用方差方程和均值方程,分析不同区位条件下(中心区和郊区)的住房特征差异。结果表明：① 家庭收入更显著地决定住房特征,对邻里特征的影响并不显著;② 区位对“收入→住房邻里特征”的关系具有显著调节作用,而对“收入→住房建筑特征”的调节作用较弱;③ 在中心城区和郊区的内部,家庭收入更显著地影响住房建筑特征,而对邻里特征基本无显著影响;④ 郊区家庭收入对公共交通时间便利性、住房面积、厕所设施水平、拥有住房数量、住房综合条件等几个主要住房特征指标的影响程度大于中心城区;⑤ 中心城区住房的邻里特征明显优于郊区,但建筑特征明显差于郊区。显示出广州市住房邻里特征与建筑特征在不同区位条件下的“互换特征”。

关键词: 家庭收入, 住房特征, 区位, 收入与住房关系, 路径分析, 广州

Abstract:

Using a case study of central (Tianhe District) and suburban (Nansha District) Guangzhou City and the 2010 data on Chinese (Guangdong Province) household dynamic tracking survey data, and based on 13 indicators, including characteristics of the neighborhoods of household residences, construction characteristics, location characteristics, and household income, this study establishes an analytical model to map the relationship between household income and housing characteristics in Guangzhou City, as well as the direction of this relationship. On this basis, we use multiple-group pathway analysis to study the degree of influence and spatial variation of the location factor on income→housing characteristics. Finally, we use equations for variance and mean to analyze variations in housing characteristics at different locations (central city and suburb). Our results reveal the following: (1) Household income is a significant determinant of housing characteristics, but has no significant effect on neighborhood characteristics; (2) Location has a significant moderating effect on the income→neighborhood characteristics relationship, and a weak moderating effect on the income→housing characteristics” relationship; (3) Within the city center and suburban areas, household income significantly affects housing characteristics, though basically does not significantly affect neighborhood characteristics; (4) The beneficial effect of household income on several important housing characteristic indices such as convenience of public transportation, housing area, bathroom facility quality, number of houses, and comprehensive housing conditions, is greater in suburban areas than in the city center; (5) Neighborhood characteristics in the city center are noticeably better than suburban areas, but housing characteristics are noticeably poorer. These results show the switching of favorable neighborhood characteristics and housing characteristics at different locations in Guangzhou City.

Key words: household income, housing characteristics, location, relationship between income and housing characteristics, pathway analysis, Guangzhou City

王洋, 张玉玲, 张虹鸥. 广州市家庭收入与住房特征对应关系的区位差异性[J]. 地理科学进展, 2017, 36(2): 151-158.

Yang WANG, Yuling ZHANG, Hong'ou ZHANG. Spatial variations in the correlation between household income and housing characteristics in Guangzhou City[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2017, 36(2): 151-158.

图/表 6

表1

图1

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 26

[17]	Logan J R, Molotch H L.1987. Urban fortunes: The political economy of place[M]. Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press.
[18]	Rex J, Moore R.1967. Race, community and conflict[M]. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
[19]	Rose K, Miller T K N.2016. Communities of opportunity: pursuing a housing policy agenda to achieve equity and opportunity in the face of post-recession challenges[J]. Trotter Review, 23(1): 3.
[20]	Saunders P.1978. Domestic property and social class[J]. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2(1-4): 233-251. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.1978.tb00749.x
[21]	Savage M, Watt P, Arber S.1990. The consumption sector debate and housing mobility[J]. Sociology, 24(1): 97-117.
[22]	Schläpfer F, Waltert F, Segura L, et al.2015. Valuation of landscape amenities: A hedonic pricing analysis of housing rents in urban, suburban and periurban Switzerland[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 141: 24-40. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.04.007
[23]	Sullivan E, Olmedo C.2015. Informality on the urban periphery: Housing conditions and self-help strategies in Texas informal subdivisions[J]. Urban Studies, 52(6): 1037-1053. doi: 10.1177/0042098014533733
[24]	Temelová J, Novák J, Ouředníček M, et al.2011. Housing estates in the Czech republic after socialism: Various trajectories and inner differentiation[J]. Urban Studies, 48(9): 1811-1834. doi: 10.1177/0042098010379279
[25]	Watt P.1996. Social stratification and housing mobility[J]. Sociology, 30(3): 533-550. doi: 10.1177/0038038596030003007
[1]	党云晓, 张文忠, 武文杰. 2011. 北京城市居民住房消费行为的空间差异及其影响因素[J]. 地理科学进展, 30(10): 1203-1209. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2011.10.001
	[Dang Y X, Zhang W Z, Wu W J.2011. Residents housing preferences and consuming behaviors in a transitional economy: New evidence from Beijing, China[J]. Progress in Geography, 30(10): 1203-1209.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2011.10.001
[2]	李强. 2009. 转型时期城市“住房地位群体”[J]. 江苏社会科学, (4): 42-53. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-8671.2009.04.008
	[Li Q. Urban "housing groups of status" in transition[J]. Jiangsu Social Sciences, (4): 42-53.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-8671.2009.04.008
[3]	刘精明, 李路路. 2005. 阶层化: 居住空间、生活方式、社会交往与阶层认同: 我国城镇社会阶层化问题的实证研究[J]. 社会学研究,(3): 52-81, 243.
	[Liu J M, Li L L.2005. Becoming stratified: Residential spaces, lifestyles, social networks and class identity: An empirical study of social stratums in urban China[J]. Sociological Research,(3): 52-81, 243.]
[4]	刘望保, 闫小培, 曹小曙. 2010. 转型期中国城镇居民住房类型分化及其影响因素: 基于CGSS(2005)的分析[J]. 地理学报, 65(8): 949-960. doi: 10.11821/xb201008006
	[Liu W B, Yan X P, Cao X S.2010. Housing type variation and its influencing factors in transitional urban China: Based on analysis of CGSS 2005[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 65(8): 949-960.] doi: 10.11821/xb201008006
[5]	刘小平, 黎夏, 陈逸敏, 等. 2010. 基于多智能体的居住区位空间选择模型[J]. 地理学报, 65(6): 695-707. doi: 10.11821/xb201006007
	[Liu X P, Li X, Chen Y M, et al.2010. Agent-based model of residential location[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 65(6): 695-707.] doi: 10.11821/xb201006007
[6]	吴明隆. 2009. 结构方程模型: AMOS的操作与应用[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社.
	[Wu M L.2009. Jiegou fangcheng moxing: AMOS de caozuo yu yingyong[M]. Chongqing, China: Chongqing University Press.]
[7]	肖黎姗, 郭青海, 李新虎. 2013. 厦门城市居民住房资源分层及其形成机制[J]. 地理科学进展, 32(12): 1804-1813. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.12.009
	[Xiao L S, Guo Q H, Li X H.2013. Urban residents' housing stratification and its driving mechanism in Xiamen City[J]. Progress in Geography, 32(12): 1804-1813.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.12.009
[8]	周素红, 程璐萍, 吴志东. 2010. 广州市保障性住房社区居民的居住—就业选择与空间匹配性[J]. 地理研究, 29(10): 1735-1745. doi: 10.11821/yj2010100002
	[Zhou S H, Cheng L P, Wu Z D.2010. The jobs-housing relocation and spatial matching of residents in alleviatory housing neighborhoods in Guangzhou[J]. Geographical Research, 29(10): 1735-1745.] doi: 10.11821/yj2010100002
[9]	Carrillo L, Pattillo M, Hardy E.2016. Housing decisions among low-income hispanic households in Chicago[J]. Cityscape, 18(2): 109-150.
[10]	Daniel M M, Wapwera S D, Akande E M, et al.2015. Slum housing conditions and eradication practices in some selected Nigerian cities[J]. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(2): 230-241. doi: 10.5539/jsd.v8n2p230
[11]	Ecker J, Aubry T.2016. Individual, housing, and neighborhood predictors of psychological integration among vulnerably housed and homeless individuals[J]. American Journal of Community Psychology, 58(1-2): 111-122. doi: 10.1002/ajcp.12066 pmid: 27422121
[12]	Galster G.2001. On the nature of neighbourhood[J]. Urban Studies, 38(12): 2111-2124.
[13]	Huang Y Q, Clark W A V.2002. Housing tenure choice in transitional urban China: A multilevel analysis[J]. Urban Studies, 39(1): 7-32. doi: 10.1080/00420980220099041
[14]	Kadi J, Musterd S.2015. Housing for the poor in a neo-liberalising just city: Still affordable, but increasingly inaccessible[J]. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 106(3): 246-262.
[15]	Liang B.2013. Housing inequality under market transition in urban china: evidence from the 2005 mini census[D]. Utah, USA: University of Utah.
[16]	Liu Z Y, Mao X P.2012. Housing stratification in urban China: A study based on a Guangzhou household questionnaire survey[J]. Social Sciences in China, 33(4): 5-27. doi: 10.1080/02529203.2012.731799
[26]	Zhao W, Ge J H.2014. Dual institutional structure and housing inequality in transitional urban China[J]. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 37: 23-41. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2014.02.002

住房特征	指标名称	问卷题目	数值区间
邻里特征	公共交通距离便利性	从您家到最近的公交站点有多远	0~500 m(1),501~1000 m(2),1001~1500 m(3),1501~2000 m(4),> 2000 m(5)
	公共交通时间便利性	公交车候车时间一般是	0~5 min(1),6~10 min(2),11~15 min(3),16~25 min(4),>25 min(5)
	就医距离便利性	您家离最近医疗点(包括村医)的距离有多远	0~200 m(1),201~500 m(2),501~1000 m(3),1001~2000 m(4),>2000 m(5),
	就医时间便利性	用最快捷的方式从您家到最近医疗点需要多长时间	0~5 min(1),6~10 min(2),11~15 min(3),16~20 min(4),>20 min(5)
	商业服务便利性	从您家日常到最近的市(镇)商业中心需要多长时间	0~15 min(1),16~30 min(2),31~45 min(3),46~90 min(4),>90 min(5)
建筑特征	生活用水质量	您家做饭用的水最主要是	江河湖水、井水、泉水、雨水、池塘水(1),自来水(3),矿泉水/纯净水/过滤水(5)
	厨房燃料质量	您家做饭用的最主要燃料	柴草、煤炭等(1),电(3),煤气/液化气/天然气(5)
	厕所设施水平	您家用的卫生间/厕所是什么类型的	居室外公厕(1),居室外冲水厕所(2),居室内非冲水(3),居室内冲水(5)
	住房面积	您家现在居住房的建筑面积有多少	0~40 m²(1), 41~85 m²(2),86~150 m²(3),151~300 m²(4),>300 m²(5)
	拥有住房数量	您家共有几套房	0套(1),1套(2),2套(3),3套(4),>3(5)
	住房条件	调查者对该家庭住房条件的总体评价	很差(1),差(2),较差(3),一般(4),较好(5),好(6),很好(7)
区位特征	区域位置(中心城区/郊区)	住房所在的区域(天河区/南沙区)	天河区(1),南沙区(2)
家庭收入	家庭总收入	工资性收入、非工资性收入、礼金收入共多少	0~25000 元(1),25001~50000 元(2),50001~75000元(3),75001~100000 元(4),>100000 元(5)

假设路径		路径系数	t-统计值	假设路径是否接受
H1	收入→公共交通距离便利性	-0.205	2.599^**	接受
H2	收入→公共交通时间便利性	-0.304	3.955^***	接受
H3	收入→就医距离便利性	-0.089	1.106	拒绝
H4	收入→就医时间便利性	0.015	0.180	拒绝
H5	收入→商业服务便利性	-0.004	0.046	拒绝
H6	收入→住房面积	-0.059	0.732	拒绝
H7	收入→生活用水质量	0.159	2.002^*	接受
H8	收入→厨房燃料质量	0.217	2.755^**	接受
H9	收入→厕所设施水平	0.415	5.656^***	接受
H10	收入→拥有住房数量	0.247	3.158^**	接受
H11	收入→住房综合条件	0.415	2.009^*	接受

模型	Δχ²	区位调节作用假设路径是否接受
1限制路径“收入→公共交通距离便利性”模型	230^***	Ha接受
2限制路径“收入→公共交通时间便利性”模型	127^***	Hb接受
3限制路径“收入→就医距离便利性”模型	101^***	Hc接受
4限制路径“收入→就医时间便利性”模型	121^***	Hd接受
5限制路径“收入→商业服务便利性”模型	179^***	He接受
6限制路径“收入→住房面积”模型	0	Hf拒绝
7限制路径“收入→生活用水质量”模型	226^***	Hg接受
8限制路径“收入→厨房燃料质量”模型	112^***	Hh接受
9限制路径“收入→厕所设施水平”模型	0	Hi拒绝
10限制路径“收入→拥有住房数量”模型	0	Hj拒绝
11限制路径“收入→住房综合条件”模型	0	Hk拒绝

路径	中心城区(天河区)		郊区(南沙区)
路径	路径系数	t-统计值	路径系数	t-统计值
收入→公共交通距离便利性	-0.61	-1.153	0.012	0.199
收入→公共交通时间便利性	-0.80	-1.496	-0.184	-2.990^**
收入→就医距离便利性	0.035	0.663	0.017	0.268
收入→就医时间便利性	-0.94	-1.766^*	0.040	0.632
收入→商业服务便利性	-0.068	-1.285	0.075	1.197
收入→住房面积	-0.42	-0.795	0.113	1.816^*
收入→生活用水质量	0.203	3.888^***	0.001	0.010
收入→厨房燃料质量	0.185	3.517^***	0.106	1.701^*
收入→厕所设施水平	-0.043	-0.802	0.165	2.673^**
收入→拥有住房数量	0.114	2.146^*	0.370	6.368^**
收入→住房综合条件	0.410	8.428^***	0.496	9.128^***

		方差方程的 Levene 检验		均值方程的 t 检验
		F	Sig.	t	df	Sig.(双侧)	均值差值M_南沙-M_天河
公共交通距离便利性	假设方差相等	28.300	0.000	-2.9	606.0	0.004	-0.254
公共交通距离便利性	假设方差不相等			-2.8	467.0	0.005^**	-0.254
公共交通时间便利性	假设方差相等	4.700	0.030	-0.8	606.0	0.446	-0.045
公共交通时间便利性	假设方差不相等				459.7	0.465	-0.045
就医距离便利性	假设方差相等	193.500	0.000	-6.7	606.0	0.000	-0.341
就医距离便利性	假设方差不相等				529.6	0.000^***	-0.341
就医时间便利性	假设方差相等	216.600	0.000	-7.2	606.0	0.000	-0.699
就医时间便利性	假设方差不相等				566.3	0.000^***	-0.699
商业服务便利性	假设方差相等	396.500	0.000	-8.7	606.0	0.000	-1.261
商业服务便利性	假设方差不相等				559.2	0.000^***	-1.261
住房面积	假设方差相等	43.400	0.000	1.2	606.0	0.251	0.125
住房面积	假设方差不相等				438.1	0.275	0.125
生活用水质量	假设方差相等	12.700	0.000	3.6	606.0	0.000	1.374
生活用水质量	假设方差不相等				375.6	0.000^***	1.374
厨房燃料质量	假设方差相等	1.700	0.195	-0.6	606.0	0.546	-0.031
厨房燃料质量	假设方差不相等				519.0	0.551	-0.031
厕所设施水平	假设方差相等	269.400	0.000	14.7	606.0	0.000	1.105
厕所设施水平	假设方差不相等				440.6	0.000^***	1.105
拥有住房数量	假设方差相等	35.200	0.000	16.1	606.0	0.000	1.564
拥有住房数量	假设方差不相等				601.0	0.000^***	1.564
住房综合条件	假设方差相等	0.494	0.483	7.6	606.0	0.000^***	0.714
住房综合条件	假设方差不相等				571.1	0.000	0.714