农民工回流务工区位研究——以河南省45个村为例

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.12.010

地理科学进展 ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (12): 2083-2093.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.12.010

农民工回流务工区位研究——以河南省45个村为例

高更和¹^,²^,³(), 王玉婵¹^,^*(), 徐祖牧¹, 郭雅琪¹, 牛宁¹^,²

1.河南财经政法大学资源与环境学院,郑州 450046
2.河南省城乡空间数据挖掘院士工作站,郑州 450046
3.城乡协调发展河南省协同创新中心,郑州 450046

收稿日期:2020-03-30 修回日期:2020-07-22 出版日期:2020-12-28 发布日期:2021-02-28
通讯作者: 王玉婵
作者简介:高更和(1962— ),男,河南洛阳人,博士,教授,硕士生导师,主要从事农户地理与农区发展研究。E-mail: gaogenghe@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41771190);国家自然科学基金项目(41771141);国家自然科学基金项目(41901153)

Work location choice of returnee migrant workers:Case study of 45 villages in Henan Province

GAO Genghe¹^,²^,³(), WANG Yuchan¹^,^*(), XU Zumu¹, GUO Yaqi¹, NIU Ning¹^,²

1. School of Resources and Environment, Henan University of Economics and Law, Zhengzhou 450046, China
2. Academician Laboratory for Urban and Rural Spatial Data Mining of Henan Province, Zhengzhou 450046, China
3. Collaborative Innovation Center of Urban-Rural Coordinated Development of Henan Province, Zhengzhou 450046, China

Received:2020-03-30 Revised:2020-07-22 Online:2020-12-28 Published:2021-02-28
Contact: WANG Yuchan
Supported by:
National Natural Science Foundation of China(41771190);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41771141);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41901153)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

回流已成为中国农民工流动的重要趋势,未来将重塑农村人口流动的空间格局。论文基于901份田野调查数据,采用描述性统计和多元Logistic回归方法,对农民工回流务工区位及影响因素进行了研究。结果表明：农民工回流后务工区位选择主要以县城为主,其次为村庄,中心城区和集镇较少。省外回流和省内回流是农民工回流的基本形式,但二者在务工区位选择上存在一定差异。回流务工区位以本属区位为主,但也存在少量非本属区位。影响回流农民工务工区位选择的显著性因子主要包括年龄、居住区位、村人均收入、村务工比、村地形、前务工地类和回流源地等。农民工回流后,虽然整体上解决了跨区域的长距离奔波问题,但仍在更小的空间尺度上继续存在务工和务家的平衡问题,距离在回流务工区位选择中具有重要作用。居住区位与务工区位具有对等性,社区内部的信息交流影响着回流者对务工收益的评价,成为务工区位决策的重要机制。在回流务工区位选择上,存在路径依赖现象。县城应成为农区新型城镇化发展的重点和主要载体。

关键词: 农民工, 回流, 务工区位, 河南省

Abstract:

Returning to the area of origin has become an important trend of migrant worker decision in China, and it will reshape the spatial pattern of rural population mobility in the future. Based on the data from field survey of 901 returnee migrant workers, descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression methods were used to examine the work location choice of the returnee migrant workers and influencing factors. The results show that after the return of migrant workers, the choice of work location is mainly in county seats, followed by villages, and fewer returnees chose central urban areas and towns. Inter- and intra-provincial flows are the basic forms of return for migrant workers, but there are some differences between these two groups of returnees. The work locations of returnees are mainly in the local areas of their origin, but there are also a few who chose non-local locations. The significant factors influencing the choice of the work location for returnees mainly include age, residential location, village per capita income, village employment ratio, village topography, former work place types, and return source areas. After the return of migrant workers, although the problem of long-distance travel across regions has been solved, the issue of balancing between work and family care still exists at a smaller spatial scale. Distance plays an important role in the return location choice of migrant workers. The location of residence is often also the location of work. The exchange of information within the community affects the returnees' evaluation on the benefits of work. It has become an important mechanism for the decision of the migrant workers. Path dependence is a common phenomenon in the choice of work location for the returnee migrant workers. County seats should become the focus and main carrier of the new urbanization development in the rural areas.

Key words: migrant workers, return, work location, Henan Province

高更和, 王玉婵, 徐祖牧, 郭雅琪, 牛宁. 农民工回流务工区位研究——以河南省45个村为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(12): 2083-2093.

GAO Genghe, WANG Yuchan, XU Zumu, GUO Yaqi, NIU Ning. Work location choice of returnee migrant workers:Case study of 45 villages in Henan Province[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(12): 2083-2093.

图/表 5

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

多元逻辑回归结果"

因素	因子	模型1				模型2				模型3
因素	因子	B	Sig.	exp(B)		B	Sig.	exp(B)		B	Sig.	exp(B)
个人	年龄	-0.0252	0.0821	0.9751		-0.0272	0.0146	0.9731		-0.0156	0.2432	0.9846
	学历	0.1013	0.0821	1.1066		0.0112	0.7967	1.0113		0.0808	0.1196	1.0841
	[性别=0]	-0.4980	0.1051	0.6078		0.2248	0.2956	1.2521		0.5832	0.0193	1.7917
	[婚姻=0]	0.0476	0.9153	1.0488		0.3207	0.3611	1.3781		0.1895	0.6532	1.2087
	[技能=0]	0.3649	0.1901	1.4404		0.2507	0.2298	1.2849		0.0712	0.7749	1.0738
家庭	家庭人口	-0.1292	0.3207	0.8788		-0.1407	0.1244	0.8687		-0.0505	0.6401	0.9508
	家庭代数	0.2907	0.3752	1.3374		0.5734		0.0123		1.7744	0.4230		0.1197	1.5265
	抚养比	0.1576	0.4718	1.1707		-0.0109		0.9464		0.9892	0.1004		0.5944	1.1057
	耕地	0.0548	0.3200	1.0564	0.0149		0.7307	1.0151	0.0921		0.0544	1.0964
	[居住区位=0]	2.9524	<0.0001	19.1520	1.9962		<0.0001	7.3611	0.9479		0.0033	2.5802
	[家庭经济地位=1]	-0.8912	0.1976	0.4102	-0.3171		0.5632	0.7283	0.4147		0.4864	1.5140
	[家庭经济地位=2]	-1.1967	0.0121	0.3022	-0.2827		0.4737	0.7537	-0.3335		0.4564	0.7164
社区	村人均收入	-0.0001	0.0034	0.9999	<0.0001	0.0038	1.0000	-0.0001	0.0185	0.9999
	村务工人数	0.0001	0.7840	1.0001	-0.0003		0.1359	0.9997	-0.0003		0.1844	0.9997
	村务工比	-0.9096	0.4844	0.4027	1.7733		0.0578	5.8902	2.0043		0.0784	7.4208
	村回流比	4.2073	<0.0001	67.1741	1.0716		0.1778	2.9201	1.0266		0.2803	2.7915
	距城市距离	-0.0418	<0.0001	0.9591	-0.0033		0.1768	0.9967	-0.0046		0.1196	0.9954
	[村地形=1]	-0.8477	0.0715	0.4284	-0.9867		0.0023	0.3728	-1.1363		0.0022	0.3210
	[村地形=2]	-1.4308	0.0155	0.2391	-1.1159		0.0056	0.3276	-1.3752		0.0034	0.2528
务工	回流时长	-0.0327	0.3349	0.9678	0.0101	0.6523	1.0101	0.0244	0.3317	1.0247
	前务工时间	-0.1413	0.0083	0.8682	0.0238		0.4000	1.0241	0.0166		0.6398	1.0167
	前务工距离	<0.0001	0.9854	1.0000	0.0002		0.1438	1.0002	-0.0001		0.6803	0.9999
	[回流源地=0]	-0.7130	0.0799	0.4902	0.2214		0.4247	1.2478	0.3444		0.3016	1.4112
	[前务工地类=1]	1.4415	0.0130	4.2272	1.9425		<0.0001	6.9765	1.3061		0.0089	3.6917
	[前务工地类=2]	1.3460	0.0427	3.8420	1.6100		0.0006	5.0030	0.9393		0.1054	2.5581
	[前务工地类=3]	0.5094	0.4841	1.6644	0.9724		0.0399	2.6442	1.2497		0.0239	3.4894

表4

参考文献 47

[1]	国家统计局. 2018年农民工监测调查报告[EB/OL]. 2019-04-29 [2020-03-07]. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201904/t20190429_1662268.html.
	[ Chinese National Bureau of Statistics. The report of migrant worker monitoring survey in 2018 2019-04-29 [2020-03-07]. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201904/t20190429_1662268.html]
[2]	豆晓, Blanca A, Josep R. 基于相互作用关系的中国省际人口流动研究[J]. 地理研究, 2018,37(9):1848-1861.
	[ Dou Xiao, Blanca A, Josep R. China's inter-provincial population flow based on the interaction value analysis. Geographical Research, 2018,37(9):1848-1861. ]
[3]	高更和, 曾文凤, 罗庆, 等. 国内外农民工空间回流及其区位研究进展[J]. 人文地理, 2019,34(5):9-14.
	[ Gao Genghe, Zeng Wenfeng, Luo Qing, et al. Progress on spatial return and its location of migrant progress on spatial return and its location of migrant workers at home and abroad. Human Geography, 2019,34(5):9-14. ]
[4]	王子成, 赵忠. 农民工迁移模式的动态选择: 外出、回流还是再迁移[J]. 管理世界, 2013(1):78-88.
	[ Wang Zicheng, Zhao Zhong. Dynamic choice of migrant workers' migration mode: Going out, returning, or relocating. Management World, 2013(1):78-88. ]
[5]	甘宇. 农民工家庭的返乡定居意愿: 来自574个家庭的经验证据[J]. 人口与经济, 2015(3):68-76.
	[ Gan Yu. Settlement intension of rural migrants: Evidence from 574 families. Population & Economics, 2015(3):68-76. ]
[6]	张丽琼, 朱宇, 林李月. 家庭因素对农民工回流意愿的影响[J]. 人口与社会, 2016,32(3):58-66.
	[ Zhang Liqiong, Zhu Yu, Lin Liyue. Impact of family factors on migrant workers' willingness to return. Population and Society, 2016,32(3):58-66. ]
[7]	陈晨. 农民工首次返乡风险研究(1980—2009): 基于个人迁移史的事件史分析[J]. 人口与经济, 2018(5):91-99.
	[ Chen Chen. The risk of conducting the first return migration between 1980 and 2009: A survival analysis of migrant workers' individual migration history. Population & Economics, 2018(5):91-99. ]
[8]	张甜, 朱宇, 林李月. 就地城镇化背景下回流农民工居住区位选择: 以河南省永城市为例[J]. 经济地理, 2017,37(4):84-91.
	[ Zhan Tian, Zhu Yu, Lin Liyue. The residential location choices of returned migrant workers in the context of local urbanization: A case study of Yongcheng City in Henan Province. Economic Geography, 2017,37(4):84-91. ]
[9]	余运江, 孙斌栋, 孙旭. 社会保障对农民工回流意愿有影响吗? 基于上海调查数据的实证分析[J]. 人口与经济, 2014(6):102-108.
	[ Yu Yunjiang, Sun Bindong, Sun Xu. Can social security influence migrant workers' return intention? An analysis based on Shanghai survey data. Population & Economics, 2014(6):102-108. ]
[10]	石智雷, 薛文玲. 中国农民工的长期保障与回流决策[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015,25(3):143-152.
	[ Shi Zhilei, Xue Wenling. Urban and rural long-term security and remigration decision of migrant workers. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2015,25(3):143-152. ]
[11]	冯建喜, 汤爽爽, 杨振山. 农村人口流动中的“人地关系”与迁入地创业行为的影响因素[J]. 地理研究, 2016,35(1):148-162.
	[ Feng Jianxi, Tang Shuangshuang, Yang Zhenshan. Determinants of entrepreneurial behavior of rural migrants in urban society: From the perspective of 'human-environment relationship'. Geographical Research, 2016,35(1):148-162. ]
[12]	殷江滨. 劳动力回流的驱动因素与就业行为研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2015,34(9):1084-1095.
	[ Yin Jiangbin. Advances in research on driving factors of return migration and employment behavior of migrants. Progress in Geography, 2015,34(9):1084-1095. ]
[13]	任义科, 宋连成, 佘瑞芳, 等. 属性和网络结构双重视角下农民工流动规律研究[J]. 地理科学进展, 2017,36(8):940-951.
	[ Ren Yike, Song Liancheng, She Ruifang, et al. Migrant workers' migration patterns from the dual perspectives of attributes and network structures. Progress in Geography, 2017,36(8):940-951. ]
[14]	门丹, 齐小兵. 回流农民工就近城镇化: 比较优势与现实意义[J]. 经济学家, 2017(9):81-88.
	[ Men Dan, Qi Xiaobing. Nearby urbanization of returned migrant workers: Comparative advantage and practical significance. Economist, 2017(9):81-88. ]
[15]	杨智勇, 李玲. 论农民工“回流”现象的原因及其消极影响[J]. 当代青年研究, 2015(1):94-100.
	[ Yang Zhiyong, Li Ling. On the reason of countryside labor's reflow and negative impact. Contemporary Youth Research, 2015(1):94-100. ]
[16]	Kou L R, Xu H, Hannam K. Understanding seasonal mobility, health and wellbeing to Sanya, China[J]. Social Science & Medicine, 2017,177:87-99. pmid: 28161675
[17]	陈文超, 陈雯, 江立华. 农民工返乡创业的影响因素分析[J]. 中国人口科学, 2014(2):96-105.
	[ Chen Wenchao, Chen Wen, Jiang Lihua. An analysis on influencing factors of migrant workers' reflux self-employment. Chinese Population Science, 2014(2):96-105. ]
[18]	戚迪明, 张广胜, 杨肖丽, 等. 农民工“回流式”市民化: 现实考量与政策选择[J]. 农村经济, 2014(10):8-11.
	[ Qi Diming, Zhang Guangsheng, Yang Xiaoli, et al. "Return" urbanization of migrant workers: Realistic considerations and policy choices. Rural Economy, 2014(10):8-11. ]
[19]	Bogue D J. Internal migration [M]// Hauser D. The study of population: An inventory appraisal. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press, 1959: 6-13.
[20]	Lee E S. A theory of migration[J]. Demography, 1966,3(1):47-57.
[21]	Todaro M P. Urban job expansion, induced migration and rising unemployment: A formulation and simplified empirical test for LDCs[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 1976,3(3):211-225.
[22]	Cassarino J P. Theorizing return migration: The conceptual approach to return migrants revisited [J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2004,6(2):21-54.
[23]	Lewis J R, Williams A W. The economic impact of return migration in central Portugal[M]// King R. Return migration & regional economic problems. London, UK: Croom Helm, 1986.
[24]	Gullahorn J T, Gullahorn J E. An extension of the U-Curve Hypojournal[J]. Journal of Social Issues, 1963,19(3):33-47.
[25]	Berry J W. Immigration, acculturation and adaptation[J]. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 1997,46(1):5-34.
[26]	Sussman N M. Testing the cultural identity model of the cultural transition cycle: Sojourners return home[J]. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2002,26(4):391-408.
[27]	Hare D. 'Push' versus 'pull' factors in migration outflows and returns: Determinants of migration status and spell duration among China's rural population[J]. The Journal of Development Studies, 1998,35(3):45-72.
[28]	Haas H D, Fokkema T, Fihri M F. Return migration as failure or success?[J]. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 2015,16(2):415-429. pmid: 26161043
[29]	Bastia T. Should I stay or should I go? Return migration in times of crises[J]. Journal of International Development, 2011,23(4):583-595.
[30]	Kerpaci K, Kuka M. The Greek debt crisis and Albanian return migration[J]. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 2019,21(1):104-119.
[31]	Sadowski-Smith C, Li W. Return migration and the profiling of noncitizens: Highly skilled BRIC migrants in the Mexico-US borderlands and Arizona's SB 1070[J]. Population, Space and Place, 2016,22(5):487-500. doi: 10.1002/psp.1868
[32]	Constant A, Zimmermann K F. The dynamics of repeat migration: A Markov chain analysis[J]. International Migration Review, 2012,46(2):362-388.
[33]	Hirvonen K, Lilleør H B. Going back home: Internal return migration in rural Tanzania[J]. World Development, 2015,70:186-202.
[34]	Woodruff C M, Zenteno R. Remittances and microenterprises in Mexico[DB/OL]. 2001-08-14[2017-02-20]. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.282019.
[35]	Haas H D, Fokkema T. The effects of integration and transnational ties on international return migration intentions[J]. Demographic Research, 2011,25(24):755-782.
[36]	Démurger S, Xu H. Return migrants: The rise of new entrepreneurs in rural China[J]. World Development, 2010,39(10):1847-1861.
[37]	Choudhury P. Return migration and geography of innovation in MNES: A natural experiment of knowledge production by local workers reporting, to return migrants[J]. Journal of Economic Geography, 2016,61(3):68-73.
[38]	International Organization for Migration. Making the return of migrant workers work for Viet Nam: An issue in brief [DB/OL]. 2014-09-23 [2017-02-10]. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public.
[39]	Gaulé P. Who comes back and when? Return migration decisions of academic scientists[J]. Economics Letters, 2014,124(3):461-464.
[40]	王利伟, 冯长春, 许顺才. 传统农区外出劳动力回流意愿与规划响应: 基于河南周口市问卷调查数据[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014,33(7):990-999.
	[ Wang Liwei, Feng Changchun, Xu Shuncai. Return intention of migrant workers in a traditional agricultural area and planning response: Based on a questionnaire survey in Zhoukou, Henan Province. Progress in Geography, 2014,33(7):990-999. ]
[41]	陈润儿. 推进乡村振兴的一支重要力量: 关于外出务工人员返乡创业情况的调查[EB/OL]. 2019-06-27[2020-02-27]. http://dy.163.com/v2/article/detail/EINB2JKG0519D9DS.html. .
	[ Chen Run'er. An important force to promote rural renaissance: A survey on the entrepreneurship situation of returnees of migrant workers in Henan Province 2019-06-27[2020-02-27]. http://dy.163.com/v2/article/detail/EINB2JKG0519D9DS.html.]
[42]	张广海, 赵韦舒, 朱旭娜. 基于Logistic模型的乡村旅游住宿需求影响因素分析: 以山东省乐陵市朱集镇为例[J]. 中国石油大学学报(社会科学版), 2017,33(3):22-28.
	[ Zhang Guanghai, Zhao Weishu, Zhu Xuna. Analysis on the influencing factors of rural tourism accommodation demand based on Logistic model: A case study of Zhuji Town in Leling City of Shandong Province. Journal of China University of Petroleum (Edition of Social Sciences), 2017,33(3):22-28. ]
[43]	林李月, 朱宇. 流动人口初次流动的空间类型选择及其影响因素: 基于福建省的调查研究[J]. 地理科学, 2014,34(5):539-546.
	[ Lin Liyue, Zhu Yu. The choices of the destination's spatial types in the floating population's first-time migration and their determinants: Case studies of Fujian Province. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2014,34(5):539-546. ]
[44]	曾文凤, 高更和. 中国中部农区农民工多阶流动及影响因素研究: 以河南省6个村为例[J]. 地理科学, 2019,39(3):459-466.
	[ Zeng Wenfeng, Gao Genghe. Multi-order flow and its influencing factors of migrant workers in agricultural areas of Central China: Case study of six villages in Henan Province. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2019,39(3):459-466. ]
[45]	杨慧敏, 高更和, 李二玲. 河南省农民工务工地选择及影响因素分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014,33(12):1634-1641.
	[ Yang Huimin, Gao Genghe, Li Erling. Destination of migrant workers and influencing factors of Henan Province. Progress in Geography, 2014,33(12):1634-1641. ]
[46]	戴延平. 基础行为学 [M]. 北京: 作家出版社, 2012.
	[ Dai Yanping. Basic behavior. Beijing, China: Writers' Publishing House, 2012. ]
[47]	朱强. 家庭社会学 [M]. 武汉: 华中科技大学出版社, 2012.
	[ Zhu Qiang. Family sociology. Wuhan, China:Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press, 2012. ]

区位	省外回流		省内回流		合计/人
区位	人数/人	占比/%	人数/人	占比/%	合计/人
中心城区	117	17.75	24	9.92	141
县城	274	41.58	95	39.26	369
集镇	97	14.72	52	21.49	149
村庄	171	25.95	71	29.34	242
合计	659	100	242	100	901

因素	因子	取值(单位)	说明
个人因素	年龄	实际值(岁)	被试者的实际年龄
	学历	实际值(a)	被试者实际受教育年限
	性别	男1,女0	哑变量,被试者性别
	婚姻	已婚1,未婚0	哑变量,被试者的婚姻状况,离异属于已婚
	技能	有1,无0	哑变量,被试者是否具有一定的劳动技能
家庭因素	家庭人口	实际值(人)	被试者家庭的总人口数
	家庭代数	实际值(代)	被试者家庭由几代人组成
	抚养比	实际值	被试者家庭被抚养人口除以劳动力人口
	耕地	实际值(hm²)	被试者家庭承包的耕地面积
	居住区位	村1,非村0	哑变量,被试者家庭是否居住在村庄
	家庭经济地位	差1,中2,好3	哑变量,被试者对本家庭在村中经济状况的评价
社区因素	村人均收入	实际值(元)	调查年份村农民人均纯收入
	村务工人数	实际值(人)	调查年份村务工人数
	村务工比	实际值	调查年份村务工人数除以村总人口
	村回流比	实际值	调查年份村回流人数除以务工人数
	距城市距离	实际值(km)	村到本行政区地级市的直线距离
	村地形	平原1,丘陵2,山区3	哑变量,村庄所在地区地形分类
务工因素	回流时长	实际值(a)	被试者回流返乡的时间长短
	前务工时间	实际值(a)	被试者回流前最近一次务工工作持续时间
	前务工距离	实际值(km)	被试者回流前最近一次务工的工作地到村庄的距离
	回流源地	省外1,省内0	哑变量,被试者回流前最近一次务工所在省份
	前务工地类	城区1,县城2,集镇3,村庄4	哑变量,被试者最近一次务工工作地中心地类型

农民工回流务工区位研究——以河南省45个村为例

Work location choice of returnee migrant workers:Case study of 45 villages in Henan Province

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 47

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

非本属区位	省外回流				省内回流				合计
非本属区位	中心城区	县城	集镇	村庄	中心城区	县城	集镇	村庄	合计
省会郑州(Ⅰ类)	35	1	2	0	1	0	0	0	39
附近(Ⅱ类)	9	38	8	8	0	3	5	1	72
外地(Ⅲ类)	5	5	1	1	0	1	0	0	13
合计	49	44	11	9	1	4	5	1	124

[1]	张华, 刘哲达, 殷小冰. 中国跨省流动人口回流意愿的空间差异及影响因素[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(1): 73-84.
[2]	林李月, 朱宇, 柯文前. 城镇化中后期中国人口迁移流动形式的转变及政策应对[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(12): 2054-2067.
[3]	韩冬, 乔家君, 马玉玲. 基于空间界面视角的新时期乡村性空间分异机理——以河南省巩义市为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2018, 37(5): 655-666.
[4]	李二玲, 胥亚男, 雍雅君, 魏莉霞. 农业结构调整与中国乡村转型发展——以河南省巩义市和鄢陵县为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2018, 37(5): 698-709.
[5]	任义科, 宋连成, 佘瑞芳, 杜海峰. 属性和网络结构双重视角下农民工流动规律研究[J]. 地理科学进展, 2017, 36(8): 940-951.
[6]	王喜, 鲁丰先, 秦耀辰, 孙艳芳. 河南省碳源碳汇的时空变化研究[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(8): 941-951.
[7]	周春山,杨高. 中国农民工聚居区研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(5): 569-579.
[8]	谢明霞, 王家耀, 陈科. 地理国情分类区划模型构建及实证研究——以河南省为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(11): 1360-1368.
[9]	殷江滨. 劳动力回流的驱动因素与就业行为研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2015, 34(9): 1084-1095.
[10]	张海军. 河南省火灾影响因素的空间分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(7): 958-968.
[11]	王利伟, 冯长春, 许顺才. 传统农区外出劳动力回流意愿与规划响应——基于河南周口市问卷调查数据[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(7): 990-999.
[12]	杨慧敏, 高更和, 李二玲. 河南省农民工务工地选择及影响因素分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(12): 1634-1641.
[13]	陈太政, 李二玲, 李琬. 1989-2009年河南省农作物地理集聚及其演化机制[J]. 地理科学进展, 2013, 32(8): 1237-1245.
[14]	苏飞, 马莉莎, 庞凌峰, 赵秀芳, 潘云新. 杭州市农民工生计脆弱性特征与对策[J]. 地理科学进展, 2013, 32(3): 389-399.
[15]	苏坤慧, 延军平, 白晶, 张立伟, 王晓喆, 李建山, 田青霞. 河南省境内淮河南北气候变化的小麦适应度比较[J]. 地理科学进展, 2012, (1): 63-71.