地理科学进展, 2023, 42(3): 464-477 doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2023.03.005

研究论文

城—城流动人口统计口径的改进与新口径下的流动特征和影响因素

王婧雯,1,3, 朱宇,2,3,*, 林李月1,4, 柯文前1,4, 肖宝玉1,4

1.湿润亚热带生态地理过程教育部重点实验室,福州 350007

2.上海大学人口研究所暨亚洲人口研究中心,上海 200444

3.福建师范大学地理科学学院,福州 350007

4.福建师范大学地理研究所,福州 350007

Improvement in the statistical criteria of intercity floating population and their mobility features and determinants under the new criteria

WANG Jingwen,1,3, ZHU Yu,2,3,*, LIN Liyue1,4, KE Wenqian1,4, XIAO Baoyu1,4

1. Key Laboratory for Humid Subtropical Eco-geographical Processes of the Ministry of Education, Fuzhou 350007, China

2. Asian Demographic Research Institute, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China

3. School of Geography, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350007, China

4. Institute of Geography, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350007, China

通讯作者: *朱宇(1961— ),男,福建闽清人,博士,教授,主要研究方向为人口迁移流动、城市化与区域发展。E-mail: zhu300@shu.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2022-10-6   修回日期: 2023-01-10  

基金资助: 国家自然科学基金项目(41971180)
国家自然科学基金项目(41971168)
澳大利亚研究理事会项目(DP230103060)

Received: 2022-10-6   Revised: 2023-01-10  

Fund supported: National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971180)
National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971168)
Australian Research Council Project(DP230103060)

作者简介 About authors

王婧雯(1997— ),女,福建泉州人,硕士生,主要研究方向为人口与城乡发展。E-mail: Wangjw9792@163.com

摘要

城—城流动人口是影响中国人口流动格局演变和城镇化高质量发展的一个关键因素。论文基于2017年流动人口动态监测调查数据,对城—城流动人口的统计口径进行改进,并分析了新口径下城—城流动人口的规模、社会经济特征、空间分布格局和人口城—城流动的影响因素。研究表明:① 新口径下城—城流动人口占全部流动人口的42.92%,远高于原口径的18.85%。② 与原口径相比,新口径下城—城流动人口具有性别比高,已婚者比例高,首次流动时更年轻,流动年限更长,人力资本、社会经济地位以及定居意愿更低的特征。③ 与农村户籍相比,城镇户籍城—城流动人口的流动距离更远、流入城市等级更高,后续流动仍然高度集聚在沿海发达城市,而农村户籍流动人口继续在沿海城市间流动的同时,出现明显的向中西部回流的态势。④ 模型结果显示,年轻、教育年限长、已婚、从事商业服务业、流动时间长、家庭收入高的人口更容易城—城流动,但家属随迁和子女数量的增加会抑制人口城—城流动;首次流入城市较低的工资水平和绿化覆盖程度、较高的人均GDP和财政支出都有效地推动了人口的城—城流动。论文纠正了迄今城—城流动人口统计口径存在的一些问题以及由此造成的对城—城流动人口认识的偏差,推进了对人口城—城流动这一薄弱领域的研究。

关键词: 城—城流动人口; 统计口径; 流动特征; 后续流动

Abstract

Intercity floating population is a key factor that affects the evolution of migration and mobility patterns and the high-quality development of urbanization in China. Based on the data from the 2017 China migrant population dynamic monitoring survey, this study improved the statistical criteria of intercity floating population, and analyzed their sizes, socioeconomic characteristics, spatial distribution, and the determinants and mechanism of their intercity mobility under the new criteria. The results show that: 1) The intercity floating population by the new criteria accounted for 42.92% of the total floating population, much higher than the 18.85% by the original criteria. 2) Compared with those by the original criteria, members of the intercity floating population by the new caliber had a slightly higher proportion of males and married people, a younger age at the time of first migration, a longer migration duration, a lower level of education, income, housing condition, social security, occupational status, and willingness to settle down in the current city. 3) Compared with rural-urban migrants, the urban-urban migrants were more capable of long-distance migration, and were more likely to have migration experiences in cities at high levels in the urban hierarchy and migrate to coastal prosperous cities in their subsequent migration. In contrast, rural-urban migrants who came to coastal areas were more likely to return to central and western areas. 4) The characteristics of individual migrants, their mobility and families, and the first destination cities of migration had significant impacts on the intercity migration of the floating population. The probability of subsequent migration between cities was higher among business and service sector workers and people with younger age and higher educational level, being married, having longer migration duration and higher family income, but lower for those with accompanying family members and an increased number of children. The characteristics of the city also affected the subsequent urban-urban mobility, with lower average wage level and green space coverage and higher per capita GDP and financial expenditure promoting subsequent migration of the floating population in cities. These results corrected some problems in the statistical criteria for intercity floating population and misunderstandings on them based on such criteria, and promoted research of this relatively weak field.

Keywords: intercity floating population; statistical criteria; mobility characteristics; subsequent mobility

PDF (4638KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 导出 EndNote| Ris| Bibtex  收藏本文

本文引用格式

王婧雯, 朱宇, 林李月, 柯文前, 肖宝玉. 城—城流动人口统计口径的改进与新口径下的流动特征和影响因素[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(3): 464-477 doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2023.03.005

WANG Jingwen, ZHU Yu, LIN Liyue, KE Wenqian, XIAO Baoyu. Improvement in the statistical criteria of intercity floating population and their mobility features and determinants under the new criteria[J]. Progress in Geography, 2023, 42(3): 464-477 doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2023.03.005

当前中国已全面迈入城镇化中后期,人口迁移流动的类型和模式也正随之发生深刻转变,人口城—城流动渐趋常态化便是其中一个重要的变化特征[1-2],但现有文献中对城—城流动人口的研究还非常有限。这一方面源于人们对中国人口迁移流动趋势的判断出现偏误,另一方面与当前有关流动人口的测量和数据收集无法准确反映城—城流动人口的规模和地位有关[3]。第七次全国人口普查(简称“七普”)结果显示,2020年城—城流动人口的规模虽然较2010年有大幅度上升,但其占总流动人口的比例却几乎没有发生变化[4-5]。这一结果意味着城—城流动在中国人口流动中的地位始终没有明显提升,与此前基于国际相关理论和实证经验得到的理论预期不符[1]

造成上述结果的重要原因之一是基于普查得到的城—城流动人口数据无法完整地反映出人口城—城流动的实际状况。在中国,判定流动人口的依据是“人户分离”[6],流出地的城乡性质是以流动人口户籍的城乡性质、而不是当次流动的实际来源地为依据来判定的。基于这种统计口径得到的城—城流动人口仅包括城镇户籍的流动人口。许多农村户籍流动人口来到城市后,在不同城市间的流动行为虽然在空间意义上也属于城—城流动,但在普查的统计口径中仍被认定为乡—城流动人口,而非城—城流动人口。这一问题不仅存在于人口普查数据中,也存在于近年来被广泛使用的中国流动人口动态监测调查数据中。这不仅严重低估了中国城—城流动人口的规模和地位[3],而且导致对其流动特征和影响因素的不准确刻画。

因此,要准确地认识和把握城镇化中后期中国城—城人口流动的规模、特征和趋势,首先亟需解决的一个问题是要科学地界定和统计城—城流动人口,将进入城市后继续在城市间流动的农村户籍流动人口与城镇户籍流动人口一起纳入城—城流动人口的统计范围内,并在此基础上估计城—城流动人口的规模,刻画其特点与流动规律。由于城—城流动人口将成为影响中国人口迁移流动格局演变和城镇化高质量发展的一个关键因素,这一工作在揭示中国人口迁移流动的整体演变规律,并为相关政策的制定提供科学依据上具有重要意义。因此,本文将利用2017年流动人口动态监测调查数据对此做一尝试。

1 文献综述

1.1 城市间人口迁移流动的相关理论和国际经验

中国是人口迁移流动和城镇化历程上的一个后来者,因此,国际上的相关研究为我们认识发生在中国的城—城人口迁移流动提供了重要借鉴。由于发达国家已经完整经历了人口迁移流动和城镇化的各个发展阶段,这种借鉴主要来自于发达国家的相关经历,以及在此基础上总结的各种不同形式人口迁移流动的发展演变规律,并可以从人口移动转变、城市发展阶段、个人及家庭生命周期3个视角加以概括。

首先,Zelinsky[7]的人口移动转变理论表明,人口在城市间和城市内部迁移流动的产生和发展是社会经济发展阶段变迁的必然结果。Zelinsky把人口移动转变划分为传统社会时期、早期转型社会时期、晚期转型社会时期、发达社会时期以及未来超先进社会时期等5个阶段,并基于发达国家的经历,揭示了乡—城迁移、城—城和城市内部迁移在上述发展阶段的演替中此消彼长的规律:在早期转型社会时期,乡—城迁移的规模快速增长,直到晚期转型社会时期的后期达到顶峰,之后趋于下降;而在乡—城迁移下降的同时,人口的城市间和城市内部迁移逐步上升;到了未来超先进社会时期,乡—城迁移趋于消亡,而城市之间和城市内部迁移将占据主导地位[7]。在美国、加拿大、澳大利亚等城镇化水平较高的国家,人口的城市间迁移流动早已十分频繁,居民由于上学、就业、家庭构成变化、养老等原因产生居住需求的变化,从而引起了人口在城市间的迁移[8-10];同样,在墨西哥、巴西等部分发展中国家中,城—城流动也已成为主要的人口流动形式[11]。因此,不论从理论还是实际经验来看,随着社会的发展与演变,城—城迁移流动必然会取代乡—城迁移流动成为人口迁移流动的主要形式。

其次,学者们在对城市发展阶段的研究中发现,城市间和城市内部人口的迁移流动是城市化进程中与郊区化过程相伴随而出现的迁移形式。战后时期大都市地区的郊区化在世界范围内广泛发生着,其中美国的郊区化发展得更远更快,由于都市中心的土地和住宅无法满足人们的商业和居住需求,人口大规模向外围甚至更远的地方流动[12-13]。基于西方国家的经验事实,Hall[14]提出了城市演变模型,他认为城市的发展具有6个阶段,前期人口不断向都市中心集聚,第四至第五阶段人口开始向郊区转移,第六阶段进入逆城市化时期,都市区中心部分人口向郊区、低等级城镇,甚至非都市区转移。20世纪90年代末的韩国也到达了城市发展的后期阶段,长期以来其经济发展集中于首尔大都市区,但随着首尔与邻近城市之间经济联系的增加以及限制人口流入首尔政策的出台,人口大规模向郊区转移,并逐渐延伸至首都周边城市,在这一进程中人口的城—城流动得到快速发展[15]。由此可见,城市间和城市内部人口的迁移流动是发达国家城市进入郊区化发展阶段后出现的一个重要现象。

再次,个人及家庭生命周期的变化也是人口在城市间和城市内部迁移流动的一个重要原因[1]。发达国家的实证研究表明,家庭生命周期与人口的迁移流动存在密切联系,处于不同生命周期阶段的个体,其就业、婚姻、组成家庭后的生育、子女离迁等生命事件的发生均可能引起人们更换住所以满足其居住需求的变化[16-18]。另外,有学者认为个体的家庭、社会背景以及生活经历对人口的迁移流动有着深刻的影响,并且不同群体会在流动轨迹和流入城市上呈现出不同的特点,而这些流动经历还会影响下一代甚至是几代人的生活环境和流动行为[19-20]。总之,生命过程中个体需求和家庭结构的改变,会使人口不断在城市间或城市内部探索新的居住区位,因此,在城镇化中后期,这将逐渐取代乡—城迁移流动,成为人口空间变动的主要动力。上述主要来自发达国家的国际经验和相关理论,为本文对中国人口城—城流动的考察奠定了重要基础。

1.2 国内对城—城人口流动的初步研究

与西方国家不同的是,直到21世纪初,中国人口的城—城流动才通过城镇户籍人口在城市间转移的现象进入学者们的视野[21-23]。由表1可见,尽管当前有关城—城流动人口的统计口径尚未统一,但基本上多是指“户口性质为非农业,流入地为城镇的流动人口”。相关研究以此为标准对城—城流动人口的规模、特征及其影响因素进行了一些初步考察。

表1   城—城流动人口的不同统计口径

Tab.1  Different statistical criteria of intercity floating population

年份文献来源城—城流动人口的不同统计口径
2014马小红等[24]户口性质为“非农业”,流入地为“城镇”的流动人口
2018陶树果等[25]户口性质为“非农业”和“非农业转居民”的流动人口
2020孟凡强等[26]户口性质为“非农业”和“非农业转居民”以及因户口改革以外的其他原因获得居民户口的流动人口
2021卓云霞等[27]户口类型为非农业、非农转居,或户口类型为农转居、居民户口且非农户口的获取方式为升学、工作(招工)、转干、家属随转或购房落户的人口;现住地为居委会,或现住地为村委会但居住在政府提供公租房、自购商品房、保障房或小产权房的人口

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


第一,在城—城流动人口的规模和地位上,人口普查数据显示,自2000年起城—城流动人口的规模一直在上升,从2000年的2267.42万人增加到2010年的4694.25万人,2020年更是猛增至8216.97万人,但其占总流动人口的比重却始终维持在21%左右,在流动人口整体中的地位并无显著变化[4-5,28]。一些利用中国流动人口动态监测调查数据的研究发现,2013年城—城流动人口占总流动人口的比例达到14.44%[29],2017年这一比例也仅上升至16.51%[26],可见城—城流动人口的比重不大且增长幅度较小,这类研究结果虽与普查数据存在差异,但也得到了与上述相近的结论。

第二,在社会经济特征方面,城—城流动人口与乡—城流动人口和流入地的户籍人口存在较大差异。附着于城镇户籍上的各项社会福利和就业机会,使得城—城流动人口的平均社会经济地位要高于乡—城流动人口,这具体表现在前者的教育水平、职业层次、收入水平、社会保险参与程度、社会融入情况等比后者更具优势[23-25,30]。此外,比起出身于农村的流动人口,来自其他城市的流动人口更渴望融入新的城市[31]。然而,与乡—城流动人口一样,城—城流动人口也是户籍制度下“区域分割”的受损者[32],作为“外地人”,尽管他们的收入水平较高,但在就业质量、住房保障、社会福利等方面的条件上却远不及本地市民[33-35],而这会使得城—城流动人口的市民化存在难以逾越的障碍。

第三,城—城流动人口空间分布的研究则较为匮乏,但也有研究显示,城—城流动人口的空间分布特征与其他流动人口相似,他们都存在向经济发展水平较高的城市集聚的趋势。在不同等级城市的分布上,城—城流动人口主要从低等级城市向高等级城市转移[36],也有一些人倾向流入一线城市周边的二三线城市[37]。在地区分布上,城—城流动人口多从经济欠发达地区向发达地区流动,主要从邻近欠发达省市流入环渤海、长三角和珠三角城市群,也有部分流入中西部的省会城市和少数工矿城市[37]。此外,在城市间流动的中国大学毕业生也存在类似的现象,研究显示,省会城市是毕业生的主要目的地,与此同时,经济发展水平较高的非省会城市也对他们具有较强的吸引力[39]

第四,迄今研究还初步揭示了影响人口在城市间流动的多方面因素。个体及其家庭的特征、城市和地区的发展水平都对城市间的人口流动具有显著影响。研究显示,男性、年龄小、受教育程度高、流动时间越长的群体更易更换城市以寻求就业机会[40-41]。另外,新经济迁移理论认为劳动力的流动决策是以家庭为基本单位,家庭结构的改变也会影响人口的城—城流动,正如非核心家庭成员多会因核心家庭成员的转移而转移,未成年子女数量的增加也会导致家庭迁居方式改变[40,42]。同时,发展水平不同的城市和地区对流动人口的吸引力存在较大差异,(特)大城市对于中小城市人口具有较强的辐射作用[43],经济发展水平、房价、设施条件差距越大的城市和地区之间越容易产生人口的流动[44-45]

1.3 迄今中国城—城人口流动研究中存在的主要问题

国内外学者围绕人口城—城流动进行的大量理论探索与经验研究为本文奠定了重要基础,但仍存在以下不足:

第一,长期以来中国的人口流动研究多聚焦于人口的乡—城流动,对城—城流动的研究仍十分薄弱。有限的一些研究局限于部分区域,未能在全国大尺度层面上对中国城—城流动人口的流动特征和影响因素获得全面和深入的认识。城—城流动人口在学历水平、职业构成等方面与其他流动人口间存在显著的差异[23-25,30],这种差异也势必造成城—城流动人口的流动特征与影响机制具有其特殊性,然而现有研究却远未揭示这种特殊性。

第二,迄今研究对城—城流动人口的判定是以“户籍地”而不是“流出地”为标准的,农村户籍流动人口在城市间的后续流动行为未能被纳入城—城流动人口的统计当中,从而严重影响了对城—城流动人口规模、地位、特点的准确判断。有研究显示,2010年在东部地区城市间转移的流动人口中农村户籍占比达到76.78%,而非农户籍仅占23.22%[46];因此,可以推断忽视农村户籍的城市间流动人口导致的对城—城流动人口实际规模的低估是十分严重的,据此口径对其进行的人口学特征、空间分布特征以及流动机制的分析也必然存在各种偏差。希望本文的工作能弥补以上研究的不足。

2 统计口径改进方案和新旧口径下 城—城流动人口的样本特征

2.1 城—城流动人口统计口径的改进

城—城流动人口原统计口径(即流动人口的户口性质为非农业,流入地为城镇[24])是以“户籍地”而不是“流出地”为判定标准的,这导致了农村户籍流动人口在城市间的后续流动未能被纳入城—城流动人口的统计当中。本文认为,城—城流动人口,不仅包括户籍所在地和流入地均为城镇的城镇户籍流动人口,还应包括完成首次乡—城流动之后,继续在城市间转移的农村户籍流动人口,因此,参照已有研究[27],结合理论思考和数据特征 (①有关此次调查的抽样手段、调查对象和调查内容等说明,详见《2017年全国流动人口卫生计生动态监测调查技术文件》。),按以下口径筛选城—城流动人口:

(1) 户籍地所在位置为乡镇、县城或城市,现居地在居委会,或现居地在村委会但居住在政府提供的公租房、自购商品房、保障房或小产权房者 (②政府通过利用农村集体建设用地建设公共租赁住房,或提供廉租房、经济适用房等保障性住房,将外来务工人员纳入城镇住房保障体系[35],因此,居住在村委会中的公租房、自购商品房、保障房或小产权房属于进入了当地城镇住房保障体系或拥有了自主产权房,这也应视为流入城镇。);

(2) 户籍地所在位置为农村,首次流入地行政单元为县级及以上的城市(③由于数据中流动人口的首次流入地信息只到区县一级,并未告知流入地的城乡属性,故本文认定流动人口首次流入县级及以上的城市则为流入城市,以此原则剔除的样本中可能也存在城—城流动行为,若纳入此部分样本,城—城流动人口的规模还会有所增加。),现居地要求与(1)相同,初次离开户籍地至调查时点期间总共流动过的城市个数大于1。

与旧口径相比,本文的贡献在于将完成首次乡—城流动后,继续在城市间流动的农村户籍流动人口也纳入城—城流动人口的统计范畴。

2.2 新旧口径下城—城流动人口的规模和地位

2017年流动人口动态监测样本中全部流动人口有147970人,根据新旧统计口径筛选城—城流动人口,结果显示,2017年流动人口动态监测样本中全部流动人口有147970人,根据新旧统计口径筛选城—城流动人口,结果显示:在原统计口径下,2017年城—城流动人口只有27885人,仅占流动人口总量的18.85%;而新口径下的城—城流动人口则达到63507人,其占比也提升至42.92%,其中农村户籍占23.37%、城镇户籍占19.55%(表2)。与原口径相比,新口径下城—城流动人口增加了35622人,占全部流动人口的比重也提升了24.07个百分点。增加的这部分群体正是以往统计所遗漏的农村户籍城—城流动人口,而实际上这部分群体的规模和地位已然超过了城镇户籍城—城流动人口。可见,原统计口径大大低估了真正意义上发生城—城流动的流动人口规模,而新统计口径则在一定程度上体现出了中国的人口城—城流动正向高速增长阶段迈进的事实,对于系统认知中国人口城—城流动具有重要意义。

表2   新旧口径下城—城流动人口的规模比较

Tab.2  Comparison of the sizes of intercity floating population by the old and new statistical criteria

流动形式户籍类型原统计口径新统计口径
人数/人占比/%人数/人占比/%
城—城流动农村3457823.37
城镇2788518.852892919.55
其他流动农村12008581.157969853.86
城镇47653.22
总计147970100147970100

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


2.3 新旧统计口径下的城—城流动人口社会经济特征

表3可知,新旧口径下城—城流动人口的教育程度、职业层次、住房条件和社会保障等均优于流动人口整体,这与前人对城—城流动人口的认知[23-25,30]基本相同。然而,相较于原统计口径,新口径下城—城流动人口的男性和已婚者比例略高,首次流动时更年轻,流动年限更长,教育、职业、收入、住房和社会保障水平均更低,在当前城市的定居意愿也比较低,这主要与新口径中农村户籍城—城流动人口的社会经济水平较差有关。可见,原统计口径在一定程度上拉高了城—城流动人口的平均水平,新统计口径所反映的情况应更具有真实性。

表3   新旧口径下城—城流动人口的社会经济特征

Tab.3  Socioeconomic characteristics of intercity floating population under the old and new statistical criteria

社会经济特征全部流动人口城—城流动人口
原统计口径新统计口径
不区分户籍农村户籍城镇户籍
男性/%51.4349.4452.4456.2547.88
首次流动年龄/岁25.4727.0323.8721.2227.03
调查时的年龄/岁36.5437.8136.3335.3337.52
受教育年限/a10.3112.6211.3010.4612.31
已婚/%81.5680.4382.1385.3578.27
管理技术人员/%10.0120.1213.5210.1417.90
个人月均收入/元4375.595464.864942.294584.155407.34
流动年限/a11.0610.7712.4614.1110.49
自购房/%24.8945.1634.8929.1241.78
已办理社会保障卡/%50.8867.2557.4751.4864.63
愿意在当前城市定居/%36.1055.8243.6836.5152.20
样本量/份14797027885635073457828929

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3 城—城流动人口的空间分布特征

3.1 城—城流动人口流动范围的变化

将流动人口的首次流入地和现居地分别与户籍地相比较得出流动人口的首次流动和本次流动范围(表4)。两次流动中跨省流动始终是城—城流动人口的主要流动方式,但与首次流动相比,本次流动中跨省流动的比重有所降低。这说明城—城流动人口虽以远距离流动为主,但有就近转移的趋势。分户籍来看,农村户籍流动人口首次流动到省外后,回流至户籍地所在省中其他市或县的比例均高于城镇户籍者;而在城镇户籍流动人口中,无论首次为哪种流动方式,本次为跨省流动的比例均高于农村户籍流动人口。这说明城镇户籍流动人口更有能力进一步远距离流动,而多次流动后农村户籍流动人口回流的可能性更大。

表4   城—城流动人口的首次和本次流动范围变化情况

Tab.4  Changing distances of the first time and current migration of intercity floating population (%)

区域范围首次流动范围
农村户籍城镇户籍
国内跨省省内跨市市内跨县总计国内跨省省内跨市市内跨县总计
本次流动范围国内跨省37.056.171.2544.4741.168.941.6851.78
省内跨市12.0721.521.5835.1710.3620.591.5832.53
市内跨县8.103.428.8420.365.683.486.5315.69
总计57.2231.1111.6710057.2033.019.79100

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.2 城—城流动人口流出和流入城市规模及其变化

将流动人口的流出和流入城市划分为超大城市、特大城市、Ⅰ型大城市、Ⅱ型大城市、中等城市、Ⅰ型小城市和Ⅱ型小城市7个等级(④城市规模等级根据2014年国务院印发的《关于调整城市规模划分标准的通知》,按各地级市的城区常住人口数量进行划分。)。表5数据显示,城—城流动人口来自Ⅱ型大城市、中等城市和Ⅰ型小城市的比例超过了80%,分户籍来看,城镇户籍流动人口的户籍地城市等级要比农村户籍高。在流入地的分布中,城—城流动人口虽集中在超大城市和Ⅱ型大城市,但相对于首次流入时,现居住于低等级城市的比例有所提高(尤其是农村户籍)。另外,两户籍城—城流动人口首次流入和现居住在超大城市中的情况存在明显差异,有6.14%的农村户籍流动人口并未继续留在超大城市,而是向其他等级城市转移;城镇户籍流动人口则进一步向超大城市集中,并且当前居住在超大城市的比例比农村户籍多11.35个百分点。总体上,城镇户籍人口的户籍地、首次流入地和现居地城市等级均比农村户籍高,且留在高等级城市的可能性也比农村户籍大。

表5   城—城流动人口流出和流入城市规模变化情况

Tab.5  City sizes of the origin and destination of intercity floating population (%)

类别户籍超大城市特大城市Ⅰ型大城市Ⅱ型大城市中等城市Ⅰ型小城市Ⅱ型小城市总计
户籍地农村4.911.092.4623.1135.1929.843.40100
城镇7.012.514.4124.2232.4326.822.87100
首次流入地农村18.5812.5113.7133.9512.506.931.82100
城镇20.3111.9413.9332.7711.567.761.73100
现居地农村12.448.9112.6234.9514.5413.003.54100
城镇23.799.0711.7730.2011.8710.632.67100

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.3 城—城流动人口的流动轨迹变化

表6图1所示,城—城流动人口的户籍地主要分布在中部和东北地区城市,其中重庆与合肥的流出人口占比最大。城—城流动人口的首次流入地与现居地的分布相对集中,沿海和内陆的发达城市均为流动人口的重要流入地。与首次流动相比,后续流动的集中程度更高,其引人注目的变化是珠三角城市群的吸引力明显减弱,而重庆作为城—城流动人口流入地的地位明显上升。分户籍看,虽然重庆、武汉等中部城市是城镇户籍流动人口的重要流入地,但在后续流动中进一步流入沿海发达城市的城镇户籍流动人口比例更高,其中上海、北京、深圳等超大城市所集聚的城—城流动人口最多;而与前者不同的是,农村户籍流动人口在向上海等沿海城市流动的同时,呈现出更为明显的向重庆、合肥、长沙等中西部城市回流的趋势。

表6   城—城流动人口占比排名前10的城市

Tab.6  Top 10 cities by the proportion of intercity floating population (%)

占比排名农村户籍城镇户籍
户籍地首次流入地现居地户籍地首次流入地现居地
城市占比城市占比城市占比城市占比城市占比城市占比
1重庆4.66深圳6.45重庆4.55重庆5.86北京6.04上海8.80
2合肥1.90广州5.32上海3.09合肥1.47上海5.67北京6.75
3阜阳1.72上海4.86合肥2.94岳阳1.02深圳4.76重庆5.66
4六安1.47北京4.36厦门2.51哈尔滨0.98广州4.17深圳2.40
5周口1.35苏州2.75青岛2.50盐城0.98重庆3.63天津2.28
6安庆1.26重庆2.72深圳2.32孝感0.94东莞2.80武汉2.16
7上饶1.10青岛2.30北京2.30上饶0.93武汉2.62合肥2.09
8邵阳1.08武汉2.13天津2.14安庆0.93成都2.06太原1.90
9商丘0.97成都1.91南京2.12六安0.90苏州1.88南京1.83
10南充0.96佛山1.87长沙2.07南昌0.89西安1.83厦门1.77

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


图1

图1   城—城流动人口的流动轨迹变化

注:本图基于自然资源部标准地图服务网站下载的审图号为GS(2016)1569的标准底图制作,底图无修改。

Fig.1   Migration trajectories of intercity floating population


4 人口城市间流动的影响因素

4.1 模型选择和变量设置

为了探究人口城—城流动的影响机制,本文采用Logit模型分析流动人口是否发生后续城—城流动。借鉴已有研究,将个人特征、流动方式、家庭和城市特征作为自变量。其中,个人特征包括性别、首次流动年龄、受教育年限、婚姻状况、职业;流动特征包括流动年限、首次流动原因;家庭特征包括首次有无家属随迁、首次流动前子女数量、家庭收入;城市特征(⑤房价数据来自CEIC中国经济数据库,其他城市数据来自《中国城市统计年鉴2018》。)包括首次流入地(⑥由于部分群体仅流动了1次(仅从户籍地到达现居地),其现居地即为首次流入地,并未发生后续的流动,本文中模型只探讨流动人口的首次流入地对其后续城—城流动的影响。)的房价、绿地覆盖率、地方财政支出、人均GDP、工资水平、城市规模、地区分布(表7)。本文分别对农村户籍人口和城镇户籍人口的城—城流动进行分析,由于农村户籍人口只有在首次乡—城流动后才可能发生后续城—城流动,因此,在城镇户籍流动人口的模型中也仅分析城镇户籍人口进入首次流入地后的后续城—城流动,以更好地对比农村和城镇户籍流动人口在城—城流动影响因素上的差异。

表7   变量的名称和赋值

Tab.7  Names and value assignment of variables

变量分类变量名称变量赋值均值标准差
个体特征性别女性=0;男性=10.520.50
首次流动年龄连续变量(岁)23.8710.32
受教育年限数值型变量(a)11.303.50
婚姻单身=0;已婚=10.820.38
职业管理技术及办公人员=1;
商业服务业人员=2;
农业制造业人员=3;
其他人员=4
2.090.70
流动特征流动年限连续变量(a)12.467.82
首次流动原因社会因素=0;经济因素=10.880.33
家庭特征首次家属随迁无=0;有=10.290.45
首次流动前子女数量数值型变量(个)0.990.80
家庭月均收入连续变量(元),取对数8.820.63
首次流入地城市特征房价连续变量(元),取对数9.230.74
绿地覆盖率连续变量(%)41.463.90
地方财政支出连续变量(万元),取对数15.601.54
人均GDP连续变量(元),取对数11.480.43
工资水平连续变量(元),取对数11.310.24
城市规模
中小城市否=0;是=10.210.41
大城市否=0;是=10.470.50
特大/超大城市否=0;是=10.310.46
地区
东北否=0;是=10.090.29
西部否=0;是=10.230.42
中部否=0;是=10.170.37
东部否=0;是=10.510.50

注:① 离婚者归入单身类别。② 地区划分中,东部包括北京、天津、河北、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东和海南;中部包括山西、安徽、江西、河南、湖北和湖南;西部包括内蒙古、广西、重庆、四川、贵州、云南、西藏、陕西、甘肃、青海、宁夏和新疆;东北包括辽宁、吉林和黑龙江。

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


4.2 模型结果及其解释

回归分析结果显示,个体特征、流动特征、家庭特征和城市特征均对流动人口的城—城流动有显著影响,而各要素的影响程度与方向存在户籍分异,具体情况见表8

表8   人口城—城流动影响因素的回归结果

Tab.8  Regression results of influencing factors of intercity mobility

变量分类变量名称模型1:农村户籍模型2:城镇户籍
个体特征性别(女性)
男性-0.009-0.004
首次流动年龄-0.041***-0.052***
受教育年限0.056***0.043***
婚姻(单身)
已婚0.418***0.191***
职业(其他人员)
管理技术及办公人员0.273***0.007
商业服务业人员0.403***0.185***
农业制造业人员-0.116***-0.248***
流动特征流动年限0.055***0.075***
首次流动原因(社会因素)
经济因素0.422***0.660***
家庭特征首次家属随迁(否)
-1.027***-1.087***
首次流动前子女数量-0.098***-0.033
家庭月均收入0.194***0.205***
首次流入地城市特征房价-0.229***0.022
绿地覆盖率-0.008***-0.015***
地方财政支出0.501***0.005
人均GDP0.338***0.437***
工资水平-1.045***-1.386***
城市规模(中小城市)
大城市-0.380***0.044
特大/超大城市-0.827***0.099
地区(东北)
西部0.224***0.239***
中部0.275***0.455***
东部0.233***0.455***
R20.16690.1817
LR卡方检验值18867.666386.92

注:括号内为参照组;*、**、***分别表示估计值在10%、5%、1%水平上显著。

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


(1) 流动人口的个体特征。年轻、受教育年限长、已婚的流动人口发生后续城市间流动的概率更高,但性别与后续城—城流动的发生无显著关联。年轻劳动力需要积累经验和财富,已婚人口则更需要承担养育子女的责任,更换流动城市能为他们带来新的机遇,从而过上更好的生活。高学历流动人口往大城市集聚已成为一种普遍的社会现象[47],他们也更容易为提升自我而往更高等级的城市流动,因此其城—城流动的情况也更为普遍。在职业方面,结果显示,农村户籍的商业服务业人员城—城流动的可能性最大,城市中的商业服务业存在大量流动人口,但此类人口的就业条件不稳定,市场的动荡会加剧他们的流动。

(2) 流动人口的流动特征和家庭特征。流动年限的影响与已有研究结论相同,流动人口在外时间越长,其经验和技能得到提升,则越有可能流动到更好的城市以谋求更优质的工作机会[41]。此外,城—城流动人口后续在城市间流动更多受到经济因素的影响,说明与其他流动人口相同[22],经济趋向也是城—城流动人口的典型特征。在家庭因素中,流动时有家属随迁和子女数量较多都会阻碍流动人口更换居住城市,有研究显示,家庭同住人数越多、子女个数越多的流动人口在当前城市具有更高的居留意愿[48],这也意味着此类家庭更换居住城市的可能性更低。同时,家庭收入越高的流动人口越可能城—城流动,说明家庭经济支持是前往更好的城市工作生活的一个重要条件,并且由于城镇户籍人口平均家庭条件优于农村户籍,因此,在模型中这一要素对城镇户籍人口的影响程度更大。

(3) 流动人口首次流入地的城市特征。城市特征也对人口城—城流动具有显著影响,但不同要素的影响方向存在差异。工资水平高低直接影响流动人口在城市的收入水平,是吸引经济型流动人口的重要因素;绿化覆盖率则在一定程度上体现了城市生活环境的舒适程度。与以往研究结论相同,首次流入城市的工资水平对人口城—城流动的影响程度最大,城市工资水平越低,流动人口越倾向于更换居留城市,同时绿化覆盖程度低的城市也很难留住外来人口,并且这一因素对城镇户籍人口的影响程度更深,说明城镇户籍人口对生活环境的要求更高[49-50]。而不同于以往研究结果的是,在控制了包括工资水平在内的其他变量后,城市的人均GDP和财政支出越高,流动人口越容易离开,这可能与流动人口缺少户籍制度的合法性保障[51],从而无法和户籍人口一样享受城市经济发展带来的社会福利有关;城市较高的人均GDP也未必都能转化为每个流动人口较高的工资收入,因此,宏观层面上人均GDP和财政支出的高指标未必能在个体层面上惠及、进而留下流动人口;然而,这些指标所表征的城市发展却打开了流动人口的眼界,使他们更有欲望和动力到其他城市做新的尝试,寻求新的机会。事实上已有研究显示,没有永久定居意愿的流动人口在流入城市的长期居留意愿不受这些城市人均GDP的影响,但与这些城市的工资水平有着密切的正相关关系,其背后的主要原因也正是在于高工资水平能给他们带来直接、现实的经济利益,而城市较高的人均GDP却未必能给每个流动人口个体带来这种利益[52]。这一结果从一个侧面进一步印证了前述工资水平和人均GDP对城—城流动的影响及其机制的合理性。另一个有意思的结果是,对农村户籍人口来说,首次流入的城市房价越高,其迁往其他城市的可能性越低。这可能是由于城市的高房价在心理上和实际行动中分别降低了流动人口在城市间进一步流动的愿望和能力,使得一部分农村户籍流动人口将选择在城市积累了经验和技能后,直接返回户籍地农村就业或创业。此外,从首次流入地的城市规模和地区分布来看,农村户籍流动人口中首次流入中小城市和中部地区者后续城—城流动的可能性最大,其背后可能是这部分流动人口进一步梯次迁移(从中小城市向大城市、从中部地区向东部地区)的力量使然;而城镇户籍流动人口中,首次流入中部和东部地区者后续城—城流动的可能性高于流入西部和东北者,反映出西部和东北地区作为首次流入地为流动人口后续梯次流动提供的动力不如东部和中部地区。

5 结论与讨论

长期以来,流动人口研究中判定城—城流动人口所依据的是“人户分离”的原则,以流动人口的户籍所在地为依据来判定流动人口的来源地是否为城市,导致过去学界对城—城流动人口的认识仅限于城镇户籍人口,忽略了农村户籍流动人口从农村进入城市后在城市间的后续流动。本文提出一种新的城—城流动人口的统计方法,将农村户籍流动人口进入城市后的后续流动纳入人口城—城流动的统计范围,有助于更加全面了解中国人口城市间流动的全貌。在此基础上,使用2017年全国流动人口动态监测数据,对新口径下中国城—城流动人口的规模、社会经济特征和空间分布格局进行分析,并利用Logit模型考察了人口在城市间流动的影响因素,所得研究结论如下:

(1) 在改进后的统计口径下,中国城—城流动人口占全部流动人口的42.92%(农村户籍占23.37%、城镇户籍占19.55%),远高于原统计口径下的18.85%,同时也高于“七普”21%的水平[4-5,28]。这表明,由于迄今人口城市间流动的相关研究仅考虑了城镇户籍流动人口,使得农村户籍流动人口的后续城市间流动被忽略,导致城—城流动人口的实际规模和强度被严重低估,这一问题必须引起高度重视。

(2) 与原统计口径下的相关结果相比,改进后的统计口径下城—城流动人口的男性和已婚者比例略高,首次流动时更年轻,流动年限更长,教育、职业、收入、住房和社会保障水平均更低,在当前城市的定居意愿也比较低。这是由于以往人们所认识的城—城流动人口的基本特征实际上仅是城镇户籍城—城流动人口的基本特征,而在新口径下得到的结果由于纳入了发生后续城—城流动的农村户籍人口,基于此展示的城—城流动人口的基本特征比以往仅基于城镇户籍的城—城流动人口的认知更为全面和真实。

(3) 同样,以往对城—城流动人口空间特征的认识也仅是基于城镇户籍人口城—城流动的空间格局,而改进后的统计口径把农村户籍流动人口的城—城流动纳入分析的视野,城镇户籍流动人口和农村户籍流动人口城—城流动的不同空间特征也因此以揭示。我们在前面的分析中看到,城—城流动人口在流动范围上以跨省流动为主,相较于农村户籍,城镇户籍流动人口更有能力进一步远距离流动;在不同等级城市的分布中,城镇户籍城—城流动人口的户籍地、首次流入地和现居地城市等级均比农村户籍高,且留在高等级城市的可能性也比农村户籍大。在流动轨迹上,城—城流动人口的户籍地主要在中部和东北地区,与首次流动相比,其后续流动的集中程度更高,进一步流入沿海发达城市的比例更高,其中上海、北京、深圳等超大城市具有突出地位,而农村户籍流动人口在流入上海等发达城市的同时,呈现出明显向重庆、合肥、长沙等中西部城市回流的趋势。

(4) 人口后续城—城流动影响因素的模型结果表明,个体特征、流动特征、家庭以及城市特征均对人口后续的城—城流动有显著影响。个体特征中,年轻、受教育年限长、已婚、从事商业服务业的流动人口发生后续城市间流动的概率更高。流动特征中,流动人口在外时间越长越有可能发生后续城市间流动,并且流动人口后续在城市间的流动呈现明显的经济趋向。家庭特征中,家属随迁和子女数量的增加均会阻碍流动人口在城市间转移,而家庭收入越高则会促进人口的城—城流动。首次流入地的城市特征中,工资水平低、绿化覆盖程度低的城市留住外来人口可能性更低;此外,不同于以往研究的是,城市的人均GDP和财政支出越高,流动人口越容易离开;同时,首次流入的城市房价越高,流动人口越不会去往别的城市;农村户籍流动人口中首次流入中小城市和中部地区者及城镇户籍流动人口中首次流入中部和东部地区者后续城—城流动的可能性更大。

上述研究结果纠正了迄今城—城流动人口统计口径存在的问题及其造成的在城—城流动人口规模、强度和特征等问题上的认识偏差,揭示了城—城流动人口在城市间流动的空间特征和影响因素,推进了对人口城—城流动这一薄弱领域的研究。此外,研究结果中所呈现的农村与城镇户籍流动人口在社会经济特征、流动轨迹以及城—城流动影响机制上的差异尤其值得进一步关注。在城乡二元体制下,由于城乡两户籍流动人口的社会属性、享有的福利和积累的资本存在较大差异,因此,他们在城市间流动所面临的困难必然不同,在研究分析时不可同一而论。这就要求各地针对两户籍城—城流动人口的需求分别制定与之相匹配的政策和保障制度,进一步推动公共服务均等化、流动人口市民化,更好地维护流动人口中不同群体的各项权益。

由于数据的限制,本文未能描述出城—城流动人口在流动过程中基本特征的变化,也未能在人口城—城流动影响因素的研究中纳入每次流动时个人及其家庭的经济社会特征和所经历城市的资源禀赋特征。期待未来能有更详细丰富的数据,针对上述不足进行进一步的深入研究,以进一步完善、拓展和深化对中国人口城—城流动的认识。

参考文献

朱宇, 林李月, 柯文前.

国内人口迁移流动的演变趋势: 国际经验及其对中国的启示

[J]. 人口研究, 2016, 40(5): 50-60.

[本文引用: 3]

文章从人口迁移流动的不同形式及其演变趋势、中国国内人口迁移整体强度的国际对比、人口迁移流动的微观生命过程、以及人口循环流动的发生发展机制和近期演变等4个方面回顾了国际上对人口迁移流动演变趋势及其机制的相关研究,并根据从中获得的借鉴和启示对中国人口迁移流动的未来走势做出判断,认为目前我国人口在区域和乡城间迁移流动的减缓更多预示的是人口迁移流动形式的改变,而不是其整体规模和强度的下降,后者还有着相当大的上升空间;今后仍不可忽视针对迁移流动人口的各种公共服务的转移、接续问题,并要根据人口迁移流动形式的变化,尤其是人口在城市间和城市内部迁移流动上升的新形势,与时俱进地改进流动人口的管理和服务工作。

[Zhu Yu, Lin Liyue, Ke Wenqian.

Trends in internal migration and mobility: International experiences and their implications for China

Population Research, 2016, 40(5): 50-60.]

[本文引用: 3]

This article reviews international literature on the changing trends of population migration and mobility and their mechanisms from the following perspectives: the changing trends of different forms of population mobility,the international comparison of the overall intensity of China’s internal mi- gration,the micro life course of population migration and mobility,and the mechanism and recent evolution of circular migration.The authors derive the following views on the future trends of China’s population migration and mobility from the above review and its implications: First,the recent decreasing trends of regional and rural-urban migration in China indicate changes in the forms of China’s population mobility rather than a real decline of its overall volume and intensity,which will still be on the rise; Second,great attention still needs to be paid to the portable issues of various public services provided to the floating population; and third,the management of and services to the floating population need to be improved in accordance with the changes in the forms of population mobility,especially the rise of urban to urban and intra-urban migration and mobility.

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.

DOI:10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.12.008      [本文引用: 1]

人口迁移流动形式是构成人口迁移流动特征的一个关键要素。在中国进入人口城镇化中后期后,准确判断和把握人口迁移流动形式的转变是一项十分重要的工作。论文基于人口迁移流动形式转变的相关理论与国际经验,考察现阶段中国人口迁移流动形式转变的进程和特点及由此产生的问题与挑战。研究发现,中国人口迁移流动形式已发生转变,并突出表现为人口回流现象不断增多、省际和省内人口迁移流动此消彼长的趋势日益明显;城—城流动显著增加,人口的城-城间流动将渐成常态化;流动人口户籍城镇化进程开始加快,其城乡两栖生计的重心向城镇转移;住房驱动下的流动人口就地、异地城镇化渐成趋势等。同时,人口迁移流动形式转变过程中面临着人口回流推动的就近就地城镇化发展可持续性不足;城—城流动向东部少数省市聚集的态势明显;以户籍城镇化主导的农业流动人口市民化面临多重障碍等问题与挑战。最后,从流动人口城镇化的空间载体构建、城市治理方式转变、中西部小城镇自我可持续发展能力提升等方面提出相应的建议。

[Lin Liyue, Zhu Yu, Ke Wenqian.

Changes in the form of population migration and mobility in China and corresponding policy responses at the late-intermediate stage of urbanization

Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(12): 2054-2067.]

DOI:10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.12.008      [本文引用: 1]

The form of population migration and mobility constitutes a key element of the characteristics of migration. Since China has entered the late-intermediate stage of urbanization, it is very important to accurately identify and understand the transformation in the form of population migration and mobility. While a growing body of literature has been generated and significant progress has been made on China's population migration and mobility and its determinants, an important inadequacy of relevant research are often focused on rural to urban population migration and mobility, neglecting the multi-dimensional forms of population migration and mobility. Based on relevant theories and international experience relating to the transformation in the forms of population migration and mobility, and using data from the China Migrants Dynamic Survey (CMDS), Report on Monitoring and Investigation of Migrant Workers in China, and relevant statistics, this study examined the processes of the transformation in the forms of the population migration and mobility in China and their characteristics at the present stage and the issues and challenges arising therefrom. The results show that there have been significant changes in the forms of population migration and mobility in China, and such changes mainly manifest in the following aspects: First, there has been a steady increase in return migration and short-distance migration; Second, inter-urban migration has also significantly increased and become increasingly common; Third, the urbanization process of the floating population based on the rural-urban transfer of their hukou has started to accelerate, and their rural-urban multiple livelihoods has increasingly shifted towards the urban end; Fourth, there has been a developing trend of urbanization driven by housing purchases in both migrants' places of origin and destination. The study also identified issues and challenges in the process of transformation in the forms of population migration and mobility, including: First, there is a lack of sustainability in in situ urbanization promoted by return migration; Second, urban-urban migration are highly concentrated in a few provinces of the eastern region; Third, there are still many obstacles for the urbanization of rural migrants based on their hukou transfer. Finally, the article puts forward some policy recommendations from the perspectives of the construction of multi-level spatial system of urbanization of the floating population, the transformation of urban governance mode, and the promotion of the capacity for sustainable development of small towns in central and western regions.

朱宇, 林李月, 李亭亭, .

中国流动人口概念和数据的有效性与国际可比性

[J]. 地理学报, 2022, 77(12): 2991-3005.

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202212004      [本文引用: 2]

长期以来,“流动人口”和“人口流动”这两个概念、以及基于这两个概念获取的数据在中国相关研究和政策制定中得到广泛使用,甚至主导着中国人口迁移流动的研究。在国际背景下对这两个概念和相关数据的有效性和可靠性进行了深入地检视,并通过对若干人口普查数据和流动人口动态监测调查数据的分析,揭示“流动人口”和“人口流动”在测量人口迁移流动事件时的失效和失真。结果表明,“流动人口”和“人口流动”概念及相关数据已与现实的迁移流动事件和过程严重脱节;它们既可能因高估迁移流动人口的规模而失真,也可能因系统性遗漏某些迁移流动人口(如城—城流动人口)而失效,同时还严重干扰对现实人口迁移流动方向的判断。此外,基于“人户分离”得到的流动人口数据还存在着不能用于“率”指标的计算和缺乏国际可比性等问题。基于此,本文认为中国人口迁移流动的相关概念、测量和数据收集应回归其反映空间变动事件的本质功能,逐步扩大使用基于5年前常住地(乃至1年前常住地)变动的人口迁移流动数据,并充分利用人口登记和行政管理数据开发基于迁移事件的人口迁移流动数据,为分析和判断中国人口迁移流动的演变趋势和规律提供有效且可靠的数据基础。

[Zhu Yu, Lin Liyue, Li Tingting, et al.

The validity and international comparability of China's concepts and data on the floating population

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2022, 77(12): 2991-3005.]

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202212004      [本文引用: 2]

The two concepts of "liu dong ren kou (the floating population)" and "ren kou liu dong (the mobility of the floating population)", and relevant data based on these two concepts, have long been used extensively in China's relevant research and policy making, playing a dominant role in the fields. Different from the concepts of "migrant" and "migration" in the international literature, which are focused on people's spatial mobility, "liu dong ren kou" and "ren kou liu dong" are identified and measured by the separation of one's place of household registration (hukou) from the place of residence, and inconsistent with relevant international practices. By analysing various census data and data from China Migrant Dynamic Survey (CMDS), this article examines the validity and reliability of these two concepts and data based on them in the international context, and reveals that they have become increasingly invalid and not reliable in measuring migration events since the reform and opening up. The results further demonstrate that these two concepts and the data based on them have been increasingly detached from the real migration events and processes; they may become invalid because of overestimating the volume of the mobile population, or ineffective due to systematic omitting of certain group of the mobile population (such as urban-urban migrants), and can even seriously mislead people's judgment on the changing direction of migration flows. In addition, data on the floating population cannot be used to calculate migration rate and are not comparable in the international context. Based on the above analysis, the article argues that while the concepts of "liu dong ren kou" and "ren kou liu dong" and relevant data based on these two concepts still need to be used for a long period of time due to the continuing existence of the hukou system and its roles in the provision of public services, social welfare and social security, relevant concepts, measurements and ways of data collection in China's migration research should be gradually shifted to and focused on the nature of migration as spatial events; transition data based on the usual residence five years and one year ago should be gradually used as the main data sources and included in the short form of future censuses, and migration event data based on population registration and administrative records should be more fully used, so that China's migration research can be conducted on the solid basis of valid and reliable data sources.

周皓.

中国人口流动模式的稳定性及启示: 基于第七次全国人口普查公报数据的思考

[J]. 中国人口科学, 2021, 35(3): 28-41, 126-127.

[本文引用: 3]

[Zhou Hao.

The stability of migration pattern in China and related issues: Consideration based on the data of seventh national census bulletin

Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2021, 35(3): 28-41, 126-127.]

[本文引用: 3]

王桂新.

中国人口流动与城镇化新动向的考察: 基于第七次人口普查公布数据的初步解读

[J]. 人口与经济, 2021(5): 36-55.

[本文引用: 3]

[Wang Guixin.

New trends in migration and urbanization in China: A preliminary investigation based on the seventh census data

Population & Economics, 2021(5): 36-55.]

[本文引用: 3]

宋健. 人口统计学[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2019: 211-212.

[本文引用: 1]

[Song Jian. Population statistics. Beijing, China: China Renmin University Press, 2019: 211-212.]

[本文引用: 1]

Zelinsky W.

The hypothesis of the mobility transition

[J]. Geographical Review, 1971, 61(2): 219-249.

DOI:10.2307/213996      URL     [本文引用: 2]

DaVanzo J.

Repeat migration, information costs, and location-specific capital

[J]. Population and Environment, 1981, 4(1): 45-73.

DOI:10.1007/BF01362575      URL     [本文引用: 1]

McHugh K E, Hogan T D, Happel S K.

Multiple residence and cyclical migration: A life course perspective

[J]. The Professional Geographer, 1995, 47(3): 251-267.

DOI:10.1111/j.0033-0124.1995.251_q.x      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Newbold K B, Bell M.

Return and onwards migration in Canada and Australia: Evidence from fixed interval data

[J]. International Migration Review, 2001, 35(4): 1157-1184.

DOI:10.1111/j.1747-7379.2001.tb00056.x      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Analysis of return and onwards migration flows has typically relied upon lifetime migration definitions. Both Canada and Australia have collected data on usual place of residence both one and five years prior to the census, which provide a richer source of information on return and onwards moves. Utilizing data drawn from complementary sources, this article examines the incidence, composition and spatial patterning of return and onwards migration at the state and provincial level in Canada and Australia over the period of 1986–1990–1991. Results indicate a high degree of symmetry in these processes between the two countries. While many of the findings are consistent with those derived from analysis of lifetime data, we find that one quarter to one third of return moves were to the original (1986) dwelling, indicating a planned return rather than the failed migration as previous literature has often assumed.

Deshingkar P, Grimm S.

Voluntary internal migration: An update

[R]. London, UK: Overseas Development Institute, 2004.

[本文引用: 1]

Mills E S, Tan J P.

A comparison of urban population density functions in developed and developing countries

[J]. Urban Studies, 1980, 17(3): 313-321.

DOI:10.1080/00420988020080621      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Rees P, Bell M, Kupiszewski M, et al.

The impact of internal migration on population redistribution: An international comparison

[J]. Population, Space and Place, 2017, 23(6): e2036. doi: 10.1002/psp.2036.

[本文引用: 1]

Hall P.

The world cities

[M]. 3rd ed. London, UK: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984.

[本文引用: 1]

Lee Y, Kim D S.

Internal migration in South Korea

[M]// Bell M, Bernard A, Charles-Edwards E, et al.Internal migration in the countries of Asia. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2020: 93-111.

[本文引用: 1]

Rossi P H.

Why families move

[M]. 2nd ed. London, UK: Sage Publications, 1980.

[本文引用: 1]

李竞能. 现代西方人口理论[M]. 上海: 复旦大学出版社, 2004.

[本文引用: 1]

[Li Jingneng. Modern western population theory. Shanghai, China: Fudan University Press, 2004.]

[本文引用: 1]

Clark W A V, Withers S D.

Family migration and mobility sequences in the United States: Spatial mobility in the context of the life course

[J]. Demographic Research, 2007, 17: 591-622.

DOI:10.4054/DemRes.2007.17.20      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Geist C, McManus P A.

Geographical mobility over the life course: Motivations and implications

[J]. Population, Space and Place, 2008, 14(4): 283-303.

DOI:10.1002/(ISSN)1544-8452      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Falicov C J.

Migration and the family life cycle

[M]// Mcgoldrick M, Garcia-Preto N, Carter B, et al. The expanded family life cycle:Individual, family and social perspectives. Boston, USA: Allyn & Bacon, 2016: 222-239.

[本文引用: 1]

张展新, 高文书, 侯慧丽.

城乡分割、区域分割与城市外来人口社会保障缺失: 来自上海等五城市的证据

[J]. 中国人口科学, 2007(6): 33-41, 95.

[本文引用: 1]

[Zhang Zhanxin, Gao Wenshu, Hou Huili.

Urban-rural divide, regional segmentation and insufficient access of urban floating population to social security entitlements: Evidence from Shanghai and other four Chinese cities

Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2007(6): 33-41, 95.]

[本文引用: 1]

段成荣, 杨舸, 张斐, .

改革开放以来我国流动人口变动的九大趋势

[J]. 人口研究, 2008, 32(6): 30-43.

[本文引用: 2]

改革开放30年来,我国流动人口规模不断增大,对我国的经济发展和社会进步起到了重要作用。但我们对流动人口的认识总体来讲是底数不清、情况不明,流动人口变化趋势研究更是罕见。本文通过深入挖掘1982年以来历次全国人口普查和1%人口抽样调查数据资料,总结得出了改革开放30年来我国流动人口变动的九大趋势:流动人口的普遍化、流动原因的经济化、流动时间的长期化、流入地分布的沿海集中化、年龄结构的成年化、性别构成的均衡化、女性人口流动的自主化、流动方式的家庭化和学业构成的"知识化"。

[Duan Chengrong, Yang Ge, Zhang Fei, et al.

Nine trends of floating population changes in China since the reform and opening up

Population Research, 2008, 32(6): 30-43.]

[本文引用: 2]

改革开放30年来,我国流动人口规模不断增大,对我国的经济发展和社会进步起到了重要作用。但我们对流动人口的认识总体来讲是底数不清、情况不明,流动人口变化趋势研究更是罕见。本文通过深入挖掘1982年以来历次全国人口普查和1%人口抽样调查数据资料,总结得出了改革开放30年来我国流动人口变动的九大趋势:流动人口的普遍化、流动原因的经济化、流动时间的长期化、流入地分布的沿海集中化、年龄结构的成年化、性别构成的均衡化、女性人口流动的自主化、流动方式的家庭化和学业构成的"知识化"。

杨菊华.

城乡分割、经济发展与乡—城流动人口的收入融入研究

[J]. 人口学刊, 2011(5): 3-15.

[本文引用: 4]

[Yang Juhua.

The effects of Hukou and development on earnings of different types of migrants

Population Journal, 2011(5): 3-15.]

[本文引用: 4]

马小红, 段成荣, 郭静.

四类流动人口的比较研究

[J]. 中国人口科学, 2014(5): 36- 46, 126-127.

[本文引用: 5]

[Ma Xiaohong, Duan Chengrong, Guo Jing.

A comparative study on four types of floating population

Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2014(5): 36- 46, 126-127.]

[本文引用: 5]

陶树果, 高向东, 方中书.

乡—城、城—城流动人口社会保险参保率及其影响因素的比较研究: 基于2014年全国流动人口动态监测数据

[J]. 西北人口, 2018, 39(2): 88-95.

[本文引用: 4]

[Tao Shuguo, Gao Xiangdong, Fang Zhongshu.

A comparative study of factors influencing insurance participation between rural-urban floating population and urban-urban floating population: Based on the dynamic monitoring data of the floating population in 2014

Northwest Population Journal, 2018, 39(2): 88-95.]

[本文引用: 4]

孟凡强, 上官茹霜, 林浩.

中国流动人口的住房消费及其不平等: 基于农民工和城城流动人口的群体差异分析

[J]. 消费经济, 2020, 36(6): 25-33.

[本文引用: 2]

[Meng Fanqiang, Shangguan Rushuang, Lin Hao.

Housing consumption and inequality of China's migrants: A differential analysis between rural migrants and urban migrants

Consumer Economics, 2020, 36(6): 25-33.]

[本文引用: 2]

卓云霞, 刘涛, 古维迎.

多维邻近性与城—城流动人口的流入地选择: 基于嵌套Logit模型的实证分析

[J]. 地理科学, 2021, 41(7): 1210-1218.

DOI:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2021.07.011      [本文引用: 2]

基于2017年中国流动人口动态监测调查数据,采用嵌套Logit模型分析了地理、制度、信息和知识等多维邻近性对城-城流动人口流入地选择的影响。结果表明:城-城流动人口倾向于流入与户籍地地理相邻、制度相似、信息联系密切以及与自身知识水平相匹配的城市,这在一定程度上缓解人口向工资水平高、就业机会多和公共服务水平好的大城市集聚的趋势;不同维度的邻近性之间存在替代效应,省内流动能够降低距离对流入地选择的负面影响;多维邻近性的影响强度存在群体差异,女性对知识邻近性更加敏感;新生代流动人口对正式制度和信息邻近的城市有更强的偏好,但受知识邻近性的影响较弱;高学历群体更能远距离、跨省迁移并受到城市间互联网信息联系更强的影响;而有过流动经历的劳动力再流动时更能克服地理、文化和知识距离的限制。

[Zhuo Yunxia, Liu Tao, Gu Weiying.

How multi-proximity affects destination choice in urban-urban migration: An analysis based on nested logit model

Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2021, 41(7): 1210-1218.]

DOI:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2021.07.011      [本文引用: 2]

As entering into middle-and-late-stage of urbanization, China’s rural-urban migrants has slowly declined after decades of growth while the amount of urban-urban migrants continues to increase. The migration flow among cities reflects the rational choice of the urban population and has a profound impact on the urban system and urban development. Therefore, it is of practical significance to explore the mechanism of urban-urban migration flows in China for realizing rational and orderly distribution of urban population. Focused on urban-urban migrants who differ from other types of migrants in several ways, this paper develops a framework of how multi-proximity, which includes geographical proximity, institutional proximity, informational proximity and knowledge proximity, makes an influence on destination choice by affecting the migration cost. Based on data from the 2017 China Migrant Population Dynamic Monitoring Survey, and by using the nested logit model, we empirically tested the proximity-migration relationship. The results show that multi-proximity has a significant and robust impact on migrants’ destination choice after controlling for the effects of cities’ characteristics. Urban-urban migrants prefer destinations that are geographically adjacent to their origins and those located in the same province and dialect area. Besides, they are more likely to choose cities which are closely connected with their origins and match them well in education background. Substitutional effect is also found between geographical and formal institutional proximity. But the effect of multi-proximity varies among sub-groups of intercity migrants. This is reflected in the following facts. First, women are more sensitive to knowledge proximity than men. Second, young migrants are less affected by knowledge proximity but relies more on informational and formal institutional proximity than the older. Third, highly educated labors are more able to migrate over a long distance and across provinces, and are affected more by internet information flow between cities than their counterparts. Finally, onward migrants can get over the barriers of geography, culture and knowledge better owing to their accumulation of experience in the previous migration experiences. Empirical results also verified the clear preference of labors for large cities with high wages, abundant job opportunities and adequate public services. But the preference can be relieved by the effect of multi-proximity. Empirical results of this study indicate that policy makers of small cities can strengthen local attraction to the surrounding areas through industrial development and public service improvement to avoid increasingly severe outflow of labors and maintain long-term competitiveness.

程梦瑶.

中国流动人口的迁移转变与多元化发展

[J]. 兰州学刊, 2021(7): 120-132.

[本文引用: 2]

[Cheng Mengyao.

Migration transition and diversified development trends of the floating population in China

Lanzhou Academic Journal, 2021(7): 120-132.]

[本文引用: 2]

石人炳, 陈宁.

城—城流动人口养老保险参保影响因素研究: 基于全国流动人口动态监测数据的分析

[J]. 人口研究, 2015, 39(4): 102-112.

[本文引用: 1]

文章使用2013年国家卫计委流动人口动态监测数据,采用二分类Logistic回归分析方法,分析城-城流动人口参加养老保险的影响因素。研究发现:第一,个人特征方面,性别、年龄、受教育程度与参保行为显著相关,男性相比女性参保率较高;25~34岁组参保可能性最大;受教育程度越高,参保可能性越大。第二,经济社会因素中,单位性质为外资企业的流动人口参保可能性最大;收入越高,参保率越高;拥有商品房或自建房的相对于租住私房的参保率更高。第三,流动因素中,流入区域、时间和流动范围对参保行为影响显著,中部相对于东部、西部参保可能性最小;市内跨县流动者相对于省内跨市、跨省流动者参保可能性更大;流入时间越长参保可能性越大。

[Shi Renbing, Chen Ning.

Factors affecting the participation of endowment insurance of urban-to-urban migrants in China

Population Research, 2015, 39(4): 102-112.]

[本文引用: 1]

Based on the dynamic monitoring data of floating population from National Health and Family Planning Commission in 2013, this study conducts binary logistic regression to analyze the influencing factors for urban-to-urban migrant population on the endowment insurance participation. The results show that personal characteristics, such as gender, age and education, are closely related to the enrollment. Males and people aged from 25 to 34 and with higher education are more likely to participate. Employer type, income and housing situation are most important economic and social factors that influence the endowment insurance participation of the floating population. Migrants working in foreign invested enterprises are most likely to participate. Those with highincome or possessing their own houses are also more likely to enroll. Types of destination, duration and distance also have significant impact on the participation behavior. The floating population in central China has lower rate of enrollment than those in east and west China. The cross-countymigrants are more willing to attend than the cross-city and cross-province ones. The longer the migrants stay, the higher the probability of participation is.

杨菊华.

中国流动人口的社会融入研究

[J]. 中国社会科学, 2015(2): 61- 79, 203-204.

[本文引用: 3]

[Yang Juhua.

Research on the assimilation of the floating population in China

Social Sciences in China, 2015(2): 61- 79, 203-204.]

[本文引用: 3]

孙伟增, 张思思.

房租上涨如何影响流动人口的消费与社会融入: 基于全国流动人口动态监测调查数据的实证分析

[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2022, 22(1): 153-174.

[本文引用: 1]

[Sun Weizeng, Zhang Sisi.

How housing rent affect migrants' consumption and social integration: Evidence from China migrants dynamic survey

China Economic Quarterly, 2022, 22(1): 153-174.]

[本文引用: 1]

齐明珠, 王亚.

中国流动人口社会经济结构分层研究

[J]. 中国人口科学, 2021(6): 110-123, 128.

[本文引用: 1]

[Qi Mingzhu, Wang Ya.

Research on the socio-economic stratification of floating population in China

Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2021(6): 110-123, 128.]

[本文引用: 1]

杨超, 张征宇.

流动人口与本地人口就业质量差异研究: 现状、来源与成因

[J]. 财经研究, 2022, 48(4): 19-33.

[本文引用: 1]

[Yang Chao, Zhang Zhengyu.

Research on employment quality differences between migrant population and local population: Status quo, sources and causes

Journal of Finance and Economics, 2022, 48(4): 19-33.]

[本文引用: 1]

杨菊华.

社会排斥与青年乡—城流动人口经济融入的三重弱势

[J]. 人口研究, 2012, 36(5): 69-83.

[本文引用: 1]

在近二、三十年大规模的人口流动、快速的城镇化进程中,青年乡-城流动人口可能因户籍性质、户籍地点、年轻(故而缺乏工作经历和经验)而成为中国目前最脆弱的群体之一。文章以社会排斥理论为分析框架,使用2005年全国1%人口抽样调查数据,探讨青年乡-城流动人口经济融入的模式、特点和影响因素。结果显示,与其他相关人群相比,该群体的绝对经济社会地位和相对融入水平都是最低的,处于三重弱势地位。该现象说明,社会发展带来的潜在的积极后果可能被制度及结构性因素所抵消;同时,文章的发现也挑战了"市场经济在纵向上,一定会促进权利和法律平等"的观点,暗示社会融入的进程滞后于经济社会发展水平,并呼唤打造一个更为包容、不同人群平等相处的和谐社会。

[Yang Juhua.

Triple disadvantages: Social exclusion and economic integraction of young rural-to-urban migrants to the host society in China

Population Research, 2012, 36(5): 69-83.]

[本文引用: 1]

In the process of large - scale internal migration and rapid pace of urbanization in the past two decades,rural - to - urban young migrants,defined as those born after 1980 to parents with a rural hukou registration,have become one of the most vulnerable segments of the population who might be triply disadvantaged.Drawing on the 2005 National 1% Population Survey data,this paper explores the patterns,status,and associates of economic integration of young migrants with a rural hukou registration ( i.e.,rural - to - urban migrants) to the host society.Preliminary findings suggest that the level of economic integration of young migrants is rather low,particularly for those with a rural registration.Such phenomena challenge the notion that marketization necessarily promotes rights and legal equality in a linear fashion,and the potentially positive impact of migration on development might be compromised by institutional constraints ( e.g.,hukou) and local residents' discrimination towards outsiders,particularly the youths.It also suggests that the pace of socioeconomic integration is lagged behind socioeconomic development.

杨菊华.

制度要素与流动人口的住房保障

[J]. 人口研究, 2018, 42(1): 60-75.

[本文引用: 2]

文章分析近十年流动人口住房来源的变动趋势、基本特点及其影响因素,重点关注更能体现“安居”的住房拥有和保障性住房情况。 分析结果表明,约七成流动人口租住私房,拥有住房的比例很低,租住公屋的比例极低;尽管流动人口群体内存在明显分层,但作为“外来人”,住房方面的共性大于差异性;流入地经济越发达、流动跨越的行政区域越大,拥有住房或租住公屋的概率越低。 可见,将流动人口全面纳入住房保障体系之路依旧举步维艰、任重道远。 在“住有所居”、“共享”发展等理念的引领下,未来需要真正从制度上消减流动人口安居之路上的障碍,扩大公租房对流动人口的覆盖率,减弱流动人口的“过客”感受,

[Yang Juhua.

Housing source of migrants and its associated factors

Population Research, 2018, 42(1): 60-75.]

[本文引用: 2]

The Chinese government,<span>central and local alike<span>,<span>has issued a number of documents<span>,<span>aiming to include migrants in the housing security system at the place of destination since <span>2010<span>. Have <span>these policies improved migrants?? living condition<span>? <span>Focusing on housing source<span>,<span>this paper describes its <span>changing trend in the past <span>10 <span>years<span>,<span>and explores its associates in <span>2014<span>. Analytic results show that over <span>70<span>% of migrants stay in rented house<span>; <span>the proportion of migrants who own house / apartment is very <span>low and those who have access to public housing is extremely low. While urban and rural <span>hukou <span>(<span>household registration<span>) <span>type makes a difference in owning / access to public housing and renting <span>housing<span>,<span>both rural-urban migrants and urban-urban migrants share more similarities than difference in <span>housing source<span>,<span>especially when they are compared to local residents. Such findings suggest that it still <span>has a long way to go to include migrants in the local housing security framework. In the context of <span>&ldquo;<span>Shared Development<span>&rdquo; <span>norms<span>,<span>more efforts should be devoted to alleviate barriers migrants encounter <span>in access to public housing and improve the ability of migrants to own their own houses / apartments.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span>

穆学英, 崔璨, 崔军茹, .

中国流动人口的跨等级流动及其对流入城市住房选择的影响

[J]. 地理学报, 2022, 77(2): 395-410.

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202202009      [本文引用: 1]

妥善解决流动人口在流入城市的住房问题是实现流动人口市民化和提高新型城镇化发展质量的关键。本文基于2017年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据,揭示了流动人口的跨等级流动格局,并探讨了跨等级流动对流动人口在流入城市住房选择的影响。研究发现:① 流动人口以跨等级向上流动为主,其中向上跨三级、两级流动的比例较大;② 不同流出地的流动人口在流入城市的住房选择存在显著差异,流出城市的人均GDP和平均房价越高,流动人口在流入城市获得住房产权的概率越大;③ 流入城市的平均房价越高,流动人口获得商品房的概率越低,随着流入城市人均GDP的增加,流动人口购买商品房的概率先增后降,而购买不完全产权房的概率则恰恰相反;④ 随着流动人口跨越城市等级的增加,其获得住房产权的概率降低,而租赁正规住房的可能性增大。研究结果有助于深化理解流动人口在流入城市住房选择的地理根源,对进一步优化面向流动人口的住房政策具有参考意义。

[Mu Xueying, Cui Can, Cui Junru, et al.

Hierarchical migration patterns of China's floating population and their impact on the housing choices

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2022, 77(2): 395-410.]

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202202009      [本文引用: 1]

Access to homeownership profoundly affects floating population's social integration in the destination city and, in the long term, wealth accumulation. While housing differentiation within China's floating population has received increasing attention in the past two decades, the varied housing outcomes of the floating population experiencing different geographic mobility have been rarely investigated. Using data from the 2017 China Migrants Dynamic Survey, this study employs logistic regression models to examine the association between migrants' hierarchical migration patterns and their housing outcomes in the destination city. The results show that the migration patterns of China's floating population are mostly featured by moving up along the urban hierarchy. There are significant disparities in housing outcomes among floating population with different origins and destinations. Migrants originating from cities with higher gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and average housing prices are more capable to afford a home in the destination city. Moving to cities with higher average housing prices implies fewer opportunities to purchase local commodity housing. As GDP per capita in destination cities increases, the probability of floating population purchasing commercial housing increases first but then decreases, while the probability of purchasing housing with incomplete property rights exhibits the opposite phenomenon. Furthermore, migrants making larger upward movements are less likely to own a home in the destination city, but more likely to rent formal housing. This study highlights the role of geographical mobility between different origins and destinations in affecting floating population's housing outcomes in the destination city and furthermore provides insight into understanding housing inequality.

张利国, 冷浪平.

流动人口与经济发展: 基于城市面板数据的实证研究

[J]. 当代财经, 2022(2): 16-27.

[本文引用: 2]

[Zhang Liguo, Leng Langping.

Floating population and economic development: An empirical research based on urban panel data

Contemporary Finance & Economics, 2022(2): 16-27.]

[本文引用: 2]

马志飞, 尹上岗, 张宇, .

中国城城流动人口的空间分布、流动规律及其形成机制

[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(4): 926-936.

DOI:10.11821/dlyj020180280     

在人口城城流动日益成为中国人口流动的重要形式背景下,基于人口普查数据和流动人口动态监测数据,分别探讨城城流动人口空间流动的结果、过程和成因,也就是探讨城城流动人口的空间分布、流动轨迹及形成机制。研究表明:城城流动人口倾向于向发达地区和大城市流动,同时在流动过程中会考虑空间的邻近;地区间经济发展水平、就业机会以及高水平教育医疗设施的差距是诱发城城人口流动的内在动力,而在实际的流动过程中会综合考虑由于空间摩擦而产生的金钱成本、心理压力等障碍;同时,已有城城流动人口存量会通过减少适应流入地的成本、提供相应的生活和就业信息等方式降低流动成本,刺激城城流动人口按照已有路径流动。借鉴西方发达国家人口流动的阶段划分,认为中国人口流动仍然处于从小城镇进入大城市的阶段。在这一时间节点上,依据人口流动的自然规律,鼓励人口向大城市流动,并通过发展副中心和卫星城等形式疏散中心区功能,推动城市郊区化发展才符合城市发展的自然逻辑。

[Ma Zhifei, Yin Shanggang, Zhang Yu, et al.

Spatial distribution, flowing rules and forming mechanism of inter-cities floating population in China

Geographical Research, 2019, 38(4): 926-936.]

DOI:10.11821/dlyj020180280     

The population flow between cities not only reflects the choice of the urban population who voted with their feet based on different development levels of urban economy, society, and public services, but also exerts a direct bearing on the success of rational and orderly movement of population, coordinated development of large, medium and small cities and the new-type urbanization strategies. Therefore, it is of practical significance to explore the spatial flowing laws and driving mechanism of urban-to-urban population flows in China for realizing rational and orderly distribution of population and the new-type urbanization strategy. In the context of the increasing amounts of urban-to-urban floating population in China, this paper discusses the results, processes, and causes of the spatial mobility of floating population in urban areas based on data of population census and dynamic monitoring of floating population. In addition, it studies the spatial distribution, flow trajectory and forming mechanism of urban-to-urban floating population. This paper uses Arcgis to visualize the spatial distribution and main flow trajectories of inter-cities floating population, then uses regression equations to analyze the main factors driving population movement between cities. The results of this paper indicate that the urban-to-urban floating population tends to flow to developed regions and metropolises, during the process of which the proximity of destination is considered; gaps among regions in terms of economic development, employment opportunities, and high levels of education and medical facilities are the internal impetus to the flow of urban-to-urban floating population, while comprehensive consideration will be given to obstacles such as money costs and psychological pressure generated by space friction; at the same time, the existing urban-to-urban floating population will reduce the flow costs, and stimulate the flow of urban-to-urban floating population according to existing routes by reducing the cost of inflows, and providing living and employment information. According to the stage division of population flow in the developed countries, it is discovered that the population movement in China is still transforming from the stage where people move from small cities and towns to metropolises. At this time point, the government should encourage the flow of population to large cities according to the natural law of population movement, decentralize the functions of the central area through the development of sub-centers and satellite cities, and promote the development of urban suburbanization, which are in line with the natural logic of urban development.

Sun Y F, Pan K F.

Prediction of the intercity migration of Chinese graduates

[J]. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2014. doi: 10.1088/1742-5468/2014/12/P12022.

[本文引用: 1]

Yang X S.

Urban temporary out-migration under economic reforms: Who moves and for what reasons?

[J]. Population Research and Policy Review, 1994, 13(1): 83-100.

DOI:10.1007/BF01074323      URL     [本文引用: 2]

杨肖丽, 张广胜, 杨欣.

农民工城市间流动的影响因素及流动后果研究: 对沈阳市农民工的实证调查

[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, 12(4): 392-396.

[本文引用: 2]

[Yang Xiaoli, Zhang Guangsheng, Yang Xin.

On the factors that produce effects on migrant workers' moving among cities and the corresponding consequences: Based on a survey of migrant workers conducted in Shenyang city

Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 2010, 12(4): 392-396.]

[本文引用: 2]

盛亦男.

流动人口家庭化迁居水平与迁居行为决策的影响因素研究

[J]. 人口学刊, 2014, 36(3): 71-84.

[本文引用: 1]

[Sheng Yinan.

The determinants of whole family migration and migration behaviors decision

Population Journal, 2014, 36(3): 71-84.]

[本文引用: 1]

尹振宇, 何皛彦.

“推—拉”理论视域下中国特大城市人口调控分析

[J]. 城市观察, 2019(2): 81-89.

[本文引用: 1]

[Yin Zhenyu, He Xiaoyan.

Analysis on population control in China's megacities from the theoretical perspective of push-pull strategy

Urban Insight, 2019(2): 81-89.]

[本文引用: 1]

刘修岩, 李松林.

房价、迁移摩擦与中国城市的规模分布: 理论模型与结构式估计

[J]. 经济研究, 2017, 52(7): 65-78.

[本文引用: 1]

[Liu Xiuyan, Li Songlin.

Housing price, migration friction and city-size distribution in China: Theory model and structural estimation

Economic Research Journal, 2017, 52(7): 65-78.]

[本文引用: 1]

张伟丽, 晏晶晶, 聂桂博.

中国城市人口流动格局演变及影响因素分析

[J]. 中国人口科学, 2021(2): 76- 87, 127-128.

[本文引用: 1]

[Zhang Weili, Yan Jingjing, Nie Guibo.

Evolution of the pattern of China's urban population flows and its proximate determinants

Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2021(2): 76- 87, 127-128.]

[本文引用: 1]

田明.

中国东部地区流动人口城市间横向迁移规律

[J]. 地理研究, 2013, 32(8): 1486-1496.

[本文引用: 1]

基于中国东部地区6 个城市流动人口问卷调查,并在对已有人口迁移规律研究进行梳理的基础上,通过比较流动人口每一次迁移前一城市和后一城市的差异以及整个迁移过程中迁移速度、迁移距离、迁移城市规模、城市经济发展水平、区域路径等方面的变化趋势,分析流动人口进入城市后在城市间横向迁移的规律和特点。研究发现:东部地区流动人口城市间横向迁移不仅速度快,城市平均居留时间短,而且在多次迁移过程中迁移流向、迁移的空间轨迹方面呈现出更为复杂的特点:随着迁移次数的增加,迁移距离增加,遵循由近及远的同时回流现象明显;随着迁移次数的增加,由收入较高城市流向收入较低城市的比例以及流向中等城市的比例显著提高,不存在由大到小的递补特征;在相邻城市或相同经济区范围内多次往返迁移现象明显。

[Tian Ming.

The migration patterns of floating population across cities in Eastern China

Geographical Research, 2013, 32(8): 1486-1496.]

[本文引用: 1]

Based on a survey in six cities of eastern China and theory of migration, this article compares current situation with the patterns of Chinese migration in the past decades, and explores certain important characteristics and law of the migration process of floating population, such as migration frequency, distance, urban scale, urban development level and spatial path between origin and destination cities in each migration and in an entire migration process. Results show that floating population in eastern China migrates frequently across cities, and stays for a short period averagely after leaving their rural homes. Its movement patterns are complex in terms of migration direction and spatial trajectory, which indicates more floating population moved transprovincially to a longer distance with more times of migration, and as the same time more floating population returns to cities in hometown provinces. More and more migrants tend to move to middle-sized and low-income cities along with movements, though flows to big-sized cities, and high-income cities are still the mainstream. These findings show that floating population becomes more rational in choosing their destination cities. Cities in home provinces, and other cities in current host provinces become the transit places to destination cities, and floating population is inclined to move back and forward between several cities in a certain economic region.

杨雪, 樊洺均.

新生代高学历流动人口的流向选择及影响机制

[J]. 人口学刊, 2019, 41(6): 64-77.

[本文引用: 1]

[Yang Xue, Fan Mingjun.

The flow direction selection of the new generation highly educated floating population and the influence mechanism of the selection

Population Journal, 2019, 41(6): 64-77.]

[本文引用: 1]

古恒宇, 孟鑫, 沈体雁, .

中国城市流动人口居留意愿影响因素的空间分异特征

[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(2): 240-254.

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202002003      [本文引用: 1]

流动人口居留意愿的影响因素往往存在显著的空间分异特征,然而既有研究对此关注较少。基于2015年中国流动人口动态监测数据,运用半参数地理加权回归(SGWR)模型,结合k均值聚类法,对中国城市流动人口居留意愿影响因素的空间分异特征展开研究。结论如下:① 流动人口居留意愿主要受流动人口群体自身特征的影响,受流入地的影响相对较弱;② 社会经济因素与流动人口居留意愿的关系紧密,人口、家庭及流动特征因素同样产生影响,收入、婚姻、跨省流动等因素对流动人口居留意愿产生抑制作用,而住房支出、参保率、子女个数等因素则产生促进作用;③ 各影响因素总体上呈现带状的空间分异模式,可概括为&#x0201C;E-W&#x0201D;&#x0201C;N-S&#x0201D;&#x0201C;NE-SW&#x0201D;&#x0201C;SE-NW&#x0201D;4种。民族、家庭等因素的正向影响自北向南递减,参保率、未婚率、二产就业等因素的影响自西北向东南递减,子女个数及人均GDP的影响自东北向西南递减。东部经济较发达地区高收入流动人口的居留意愿相对更弱,华南地区住房支出较高的流动人口居留意愿相对更强。④ 全国可划分为四大影响区,其中,华北地区、华中地区、华东地区受多因素共同影响;西北地区及部分西南地区主要受人口及社会因素的影响;东北三省及内蒙古东部地区主要受经济及家庭因素的影响;华南地区及部分中、东、西南部地区,除住房支出外,受大部分因素的影响相对最小。最后,本文对中国流动人口的服务与管理提出相应建议。

[Gu Hengyu, Meng Xin, Shen Tiyan, et al.

Spatial variation of the determinants of China's urban floating population's settlement intention

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(2): 240-254.]

DOI:10.11821/dlxb202002003      [本文引用: 1]

It is demonstrated that the determinants of China's urban floating population's settlement intention are different among geographic units, which seems to be ignored by previous researches. Based on the data from the 2015 national migrant population dynamic monitoring survey (CMDS) and related statistics, this article uses the Semiparametric Geographically Weighted Regression (SGWR) model and k-means cluster method to examine the spatial variation of the factors influencing floating population's settlement intention in 282 prefecture- and provincial- level cites of China. Results provide the following conclusions. (1) The settlement intention of urban floating population is mainly influenced by the floating population characteristics instead of the destination characteristics. (2) Social and economic factors are closely related to the floating population's settlement intention. Meanwhile, the demographic, family and mobility factors exert a significant impact on such an intention. To be specific, there exists an inhibitory effect on floating population's settlement intention in factors such as income, marriage, and cross provincial mobility. However, housing expenditure, participation rate, number of children and other factors can effectively contribute to such intention. (3) Zonal spatial differentiation patterns of the influencing factors' coefficients are illustrated by the SGWR model, which can be further divided into four categories ("E-W", "N-S", "NE-SW" and "SE-NW"): The positive influences of ethnic and family factors are decreasing from the northern to southern regions, while the influence of employment ratio in the secondary industry is declining from the northwest to the southeast regions, and the impacts of factors such as the number of children and per capita GDP are diminishing from the northeast to the southwest regions. In eastern developed areas, the settlement intention of floating population with higher income is comparatively lower, while migrants with higher housing expenditure in southern China have a stronger intention to settle down. (4) Four influencing zones are detected by the k-means method: Floating population's settlement intention in North China, Central China and East China is significantly affected by multiple factors; In the northwest region and part of the southwest region, migrants' settlement intention is mainly influenced by demographic and social factors; The northeast region and the eastern part of Inner Mongolia's floating population's willingness to stay is mainly related to economic and family factors; Apart from housing expenditure, coefficients of other factors are relatively small in southern China and part of the central, eastern and southwestern regions. Additionally, this paper puts forward some suggestions on the service and management of the floating population in China.

朱传耿, 顾朝林, 马荣华, .

中国流动人口的影响要素与空间分布

[J]. 地理学报, 2001, 56(5): 548-559.

[本文引用: 1]

[Zhu Chuangeng, Gu Chaolin, Ma Ronghua, et al.

The influential factors and spatial distribution of floating population in China

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2001, 56(5): 548-559.]

[本文引用: 1]

湛东升, 张文忠, 党云晓, .

中国流动人口的城市宜居性感知及其对定居意愿的影响

[J]. 地理科学进展, 2017, 36(10): 1250-1259.

DOI:10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.10.007      [本文引用: 1]

流动人口是中国城镇化进程的重要参与者,加强其定居意愿特征分析对制定中国新型城镇化发展政策具有重要参考价值。基于中国40个主要城市的宜居城市问卷调查数据,运用描述统计和地理探测器方法,揭示中国流动人口的城市宜居性感知特征及其对定居意愿的影响。研究结果表明:①中国流动人口的城市宜居性感知评价分异明显,呈现出“公共服务设施便利性>自然环境舒适性>社会人文环境舒适性>环境健康性>交通便捷性>城市安全性”的递减特征;②中国流动人口的公共服务设施便利性、社会人文环境舒适性、环境健康性和城市安全性等4个维度城市宜居性感知对其定居意愿具有显著影响,且影响强度依次递减,但二者关系并不完全呈简单的线性特征。③相对他人收入满意度、生活满意度、住房价格感知和地理区位等参照变量,以及年龄、性别和职业等个体与家庭属性也是影响中国流动人口定居意愿的重要因素。

[Zhan Dongsheng, Zhang Wenzhong, Dang Yunxiao, et al.

Urban livability perception of migrants in China and its effects on settlement intention

Progress in Geography, 2017, 36(10): 1250-1259.]

DOI:10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.10.007      [本文引用: 1]

Migrants play an important role in the process of China's urbanization. Therefore, understanding the determinants of their settlement intention is of great importance for making national new urbanization policies. Drawing on the livable cities survey conducted in 40 major cities in China, descriptive statistics and geographical detector methods were employed to examine the characteristics of migrants' urban livability perception and its effects on their settlement intention, respectively. The results show that: (1) Migrants' urban livability perception differs greatly between livability indicators—the ranking of importance is convenience of access to public facilities > comfort of natural environment > comfort of social environment > environmental health > convenience of transportation > security in the city. (2) Four dimensions of migrants' urban livability perception, including convenience of access to public facilities, comfort of social environment, environmental health, and security in the city, have significant effects on settlement intention with decreasing weights, but the correlations are not always linear. (3) Selected control variables, including migrants' relative income satisfaction, life satisfaction, perceived housing price, and geographic locations, and individual and family attributes such as age, gender, and occupation, also exert significant effects on settlement intention.

蔡禾, 王进.

“农民工”永久迁移意愿研究

[J]. 社会学研究, 2007, 22(6): 86-113, 243.

[本文引用: 1]

[Cai He, Wang Jin.

A study on migrant workers' permanent migration intentions

Sociological Studies, 2007, 22(6): 86-113, 243.]

[本文引用: 1]

Lin L Y, Zhu Y.

Types and determinants of migrants' settlement intention in China's new phase of urbanization: A multi-dimensional perspective

[J]. Cities, 2022, 124: 103622. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103622.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

/