EN中文

Scientia Geographica Sinica  2017 , 37 (7): 997-1005 https://doi.org/10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2017.07.004

Orginal Article

地方因素对流动人口城市融入的影响研究

田明

北京师范大学社会发展与公共政策学院,北京100875

Local Factors Effects on the Urban Integration for the Floating Population

Tian Ming

School of Social Development and Public Policy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

中图分类号:  K901.3

文献标识码:  A

文章编号:  1000-0690（2017）07-0997-09

收稿日期: 2016-10-8

修回日期:  2017-02-4

网络出版日期:  2017-07-20

版权声明:  2017 《地理科学》编辑部 本文是开放获取期刊文献，在以下情况下可以自由使用：学术研究、学术交流、科研教学等，但不允许用于商业目的.

基金资助:  国家自然科学基金项目（41371165）、国家社科基金重大项目（16ZDA026）资助

作者简介:

作者简介：田明（1974-）,男,河北康保人,教授,博导,主要从事城市研究和流动人口研究。E-mail:tianm@bnu.edu.cn

展开

摘要

利用东部和中部地区9个城市的流动人口问卷调查,采用多水平回归模型,分析了城市差异对流动人口城市融入的影响机制。研究发现：流动人口城市融入过程存在南北差异,并呈相同地域较接近的特征。城市区位、经济发展水平、以房租为代表的物价水平、以方言为主的地域文化、流动人口占比,社会保障的落实程度等地方因素,对流动人口城市融入产生显著影响,但城市人口规模影响不显著。地方因素对流动人口城市融入的影响效应是复杂的、多向的,即使同一因素既有积极的方面,也存在消极的方面。推动流动人口的城市融入,必须正视城市差异,因地制宜地提出包容性的社会政策。方言重的城市,尤其是这些城市的公共场所和公共办事窗口要推动普通话的普及,鼓励使用普通话;降低城市社会保障的准入门槛;房租高的城市,保障房建设要以公租房建设为主,把流动人口纳入公租房保障范围;要本着先易后难,同步推进的原则,优先推进省域内流动人口市民化,城镇化转移支付应向流动人口比例高的城市倾斜。

关键词： 流动人口 ; 社会融入 ; 城市 ; 地方因素

Abstract

Based on a survey of 2 496 migrant workers in 9 cities of the eastern and central China, this article investigated the impact of local factors on social integration of migrant workers. A multiple-level regression model was applied to analyzing and revealing the differential impact of local factors, including level of economic development, intelligibility of local dialect, population share of migrants, and cost of rent. The cities, with more difficulties to join the local endowment insurance, the better the economic development, the greater gap between the earnings of the migrant workers and urban capita income, the higher rent, the more difficult urban dialect to master and the higher proportion of urban immigrant population, have a lower integration. The results find: 1) each city’s uniqueness produces some specific positive and negative effects. The positive effects can reduce the social distance between the migrant population and the urban residents. The sense of inclusion may become a source of pride in promoting the effective integration of migrants. However, the negative effects may serve to marginalize and alienate the migrant population. In cities that are not conducive to social integration, the migrants have a lower degree of recognition. 2) the differences between cities are selective in attracting migrant populations. Different cities attract different types of migrants, so that their migrant populations are structurally different. The abilities of the migrant populations to adapt and integrate are also different in different cities. Therefore, cities differ significantly in their levels of social integration. Recognition of these differences is an important basis for making urbanization policies that fit the local conditions. Given the large variety of cities, it was suggested that localized social policies are promoted to ease the integration of migrant workers in urban communities. To facilitate migrant workers’ social integration, priority should be given to promoting social integration within a province and at cities with high proportion of migrant population. Migrant workers should also be given the benefits of local social programs such as public housing rental assistance, especially in cities with a high level of rental cost.

Keywords： floating population ; social integration ; urban ; local factors

0

PDF (516KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 收藏文章

本文引用格式 导出 EndNote Ris Bibtex

田明. 地方因素对流动人口城市融入的影响研究[J]. , 2017, 37(7): 997-1005 https://doi.org/10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2017.07.004

Tian Ming. Local Factors Effects on the Urban Integration for the Floating Population[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2017, 37(7): 997-1005 https://doi.org/10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2017.07.004

从西方移民社会融入研究历史上看,城市与地方曾经是移民研究的中心领域,后来逐渐被忽略[1]。直到20世纪90年代,城市对移民行为和社会融入的塑造才逐渐被认识[2~5]。地方或国家（针对国际移民）角色的比较研究在移民的融入过程中的价值逐步获得了确认[5~7],发现社会融入的差异不仅存在于群体之间,也存在于国家之间和城市之间[3,8~12]。越来越强调在考虑移民融合时,要注意地方模式,要考虑地方因素[13]。但是,在国际上地方因素对移民社会融入影响的实证分析仍然十分有限[14],系统地,多维度地比较不同城市或地方对移民社会融入行为影响的研究更为少见[15]。比较研究多存在于少数几个关键的城市,比如纽约与洛杉矶的比较[2],布鲁塞尔与安特卫普的比较[3]等,或者仅专注于某一个城市的特色分析[16]。这些研究发现移民历史的不同[2],城市的种族多样性、移民的政治环境、次区域民族主义、城市中移民构成等因素会导致不同城市移民融入的差异[3]。

人口由农村流向城镇是中国城镇化的主旋律,但流动人口融入城市困难,融入程度低已成为学界的共识[17~20]。中国流动人口不能有效地融入城市问题,国内学术界大致形成了3种主要的解释范式：现代化范式 [21~23]、社会资本范式 [24~26]和制度范式 [27]。3种范式的解释可归纳为2方面：一是流动人口自身存在的不足;二是宏观的国家经济社会体制的影响。但是,这些研究很少纳入空间的维度,同样忽略地方因素的影响。少量的研究发现流动人口城市融入在城市间存在显著差异[28],流入地的特征,比如社区差异对流动人口城市融入有着重要的影响 [29,17]。此外,与城市融入具有很大关联的落户意愿或长期定居意愿的研究发现流入地的城市规模、经济发展水平、区位等地方因素的重要性[30~32]。城市融入是在具体的场所（城市）发生的不同群体之间的相互适应、相互接纳的过程。这个过程包括在生活中、在工作中、以及在其他任何场合下的交往和适应。城市作为流入地,其城市特征和构成环境不同,流动人口适应和融入过程会呈现出差异。首先,流出地与流入地之间差异越大,克服差异越困难,流动人口面临的融入障碍就越多。其次,城市作为融入的场所,提供各种各样的资源和机会,形塑着人们的日常生活,城市不同则融入的途径、范围、对象、频率亦有所差别。本文针对城市作为融入的具体场所,其特征对流动人口城市融入产生的影响及这些因素在流动人口城市融入过程中的影响机制和政策启示进行了研究。

1 数据、因变量指标

1.1 数据

城市的差异越显著,越有利于分析提取影响流动人口城市融入的地方因素。本研究按照区域均衡、特色明显、城市间可比等原则,从2010年下半年到2012年上半年,选择北京、东莞、温州、青岛、郑州、武汉、长沙和沈阳9座城市,对非本市户籍,外出半年以上的流动人口,做了2 496份问卷调查。其中,有效问卷2 439份（表1）。由于流动人口流动性比较强,工作地和居住地不固定,没有可参照的抽样框。为了使样本更具有代表性,本次抽样在每个案例城市,城区的社区和流动人口生活和工作集聚区（包括开发区、工业园区）按照2∶1的比例调配①;其次,根据流动人口在各城市的行业分布情况对各城市总样本进行结构控制（表1）。

表1   样本人口学特征及分布(n=2 439)

Table 1   Sample demographic characteristics and distribution

项目特征值样本数量
（个）		所占比例
（%）		项目特征值样本数量
（个）		所占比例
（%）
性别男147960.64来源地区西部地区40116.44
女96039.36来源地特征城市2239.16
年龄20岁及以下2058.41县城及小城镇87135.69
20~25岁80533.41普通乡村134555.15
25~30岁47719.56在当前城市
的居留时间		1 a及以下93338.25
30~35岁27011.071~3 a66727.35
35~40岁2048.363~5 a33313.65
40~45岁1867.635 a以上50620.75
45~50岁1596.52月收入1000元及以下1927.87
50岁及以上1335.451000~2000元114346.86
受教育程度小学及以下29612.142000~3000元61425.17
初中91437.473000~5000元35014.35
高中/职高/中专683285000元以上1405.74
大专及以上54622.38行业分布制造业85535.06
婚姻状况未婚120149.24电力、燃气、水生产与供应及采矿业411.68
已婚120649.45建筑业30212.37
离异及其他321.31交通运输、批发零售,住宿餐饮、家政
等传统服务业		79632.63
户籍农村户籍192578.93金融、房地产、信息、租赁及商务服务
等现代服务业		2058.41
非农户籍51421.07科教文卫等其他服务业1757.18
来源地区东部地区86135.3其他行业652.67
中部地区117748.26

①根据国家统计局农民工调查监测报告（2014）,35.5%的农民工的工作在各种类型的产业园区,其他工作或居住在各类城市社区。

新窗口打开

1.2 社会融入测量指标

由于中国流动人口与城市居民在种族、宗教等方面并不存在显著差异,因此,国内学者对流动人口城市融入的研究重点关注人际关系、社会参与等方面。一般都从经济、社会、文化和身份4个层面,分析流动人口在城市的融入过程[33~35]。借鉴这些研究本文同样从经济、社会、文化和身份4个维度来判断流动人口的融入程度（表2）。利用AMO软件,对上述4个测量指标开展因子分析,构造一个反映城市融入水平的综合指标变量（因变量）,为城市融入指数。

表2   城市融入综合指数指标及赋值

Table 2   Comprehensive index and assignment of urban integration (dependent variable)

维度赋值123
经济层面感觉与当地人的经济差距偏低差不多偏高
社会交往层面感觉与当地人相处是否融洽不融洽一般融洽
文化层面是否喜欢当地人的生活和行为方式不喜欢一般喜欢
身份认同层面您认为自己是当地人吗不是当地人不确定是

新窗口打开

1.3 城市融入指数比较

各个城市流动人口城市融入指数见图1,排名由高到低分别是郑州、沈阳、青岛、武汉、北京、长沙、东莞、温州和无锡。首先,北方城市要高于南方城市。排在前三位的郑州、沈阳和青岛全部为北方城市,排在后三位的东莞、温州和无锡同为南方城市。其次,中部城市要高于东部城市。同为北方城市,中部地区的郑州要高于青岛等其他3个东部城市。最后,城市融入呈地域性特征,同一地理区域范围内的城市流动人口融入程度接近。同为环渤海的青岛和沈阳排序接近,同为长江中游的武汉和长沙接近,同为长江三角洲的无锡和温州接近。比较特殊的城市是北京,虽然与郑州、沈阳和青岛同处于北方,且与后两个城市同处于环渤海地区,但其流动人口城市融入程度较3个城市差距较大。

显示原图| 下载原图ZIP| 生成PPT

图1   流动人口融入的城市比较

Fig. 1   Social integration of migrant workers between cities

2 模型构建与分析

2.1 自变量选取及赋值

根据理论假设和已有研究,把影响城市融入的地方因素——自变量分为城市性质变量、经济变量、人口结构变量、语言文化变量、制度变量等。

城市性质变量：包括区位、城市规模和区域职能。区位分为南方城市和北方城市,南方城市赋值为0,北方市赋值为1。城市规模用市区常住人口数量表征,为连续变量。城市在区域中的职能,分为流动人口以省内为主的城市和以跨省流动人口为主的城市,省内流动赋值为0,跨省流动赋值为1。

城市经济变量：包括城市人均GDP、城镇人均可支配收入、当地房租平均租金3个指标。全部为连续变量。

人口结构变量：流动人口占常住人口比例的平方,为连续变量。

语言文化变量：按照流动人口掌握当地语言的熟练程度,分为完全听不懂、能听懂但说不熟练、能用当地语言进行交流、很熟练四类,其中完全听不懂赋值为0,能听懂但不会说、能用当地语言进行交流、很熟练分别赋值为1、2和3。

制度变量：在诸多社会保障项目中养老保险是最重要的项目,因此选取是否参加当地养老保险作为制度变量,没有参加当地养老保险赋值为0,参加为1。

把个人因素,如性别、年龄、户籍类型、受教育程度、在当前城市就业时长、是否跟家人在一起、就业行业、职业类型、单位所有制形式,在当地拥有的朋友的数量、以及来源地特征①（ ① 来源地特征分为乡村、小城镇和县城、城市3类。）等作为控制变量。

城市区位、城市人口规模、城市人均GDP、城镇居民人均可支配收入、城市平均房租、流动人口占常住人口比例6个指标为城市宏观层次的变量,其中除了城市平均房租①( ① 城市平均房租数据来自全国房地产市场数据主中心。http://www.cityhouse.cn/default/ leaserank.html。)外,流动人口占常住人口比例来自第六次人口普查和《2012年城市统计年鉴》[36,37]。其他变量均为问卷调查采集的个体层次数据。

2.2 模型构建

本文涉及的自变量是多水平结构的数据,既包括流动人口个体层面的数据,也包括城市层面的数据。对层次数据的处理,常见的方法有两种：一是将高层次变量分解到个体水平,高层次变量的取值相同,然后以个体为单位进行分析,但这违反了经典统计学所要求的观测之间独立这一基本假定;另一种方法是将个体变量汇总成高层变量,以高层单位进行分析,这样将会导致个体观测数据信息的损失,往往会高估变量之间的关系[38]。近来,多水平分析模型在解决此类问题上获得了广泛的应用[1,39],该方法可在分析个体因素模型的基础上同时考虑宏观因素,并考虑微观因素与宏观变量之间的交互作用,使数据分析的深度进一步提高[40]。据此,使用HLM多层回归模型分析软件,利用有随机效应的多水平回归模型,引入随机截距,允许城市之间的回归分析在截距上存在差异,从而分析城市层面变量对因变量的独立影响。

根据因子分析法构造的城市融入指数为因变量。因变量城市融入的各分项及总指标在不同城市层面上进行差异检验。检验结果显示无论是在各分项还是在总指标上,各城市间的差异均显著,sig值均小于0.001,适合用多水平模型[41]。

2.2.1 虚无模型

在建立正式多层次回归模型之前,首先要建立虚无模型。即除截距以外不包括其他任何变量的模型,其可以对数据是否适合建立多水平线性回归模型进行考察,同时将其与后建立的正式模型进行比对,通过拟合程度来对正式模型进行评估。

Yij=β0j+rij(1)

式中, β0j=r00+μ0j, Yij是因变量,代表i样本在j城市的融入程度; β0j是j城市的随机截距; rij是流动人口个体层次的随机变量,即分布于j样本点的样本i到该样本点截距的偏离; γ00代表总均值或总截距,是固定参数; μ0j代表样本点层次的随机变量,是j样本点的截距到总截距的距离。

虚无模型中随机方差是8.132,在0.001水平上显著,数据适合进行分层考察。组内相关系数为0.0645（大于常用考察标准0.059）,在不加入任何解释变量的情况下,城市层面变量的方差占所有方差之和的6.45%,城市之间存在区域差异。

2.2.2 多水平模型

个体层面的模型如下：

Yij=β0j+∑βijXij+rij（2）

式中, βij是个体层面的回归系数, Xij为个体层面自变量, rij是个体层面的城市j中个体i未被方程解释的残差。

城市层面的统计模型为:

β0j=γ00+∑γ0kWk+μ0j（3）

式中, γ0k是城市层面变量的回归系数, Wk为城市层面的自变量, μ0j是城市层面的残差。

多层次模型的随机方差部分为6.7711,较之虚无模型中的随机方差部分（8.132）,多层次模型的各个层次变量可以进一步解释16.74%以上的随机方差变化,大于常规认为的分界值6%,同时多水平模型与虚无模型相比,在拟合程度上有较大提高,充分说明加入城市层次变量的多层线性回归模型对于流动人口的城市融入具有更好的解释力。模型使用极大似然估计的迭代方法来估计所有的方差成分以及第一层和第二层方程的参数,具体模型分析结果见表3。

由表3可知,在个体层面,流动距离（跨省还是省内）、是否参加当地的养老保险、对当地语言的掌握程度等都对城市融入具有显著影响,且都在0.01的水平上显著。城市层面,城市区位、城市人均GDP、房租价格等在0.01显著性水平上显著,流动人口占总人口的比例的平方在0.05的水平上显著,城镇人均可支配收入影响在0.1的水平上显著,城市人口规模影响不显著。回归结果证明,城市层面的地方因素是影响流动人口城市融入的重要因子。

控制变量方面,性别、受教育程度、户籍类型、是否与家人在一起、收入、从事的行业、在当前城市居留时间、在当地拥有的朋友数量等对城市融入具有显著影响。年龄、来源地性质、职业类型、就业单位性质等影响不显著。收入水平越高,受教育程度位大专及以上的、在当地居留时间较长的、在当地拥有朋友数量多的、户籍类型为非农业户的流动人口城市融入程度更高,证明了人力资本和社会资本等个人因素,以及制度因素在城市融入中的作用。

表3   多水平回归模型统计结果

Table 3   Regression results

估计值标准误差t值
截距19.949***2.3308.561
是否跨省流动：参考组,否=0
是-0.340***0.129-2.630
掌握当地语言情况：参考组,完全听不懂=0
能听懂但说不熟练0.2310.1641.407
能进行交流0.843***0.2273.709
很熟练1.151***0.2245.132
是否参加当地养老保险：参考组,没参加=0
参加0.563***0.1374.121
城市区位：参考组,南方=0
北方0.696***0.1903.659
人口规模3.302E-44.470E-40.739
城市人均GDP-1.947E-5***6.479E-6-3.004
流动人口占总人口比例的平方-.0001**0.000-1.844
城市居民人均可支配收入5.593E-5*4.384E-51.276
城市平均房租-0.031***0.008-4.021
性别：参考组,男=0
女0.214*0.1191.785
年龄-0.0010.007-0.098
当前月收入4.091E-5***1.246E-53.284
教育：小学及以下=0
初中-0.1360.192-0.709
高中-0.2020.211-0.957
大专及以上0.601**0.2452.450
当地居留时间0.006***0.0014.366
是否与家人在一起：参考组,否=0
是0.178*0.1221.460
户口性质：参考组,农业户口=0
非农户口0.299*0.1741.717
行业：参考组,制造业=0
城市公用事业及采矿业0.0240.4350.054
建筑业-0.2110.219-0.962
批零、住宿餐饮等服务业-0.410**0.1822.250
信息、金融、商务等服务业0.0180.2240.081
科教文卫等行业-0.438*0.259-1.696
常来往的朋友：参考组,没有=0
有1~2个0.616***0.1623.792
有3~5个0.945***0.1625.847
有6~8个1.548***0.2157.215
有9个及以上1.775***0.17610.062

注：本表省略了个体层面部分检验不显著的变量。* P<0.1,**P<0.05,***P<0.01。

新窗口打开

3 地方因素的影响机制分析

3.1 以方言为基础的地域文化差异造成城市融入的南北差异

语言是交流的工具,掌握流入地的语言是融入城市的最基本条件。回归分析显示对当地方言掌握越好融入程度越高。与完全听不懂的相比,能听懂、能用当地方言进行简单交流、能熟练运用当地语言的系数逐步提高。对当地方言的掌握程度,一方面体现了个体掌握语言的能力;另一方面,与当地方言的特点有关,方言的难易程度决定了流动人口使用的熟练程度,反映的是城市语言环境对流动人口城市融入的影响。中国有七大方言区,在北方汉语方言比较统一,范围广泛,内部一致性明显,讲北方方言的人口占全国的68.9%,更容易被掌握。南方方言种类多、相互差异比较大,武汉和长沙位于湘方言区、无锡和温州为吴方言区、东莞则为粤方言区,掌握南方方言则比较困难。普通话是以北方方言为基础形成的,这是北方城市流动人口城市融入程度普遍高于南方城市的原因之一。

3.2 城市过高比例的流动人口会强化社会排斥效应

流动人口占当地总人口的比例对流动人口城市融入具有显著的影响,城市流动人口比例越高,融入当地社会越困难。这是因为当一个城市流动人口在较短的历史时期内达到较高的比例时,原居民与流动人口在公共资源等方面会形成一定程度的竞争,乃至冲突。这是流动人口比例影响城市融入的重要原因。为了反映流动人口占总人口比例不同的城市其居民对流动人口的态度,本调研同时对北京、无锡和沈阳3市本地居民对流动人口的看法进行了抽样问卷调查,分为正面看法和负面看法,各6个具体问题。

对于流动人口的正面形象持否定态度（很不同意和不同意）的无锡和北京远高于沈阳;对正面形象持肯定态度的沈阳远高于北京和无锡。相反,对于流动人口的负面形象持否定态度的沈阳远高于北京和无锡,持肯定态度的无锡和北京高于沈阳。无论是正面形象,还是负面形象,城镇居民对流动人口的评价与流动人口占总人口的比例有着十分吻合的关系①(① 根据第六次人口普查数据,2010年无锡、北京和沈阳流动人口占常住人口的比例分别为：27.22%、35.92%和11.22%。),流动人口比例越高,负面评价比例越高,受到的排斥越大,融入越难。

3.3 城市经济发展水平对流动人口城市融入的影响具有双向性

城市人均GDP越高的城市,流动人口城市融入越差。这是因为流入地经济发展水平越高,流出地与流入地之间的差异就越大,差异越大流动人口在城市的适应就越困难。从个体层面来看,收入越高的流动人口融入程度越高,亦证明经济差距对于城市融入的影响。

房租的高低对流动人口的城市融入有直接的影响,房租越高,流动人口融入程度越低。绝大多数流动人口都在流入城市租房居住,房租高,支出大,会影响流动人口城市融入的经济基础。对于北京这样经济发展水平高,房租也十分昂贵的城市,必然会严重影响流动人口的城市融入,这是北京在北方城市中流动人口融入程度较低的重要原因。

但是,城镇居民平均收入水平对流动人口的城市融入具有正向的影响作用。与人均GDP的影响方向相反。可能的解释是收入水平越高的城市,流动人口与当地居民在就业方面越具有互补性,而且城镇居民收入水平越高更可能对流动人口持更加开放和接纳的态度,社会排斥程度更低,利于流动人口的城市融入。由此可以看出,经济对流动人口的影响具有双向性特点,十分复杂。

此外,参加当地的养老保险对城市融入具有显著的正向影响。是否加入当地养老保险,虽然是个体层面的变量,但是总样本的参保比例在很大程度上反映了城市制度环境以及城市执行外来人口养老政策的状况。

3.4 城市职能对流动人口的筛选造成不同城市流动人口融入能力不同

省内流动人口比跨省流动人口更易于融入,吸纳省内人口为主的城市流动人口城市融入更为有利,这体现了城市职能的影响。一方面,不同职能的城市吸引的流动人口在结构上存在差异,城市对流动人口具有选择性;另一方面,不同流动人口城市融入的能力也存在差异。因此,不同职能城市由于流动人口构成不同,从而城市之间社会融入呈现出差别。郑州、武汉、长沙和青岛4个城市是省域经济中心,吸引省内人口为主,无锡、温州和东莞所在的长三角和珠三角是跨省人口流转的节点区,跨省流动人口比例高,这是造成这些城市流动人口城市融入程度存在差异的重要原因。此外,城市职能不仅体现在吸纳流动人口的范围方面,流动人口受教育程度、户籍构成等在城市间的差异其实也反映了城市职能的差异。控制变量中,受教育水平越高的流动人口,融入程度越高。在9个城市中,北京、青岛、郑州、武汉等城市流动人口的受教育程度远高于无锡、温州和东莞。

4 结论与政策启示

城市的地方因素与流动人口的个体因素,以及国家宏观体制因素都会对流动人口的城市融入产生影响。城市融入是在具体的场所（城市）发生的具体相互作用过程。地方因素对于流动人口城市融入的影响是复杂的,主要体现在如下几个方面：一是城市对流动人口具有选择性,不同城市吸引的流动人口不同,因不同流动人口城市融入能力的差异,从而造成城市间融入程度的差异;二是城市本身的地方特征和发展水平与流动人口特征以及来源地发展水平的差异会影响流动人口的城市融入。差异越大,融入越困难。比如经济发展水平越高的城市,流动人口城市融入程度越低,方言越不好掌握的城市流动人口融入程度越低。三是城市作为融入具体发生的场所,不同城市为融入提供资源和机会是不同的,比如人口构成不但影响着融入交往的对象,还影响原居民对流动人口的看法。以房租为主的物价水平直接影响流动人口融入城市的经济基础,城市社会保障的准人门槛影响流动人口的制度接纳和认同。第四,同一因素对流动人口城市融入的不同层面影响不同。以经济发展水平为例,经济发展水平越高的城市, 流动人口融入越困难,但是同时经济水平越高,越有能力为流动人口提供公共服务,把流动人口纳入社会保障体系。

本文的政策启示有如下几点：首先,要在方言差异比较大的地区推广普通话,尤其是在公共服务场所和公共办事窗口,使用普通话尤为重要;第二,构建包容性社会政策至关重要。养老保障、住房保障等是重要的社会政策。流动人口能否参加流入地的社会保障,地方政府的执行力度尤为关键。在房租高的城市,尤其是经济繁荣的大城市和特大城市,保障房应以公租房建设为主,把流动人口纳入公租房保障范围。对于经济实力较弱的城市,中央及省级政府对这些城市保障房建设方面进行适当的财政转移支付。第三,省内的人口转移,就近的人口转移更容易在其流入城市实现融入,针对中央提出的在较短的时间内解决1亿人的市民化的艰巨任务,首先要鼓励本市域内、省域内的流动人口与城市居民首先实现社会服务一体化,推进省内统筹,这不仅可以有效降低人口转移成本和市民化成本,而且比远距离转移和跨省转移更能强化流动人口的心理归属。第四,考虑到跨省人口城市融入难度更大,中央城镇化转移支付要向吸纳跨省转移人口多,流动人口比例高的城市倾斜,如珠三角地区和长三角地区的城市,这是市民化的重点区域,也是难点区域。在这些地区需要投入更多的资源化解当地居民和外来人口的矛盾,降低城市居民对外来人口的排斥,让更多的跨省转移人口能够公平获得流入地的公共服务,与当地居民共同享有城市发展的果实。

最后,本文力求全面系统探讨地方因素对流动人口城市融入影响的实证研究。虽然研究了9个城市,但对研究主题而言,中小城市案例仍然偏少。其次受限于数据等,指标设计还不尽完美,有些因素无法在模型中给予充分的考虑,希望今后的研究中不断深化。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献

[1] Waldinger R.

Immigration and Urban Change

[J]. Annual Review of Sociology, 1989, 15:211-232

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.15.080189.001235      URL      [本文引用: 2]     

[2] Waldinger R.

From Ellis Island to LAX: Immigrant prospects in the American city

[J]. International Migration Review, 1996, 30(4): 1078-1086.

https://doi.org/10.2307/2547605      URL      PMID: 12347789      [本文引用: 3]      摘要

Abstract "This article seeks to bring the 驴urban' back into immigration research. Each immigrant receiving area has its own particular group of newcomers, and the economic and political structures of the immigrant receiving areas are also distinctive. Those structures are not all determining, as immigrant trajectories are shaped by the interaction between distinctive urban institutions and the specific characteristics of the relevant ethnic groups. But in the last analysis, the urban context makes a difference, as this study shows by examining the leading [U.S.] immigrant destinations--New York and Los Angeles." excerpt
[3] Reitz J G.Warmth of the Welcome: The Social Causes of Economic Success for Immigrants in Different Nations and Cities [M]. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1998.

[本文引用: 3]     

[4] Brettell C B.Bringing the City Back: Cities as Contexts for Immigrant Incorporation [M]//Nancy Foner. American Arrivals: Anthropology Engages the New Immigration. New York:SAR Press,2003.

[5] Leif J.

The Changing Face of World Cities: The Second Generation in Western Europe and the United States

[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 2014,120(3):983-985.

https://doi.org/10.1086/680463      URL      [本文引用: 2]     

[6] Favell A.

Integration Policy and Integration Research in Europe: A Review and Critique

[M]//Aleinikoff et al. Citizenship Today: Global Perspectives and Practices. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute/Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2001.

[7] Alanya A, Baysu G, Swyngedouw M.

Identifying City Differences in Perceived Group Discrimination among Second-generation Turks and Moroccans in Belgium

[M]. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 2015, 41(7): 1088-1110.

[本文引用: 1]     

[8] Crul M,

J Schneider. Comparative Context Integration Theory. Participation and Belong in Europe’s Large Cities

[J]. Journal of Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2010, 34(4): 1249-1268.

[本文引用: 1]     

[9] Crul M, Vermeulen H.

The second generation in Europe

[J]. International Migration Review , 2003, 37(4):965-986.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2003.tb00166.x      URL      摘要

The study of integration processes has now reached a crucial stage in most Western European countries with the emergence of the second generation. The oldest children born to postwar immigrants on European soil have recently entered the job market, and we can now investigate their performance in both education and employment. This opens a unique opportunity to compare the situations of second generation migrants across countries. Ostensibly the children all have the same starting position, being born in the country of settlement. The intriguing question is how differences between immigrant groups, and also differences in national contexts, work to the benefit or detriment of the second generation. We discuss the first issue briefly, confining ourselves here to Turkish and Moroccan immigrants. In addressing the issue of national contexts, we focus primarily on policies and practices rather than on broad-reaching national integration models. We examine in detail the integration process itself in the context of vital institutional arrangements such as the education system and the mechanisms for transition to the labor market. How do such arrangements differ between countries, and how do they affect the outcomes for the second generation?
[10] Heath A F, Rothon C,Kilpi E.

The Second Generation in Western Europe: Education, Unemployment, and Occupational Attainment

[J]. Annual Review Sociology, 2008, 34: 211-235.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134728      URL      摘要

This paper reviews recent research in ten Western European countries on the educational and labor market outcomes of second-generation minorities. Minorities from less-developed origins appear to be particularly disadvantaged in education, access to the labor market, and occupational attainment. Disadvantages are most evident with test scores early in the school career, but in some countries minorities have higher continuation rates beyond the compulsory leaving age than do majority peers with similar test scores. Entry into the labor market is a particular problem for most minorities, with substantial ethnic penalties with respect to employment in all ten countries. There is a more mixed picture for occupational attainment: In some countries, we find cumulative disadvantages, whereas in others the barriers are greatest on entry into the labor market. We review possible explanations for the differences both between minorities and between countries.
[11] Koopmans R.

Trade-offs between equality and difference: Immigrant integration, multiculturalism and the welfare state in cross-national perspective

[J]. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 2010, 36(1): 1-26.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13691830903250881      URL      摘要

This paper investigates how integration policies and welfare-state regimes have affected the socio-economic integration of immigrants, focusing on eight European countries: Germany, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden, Austria and Belgium. It presents comparative data on integration policies and welfare-state regimes. The expectations derived from this comparative policy analysis are tested with cross-national data on integration outcomes regarding labour market participation, spatial segregation and incarceration. The results suggest that multicultural policies鈥攚hich grant immigrants easy access to equal rights and do not provide strong incentives for host-country language acquisition and interethnic contacts鈥攚hen combined with a generous welfare state, have produced low levels of labour market participation, high levels of segregation and a strong overrepresentation of immigrants among those convicted for criminal behaviour. Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands, which have combined multicultural policies with a strong welfare state, display relatively poor integration outcomes. Countries that either had more restrictive or assimilationist integration policies (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France) or a relatively lean welfare state (the United Kingdom) have achieved better integration results. These differences are highly consistent across the three domains of integration that are examined, with the exception of segregation rates in the United Kingdom.
[12] Van T F, Maas I, Flap H.

The economic incorporation of immigrants in 18 Western societies: Origin, destination, and community effects

[J]. American Sociological Review, 2004, 69(5): 704-727.

https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900505      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

This article examines differences in labor market participation and unemployment between immigrant groups in different countries. The authors argue that two macro designs must be combined to provide a more comprehensive perspective on the economic integration of immigrant groups. Instead of reliance on observations of multiple-origin groups in a single destination or a single-origin group in multiple destinations, multiple origins in multiple destinations are compared, suggesting that the economic status of immigrants may be affected by the country from which they come (“origin effect”), the country to which they migrate (“destination effect”), and the specific relations between origins and destinations (“community effect”). From the human capital theory, compositional hypotheses are derived, which predict that these macro effects can be attributed to the selection of human capital. From discrimination theories, contextual hypotheses are deduced, which maintain that macro effects can be ascribed to in-group preferences and out-group prejudices. Data on immigrants' labor force activity and employment in 18 Western countries during the period 1980 to 2001 are reported. Using multilevel techniques, the analysis shows that compositional differences associated with political suppression in the countries of origin, relative income inequality, and geographic distance affect the labor force status of immigrants. Contextual effects play a role as well in terms of religious origin, the presence of left wing parties in the government, and the size of the immigrant community.
[13] Foner N.

Models of integration in a settler society: caveats and complications in the US case

[J]. Patterns of Prejudice, 2012, 46(5): 486-499.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2012.718166      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

The United States is a classic country of immigration that has long defined itself as having been built by successive waves of immigrants. Social scientists often speak of a multicultural or cultural pluralist ‘model of integration’ in the US that recognizes, sometimes even celebrates, diversity at the same time as it assumes and expects immigrants and their children to assimilate and become American. This article complicates the picture. It brings in history to show how national models of integration in the US are not stable but have changed over time. In fact, the very incorporation of earlier waves of immigrants in the past has contributed to these changes. It also considers local-level variation—that is, differences among US cities in policies as well as in widespread understandings about the integration of immigrants. Despite these complications, there are clearly ways that national models of integration matter in the US, which is the theme of the concluding section.
[14] Ellis M.,Almgren G.

Local Contexts of Immigrant and Second-generation Integration in the United States

[J]. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 2009, 35(7): 1059-1076

https://doi.org/10.1080/13691830903006119      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

Our paper introduces this special issue of JEMS on the role of the local context in immigrant and second-generation integration in the United States. Recent literature has argued that national contexts are important for understanding the integration of immigrants and their descendents. The articles in this issue make the case that local contexts, broadly defined at any sub-national scale, are also important for understanding integration within the US; they suggest that it is incorrect to think of a singular and spatially undifferentiated integration process for US immigrants. In addition to previewing the contents of the articles in this issue, our paper includes a review of the meaning of generations and integration and a general discussion of the roles of local contexts in mediating processes of integration. This discussion raises questions about the appropriate spatial scale for the analysis of integration and for comparisons of the integration experience across contexts. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research on local contexts of integration within the US.
[15] Bean F D, Brown S D et al.

The dimensions and degree of second-generation incorporation in US and European cities: A comparative study of inclusion and exclusion

[J]. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 2012,53(3):181-209.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715212457095      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

This research compares cities between and within the United States and Europe with respect to their dimensionality and degree of immigrant incorporation. Based on theoretical perspectives about immigrant incorporation, structural differentiation and national incorporation regimes, we hypothesize that more inclusionary (MI) cities will show more dimensions of incorporation and more favorable incorporation outcomes than less inclusionary (LI) places, especially in regard to labor market and spatial variables. We use data from recent major surveys of young adult second-generation groups carried out in Los Angeles, New York, and 11 European cities to assess these ideas. The findings indicate that second-generation immigrants in New York (MI) and in European MI places (i.e. cities in the Netherlands, Sweden and France) show greater dimensionality of incorporation (and thus by implication more pathways of advancement) respectively than is the case in Los Angeles (LI) or in European LI places (i.e. cities in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland). We discuss the significance of these results for understanding how the structures of opportunity confronting immigrants and their children in various places make a difference for the nature and extent of their integration.
[16] Foner N.From Ellis Island to JFK: New York’s Two Great Waves of Immigration[M]. New Haven, CT and New York: Yale University Press and Russell Sage Foundation, 2000.

[本文引用: 1]     

[17] 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.

URL      [本文引用: 2]      摘要

通过对2013年流动人口社会融合个人数据和社区数据的分析，得出以下结论：以经济整合、社会适应、文化习得和心理认同四个维度测量，发现流动人口的总体社会融入水平一般，且各维度的融入状况差别较大：制度约束和结构排斥使得经济和社会方面的融入进程严重滞后于文化和心理方面的融入，凸显融入的差异性；乡城流动人口的融入水平不如城一城流动人口的融入水平，表现出融入的分层性；良好的社区服务与接纳环境可有效推进融入进程，凸显融入的社区依赖性；流入地和流出地以及流动人口和本地市民的联接影响流动人口的融入进程，凸显融入的互动性。推进融入既需要个人的努力，更需要消除歧视、排斥的制度障碍，以营造良好的制度环境和社区氛围。

[Yang Juhua.

Research on the Assimilation of the Floating Population in China.

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

URL      [本文引用: 2]      摘要

通过对2013年流动人口社会融合个人数据和社区数据的分析，得出以下结论：以经济整合、社会适应、文化习得和心理认同四个维度测量，发现流动人口的总体社会融入水平一般，且各维度的融入状况差别较大：制度约束和结构排斥使得经济和社会方面的融入进程严重滞后于文化和心理方面的融入，凸显融入的差异性；乡城流动人口的融入水平不如城一城流动人口的融入水平，表现出融入的分层性；良好的社区服务与接纳环境可有效推进融入进程，凸显融入的社区依赖性；流入地和流出地以及流动人口和本地市民的联接影响流动人口的融入进程，凸显融入的互动性。推进融入既需要个人的努力，更需要消除歧视、排斥的制度障碍，以营造良好的制度环境和社区氛围。
[18] 王春光.

农村流动人口的“半城市化”问题研究

[J].社会学研究,2006,(5):107-122.

[Wang Chunguang.

A study on peri-urbanization of rural floating population.

Sociological Studies, 2006 (5): 107-122.]

[19] 王桂新,沈建法,刘建波.

中国城市农民工市民化研究——以上海市为例

[J]. 人口与发展, 2008 ,(1):3-23.

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-1668.2008.01.002      URL      摘要

中国特有的户籍制度,使人口城市化呈不完全、非正规特征。以上海为例,主要从微观角度,考察中国城市化过程中农民工的市民化特征,评价其目前的市民化水平,分析影响其市民化转变的主要因素,从一个侧面探讨和揭示中国不完全、非正规城市化发展的独特性、阶段性与规律性。目前中国城市农民工总体上已达到54%的市民化水平,尤其是其社会关系、心理认同等非物质维度的市民化都已达到接近60%的较高水平。即使受户籍制度以及以此为基础的二元社会体制的屏障,中国城市化过程中农民工的市民化仍然取得较大进展。

[Wang Guixin, Shen Jianfa, Liu Jianbo.

Citizenization of Peasant Migrants during Urbanization in China—— A case Study of Shanghai.

Population and Development, 2008,(1):3-23.]

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-1668.2008.01.002      URL      摘要

中国特有的户籍制度,使人口城市化呈不完全、非正规特征。以上海为例,主要从微观角度,考察中国城市化过程中农民工的市民化特征,评价其目前的市民化水平,分析影响其市民化转变的主要因素,从一个侧面探讨和揭示中国不完全、非正规城市化发展的独特性、阶段性与规律性。目前中国城市农民工总体上已达到54%的市民化水平,尤其是其社会关系、心理认同等非物质维度的市民化都已达到接近60%的较高水平。即使受户籍制度以及以此为基础的二元社会体制的屏障,中国城市化过程中农民工的市民化仍然取得较大进展。
[20] 朱宇, 林李月.

流动人口的流迁模式与社会: 从“城市融入”到“社会融入”

[J]. 地理科学, 2011, 31(3): 264-271.

[本文引用: 1]     

[Zhu Yu, Lin Liyue.

Mobility patterns of floating population and their social protection: Moving from “urban inclusion” to “social inclusion”.

Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2011, 31(3): 264-271. ]

[本文引用: 1]     

[21] 钟水映,李魁.

农民工市民化过程中的现代式社会资本构建

[J]. 东北大学学报(社会科学版) , 2007, (6):500-505.

[本文引用: 1]     

[Zhong Shuiying, LI Kui.

Citifying identities of migrant rural workers to transform them into social capital.

Journal of Northeastern University,2007,(6):500-505.]

[本文引用: 1]     

[22] 赵延东.

城乡流动人口的经济地位获得及决定因素

[J].中国人口科学,2002,(4):8-15.

[Zhao Yandong.

A study of how immigrant people get economic status during urbanization.

Journal of Chinese Population Sciences, 2002,(4):8-15. ]

[23] 曹子玮.

农民工的再建构社会网与网内资源流向

[J].社会学研究,2003, (3):99-110.

URL      [本文引用: 1]     

[Cao Ziwei.

The way the migrant workers construct their social networks.

Journal of Social Science, 2003, (3):99-110.]

URL      [本文引用: 1]     

[24] 谢桂华.

中国流动人口的人力资本回报与社会融合

[J].中国社会科学,2012,(4):103-124.

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

从移民的自我选择理论和技能转换理论角度,考察并比较了不同户籍性质与流动状态的劳动力在城镇劳动力市场上的人力资本回报率,探讨外来劳动力是否可能实现与本地劳动力在经济地位方面的融合。研究发现,外来劳动力多属于正向自我选择式移民;外来非农户籍的劳动力在流入地劳动力市场不存在融合的障碍,其无论在收入还是人力资本回报率方面都高于当地城镇劳动力;外来农民工虽然在流动的初期处于收入劣势,但经过一段时期之后,其中的高技能者的收入将追上本地劳动力,并实现经济地位方面的融合,但低技能者的收入劣势无法改变。因此外来劳动力在城镇劳动力市场上的融合是一种有差别的融合。

[Xie Guihua.

The returns of human capital and social integration of the immigrant population in China.

Journal of the Chinese Academy of Social Science,2012,(4):103-124. ]

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

从移民的自我选择理论和技能转换理论角度,考察并比较了不同户籍性质与流动状态的劳动力在城镇劳动力市场上的人力资本回报率,探讨外来劳动力是否可能实现与本地劳动力在经济地位方面的融合。研究发现,外来劳动力多属于正向自我选择式移民;外来非农户籍的劳动力在流入地劳动力市场不存在融合的障碍,其无论在收入还是人力资本回报率方面都高于当地城镇劳动力;外来农民工虽然在流动的初期处于收入劣势,但经过一段时期之后,其中的高技能者的收入将追上本地劳动力,并实现经济地位方面的融合,但低技能者的收入劣势无法改变。因此外来劳动力在城镇劳动力市场上的融合是一种有差别的融合。
[25] 钱文荣,张忠明.

农民工在城市社会的融合度问题

[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2006, (4):115-121.

https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2006.04.015      URL      摘要

根据对进城农民工和原城镇居民的问卷调查和统计分析,可探讨农民 工在城镇社会的融合度和面临的挑战.在农村城市化和农民市民化进程不断加速的沿海城市(如浙江),进城农民工与原城镇居民的融合状况总体良好,但也面临重 大挑战;城市居民主要通过报纸和电视新闻等媒体了解农民工,新闻媒体对城市居民的态度有着重要的影响,媒体引导城市居民认识农民工任重道远;城市内部形成 的"新的二元社会结构"是阻碍城市和谐社会构建的主要制度因素,因此,推进城乡一体化改革,赋予农民真正的国民待遇,将是促使进城农民融入城镇社会,实现 与原市民和谐相处的制度保障.

[Qian Wenrong, Zhang Zhongming.

The incorporation of migrant workers in the urban society.

Journal of Zhejiang University,2006,(4):115-121. ]

https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2006.04.015      URL      摘要

根据对进城农民工和原城镇居民的问卷调查和统计分析,可探讨农民 工在城镇社会的融合度和面临的挑战.在农村城市化和农民市民化进程不断加速的沿海城市(如浙江),进城农民工与原城镇居民的融合状况总体良好,但也面临重 大挑战;城市居民主要通过报纸和电视新闻等媒体了解农民工,新闻媒体对城市居民的态度有着重要的影响,媒体引导城市居民认识农民工任重道远;城市内部形成 的"新的二元社会结构"是阻碍城市和谐社会构建的主要制度因素,因此,推进城乡一体化改革,赋予农民真正的国民待遇,将是促使进城农民融入城镇社会,实现 与原市民和谐相处的制度保障.
[26] 刘传江,周玲.

社会资本与农民工的城市融合

[J].人口研究,2004, 28(5):12-18.

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-6087.2004.05.002      URL      Magsci      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

20世纪90年代以来,农民工已经成为一个庞大的弱势群体,其边缘性地位使他们在生活的城市找不到归属感和认同感,一系列的经济、社会和文化冲突和矛盾日益凸现,他们与城市社会的融合显得十分必要。农民工的边缘性地位与其社会资本的占有和使用具有高度的相关性。只有改善农民工社会资本匮乏和质量低下的状况,构建农民工社会资本的积累和形成机制,才能促使农民工更快完成城市化和市民化的过程,更好地融入到城市社会生活之中。

[Liu Chuanjiang, Zhou Ling.

Social Capital and Social Integration of Migrant Workers.

Population Research, 2004, 28(5): 12-18.]

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-6087.2004.05.002      URL      Magsci      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

20世纪90年代以来,农民工已经成为一个庞大的弱势群体,其边缘性地位使他们在生活的城市找不到归属感和认同感,一系列的经济、社会和文化冲突和矛盾日益凸现,他们与城市社会的融合显得十分必要。农民工的边缘性地位与其社会资本的占有和使用具有高度的相关性。只有改善农民工社会资本匮乏和质量低下的状况,构建农民工社会资本的积累和形成机制,才能促使农民工更快完成城市化和市民化的过程,更好地融入到城市社会生活之中。
[27] 朱力.

论农民工阶层的城市适应

[J].江海学刊,2002,(6):82-88.

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-856X.2002.06.014      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

农民工进入城市后的适应对我国城市化具有重要意义。农民工的城市适应有经济层面、社会层面和心理层面三个依次递进的层次。当前，农民工的适应仅仅停留在经济层面，政策性与制度性因素阻碍了农民工适应的深入，不利于将农民工阶层的素质提升到适应城市发展需要的高度。

[Zhu Li.

On the Urban Adaptablility of the Peasant-worker Strata.

Jianghai Academic Journal, 2002,(6):82-88. ]

https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-856X.2002.06.014      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

农民工进入城市后的适应对我国城市化具有重要意义。农民工的城市适应有经济层面、社会层面和心理层面三个依次递进的层次。当前，农民工的适应仅仅停留在经济层面，政策性与制度性因素阻碍了农民工适应的深入，不利于将农民工阶层的素质提升到适应城市发展需要的高度。
[28] 田明,彭宇.

流动人口城市融入的空间差异

[J].城市规划,2014,(6):9-16.

[本文引用: 1]     

[Tian Ming, Peng Yu.

A comparative study of urban integration of floating population.

Journal of City Planning Review, 2014, (6):9-16. ]

[本文引用: 1]     

[29] 汪明峰,程红,宁越敏.

上海城中村外来人口的社会融合及其影响因素

[J]. 地理学报,2015, 70(8) :1243-1255.

https://doi.org/10.11821/dlxb201508005      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

基于上海市城中村的实地调查数据，采用因子分析法，构建了外来人口的社会融合维度，并运用多元线性回归方法，从外来人口的个体因素和流入地因素两方面考察了对社会融合及其主因子的影响作用。分析结果表明，城中村外来人口的社会融合由社会关系融合、经济融合、心理融合和文化融合4个维度构成。从因子得分来看，上海城中村的社会融合程度总体水平并不高；在各个维度上，从社会关系、心理、文化到经济的融合程度依次降低。总体而言，流人地因素对于城中村外来人口社会融合的影响作用要大于个体层面因素。其中，个体层次因素对心理融合因子的解释力度最大，而流入地因素则对经济融合因子和社会关系融合因子的解释力度都较大。研究还表明外来人口的社会融合状况与其居住社会空间紧密相关。最后，提供了相关政策启示。

[Wang Mingfeng, Cheng Hong, Ning Yuemin.

Social integration of migrants in Shanghai's urban villages.

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2015,70(8):1243-1255.]

https://doi.org/10.11821/dlxb201508005      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

基于上海市城中村的实地调查数据，采用因子分析法，构建了外来人口的社会融合维度，并运用多元线性回归方法，从外来人口的个体因素和流入地因素两方面考察了对社会融合及其主因子的影响作用。分析结果表明，城中村外来人口的社会融合由社会关系融合、经济融合、心理融合和文化融合4个维度构成。从因子得分来看，上海城中村的社会融合程度总体水平并不高；在各个维度上，从社会关系、心理、文化到经济的融合程度依次降低。总体而言，流人地因素对于城中村外来人口社会融合的影响作用要大于个体层面因素。其中，个体层次因素对心理融合因子的解释力度最大，而流入地因素则对经济融合因子和社会关系融合因子的解释力度都较大。研究还表明外来人口的社会融合状况与其居住社会空间紧密相关。最后，提供了相关政策启示。
[30] 林李月,朱宇.

中国城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的空间格局及影响因素——基于2012年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据

[J].地理学报,2016,71(10):1696-1709.

https://doi.org/10.11821/dlxb201610003      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

基于2012年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据和相关统计年鉴数据,对中国地级以上城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿、空间格局及影响因素进行了系统分析.研究发现,中国城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的整体水平并不高;等级高、规模大的城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高,而等级低、规模小的城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿低;沿海城市群流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高,其他城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿低,但内陆部分省会城市和交通区位与资源禀赋较好的中小城市也已经形成了一批流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高值区.中国城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的空间分布特征受到流入城市和流动人口自身双重力量的影响,流入城市因素的正向影响作用大于流动人口自身因素.其中,流入城市的社会、经济发展水平和流动人口在流入城市的社会融合程度是核心要素,对城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的提升具有正向的促进作用,而流动人口过于集中在次级劳动力市场的就业特征和较高的家庭财富与收入对户籍迁移意愿的提升却具有显著的抑制作用.最后,提出了相关政策启示.

[Lin Liyue, Zhu Yu.

Spatial variation and its determinants of migrants’ Hukou transfer intention of China’s prefecture-and provincial-level cities:Evidence from the 2012 national migrant population dynamic monitoring survey.

Acta Geographica Sinica, 2016, 71(10):1696-1709.]

https://doi.org/10.11821/dlxb201610003      URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

基于2012年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据和相关统计年鉴数据,对中国地级以上城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿、空间格局及影响因素进行了系统分析.研究发现,中国城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的整体水平并不高;等级高、规模大的城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高,而等级低、规模小的城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿低;沿海城市群流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高,其他城市流动人口的户籍迁移意愿低,但内陆部分省会城市和交通区位与资源禀赋较好的中小城市也已经形成了一批流动人口的户籍迁移意愿高值区.中国城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的空间分布特征受到流入城市和流动人口自身双重力量的影响,流入城市因素的正向影响作用大于流动人口自身因素.其中,流入城市的社会、经济发展水平和流动人口在流入城市的社会融合程度是核心要素,对城市流动人口户籍迁移意愿的提升具有正向的促进作用,而流动人口过于集中在次级劳动力市场的就业特征和较高的家庭财富与收入对户籍迁移意愿的提升却具有显著的抑制作用.最后,提出了相关政策启示.
[31] Zhu Y, Chen W Z.

The settlement intention of China's floating population in the cities: Recent changes and multifaceted individual-level determinants. Population,

Space and Place, 2010, 16(4): 253-267.

https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.544      URL      摘要

Abstract This paper uses data from two surveys conducted in Fujian Province in 2006 and 2002 to examine the recent situation and changes in the settlement intention of China's floating population and its determinants, and the diversification process of the floating population's migration flow. The results suggest that while the intention of the floating population to settle in the cities has increased, the places of origin remain important final destinations of the floating population, and a significant proportion of the floating population are still in the process of continuing their circulating process and looking for their final destination cities. The paper also suggests that there is a gap between the floating population's intention to settle in the cities and their real action to do so, and that they are cautious in turning such intention into immediate action. The paper identifies a set of complex determinants for the settlement intention of the floating population in the cities, and indicates that female, young, unmarried, better educated, non-production workers, and Fujian-origin members of the floating population, are more likely to choose to settle down in the cities. Having non-agricultural Hukou status, higher household income, longer working contracts, better housing conditions, and a higher administrative status and bigger population size of the destination cities, are factors that promote the settlement intention of the floating population in the cities. The paper concludes that the final destination of the floating population's migration has been increasingly diversified, and it is of great importance to monitor and understand this diversification process. Copyright 漏 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[32] 刘于琪, 刘晔, 李志刚.

中国城市新移民的定居意愿及其影响机制

. 地理科学, 2014, 34(7): 780-787.

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

Against the background of globalization, urbanization, and the relaxation of household registration system, China's large cities have witnessed massive inflows of new migrants since the start of the new millennium. The integration of new migrants into destination cities hinges on their ability to and inclination to settle down in the destination. New migrants' settlement intention has drawn extensive attention from policy-makers and the media, but such topic remains under-researched in China's migration literature. Previous studies on migrants' settlement intention have focused merely on poorly educated rural migrant workers, devoting insufficient attention to the increasing diversification of new migrants' socio-economic status in the Chinese context. Based on a questionnaire survey conducted in six cities, this article aims to investigate patterns and determinants of new migrants' settlement intention in China, with a particular focus on the heterogeneity of migrants. Our descriptive results show that new migrants generally have rather strong intention to settle down in destination cities, and that 58.8% of them intend to live in the destination city permanently. However, their intention to settle down may not be translated into actions due to the lack of capabilities of settling down. Results from logistic regression models indicate that female, well-educated, high-income, established migrants and migrants whose migration destinations are located in the central and western regions and who have local hukou status, abundant local social capital, strong local identities, and high life satisfaction have stronger intention to settle down in the destination city, and that income levels, hukou status, social networks, identities, and places of residence play a dominant role in this regard. We further divided new migrants into 3 cohorts: skilled migrants who have attained a university degree or college diploma, labor migrants with high school education or below, and business migrants who run small business such as restaurants, factories, and workshops and found that determinants of migrants' settlement intention vary across different migrant cohorts. Specifically, business migrants have the strongest intention, followed by skilled migrants and labor migrants. Skilled migrants' intention to stay permanently in the destination city is determined by their social linkages with local residents and their sense of belonging to the destination city, while that of labor migrants is jointly affected by their occupation, property status, social capital, identities, and places of residence. With regard to business migrants, human capital, social capital, household registration status, and places of residence play a dominant role in shaping their settlement intention. Our findings suggest that China's new migrants become increasingly heterogeneous in terms of the settlement intention, and that they integrate into the host urban society through different paths. Therefore, it is necessary for governments at all scales to enact different policies designed for particular migrant cohorts.

[Liu Yuqi, Liu Ye, Li Zhigang.

Settlement intention of new migrants in China’s large cities: Patterns and determinants.

Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2014, 34(7): 780-787. ]

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

Against the background of globalization, urbanization, and the relaxation of household registration system, China's large cities have witnessed massive inflows of new migrants since the start of the new millennium. The integration of new migrants into destination cities hinges on their ability to and inclination to settle down in the destination. New migrants' settlement intention has drawn extensive attention from policy-makers and the media, but such topic remains under-researched in China's migration literature. Previous studies on migrants' settlement intention have focused merely on poorly educated rural migrant workers, devoting insufficient attention to the increasing diversification of new migrants' socio-economic status in the Chinese context. Based on a questionnaire survey conducted in six cities, this article aims to investigate patterns and determinants of new migrants' settlement intention in China, with a particular focus on the heterogeneity of migrants. Our descriptive results show that new migrants generally have rather strong intention to settle down in destination cities, and that 58.8% of them intend to live in the destination city permanently. However, their intention to settle down may not be translated into actions due to the lack of capabilities of settling down. Results from logistic regression models indicate that female, well-educated, high-income, established migrants and migrants whose migration destinations are located in the central and western regions and who have local hukou status, abundant local social capital, strong local identities, and high life satisfaction have stronger intention to settle down in the destination city, and that income levels, hukou status, social networks, identities, and places of residence play a dominant role in this regard. We further divided new migrants into 3 cohorts: skilled migrants who have attained a university degree or college diploma, labor migrants with high school education or below, and business migrants who run small business such as restaurants, factories, and workshops and found that determinants of migrants' settlement intention vary across different migrant cohorts. Specifically, business migrants have the strongest intention, followed by skilled migrants and labor migrants. Skilled migrants' intention to stay permanently in the destination city is determined by their social linkages with local residents and their sense of belonging to the destination city, while that of labor migrants is jointly affected by their occupation, property status, social capital, identities, and places of residence. With regard to business migrants, human capital, social capital, household registration status, and places of residence play a dominant role in shaping their settlement intention. Our findings suggest that China's new migrants become increasingly heterogeneous in terms of the settlement intention, and that they integrate into the host urban society through different paths. Therefore, it is necessary for governments at all scales to enact different policies designed for particular migrant cohorts.
[33] 杨菊华.

流动人口在流入地社会融入的指标体系:基于社会融入理论的进一步研究

[J].人口与经济,2010, (2):64-70.

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

本文构建了农村—城镇流动人口在流入地社会融入的指标体系,阐述了构建流动人口社会融入指数的方法,介绍了该体系在相关社会调查设计、数据分析方面的作用,提出了后续研究的初步设想。该体系有助于进一步规范学术研究的开展,加深社会对流动人口生存现况的全面了解,促成政府出台加速流动人口在流入地融入过程、途径的公共政策,改善该群体的经济和社会福利。

[Yang Juhua.

Index of assimilation for rural to urban migrants: A further analysis of the conceptual framework of assimilation theory.

Journal of Population and Economy, 2010, (2):64-70.]

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

本文构建了农村—城镇流动人口在流入地社会融入的指标体系,阐述了构建流动人口社会融入指数的方法,介绍了该体系在相关社会调查设计、数据分析方面的作用,提出了后续研究的初步设想。该体系有助于进一步规范学术研究的开展,加深社会对流动人口生存现况的全面了解,促成政府出台加速流动人口在流入地融入过程、途径的公共政策,改善该群体的经济和社会福利。
[34] 张文宏,雷开春.

城市新移民社会认同的结构模型

[J].社会学研究,2009, (4): 61-87.

[Zhang Wenhong, Lei Kaichun.

Structural equation model of the social identifications of the new urban immigrant.

Sociological Studies, 2009, (4): 61-87. ]

[35] 李培林,田丰.

中国农民工社会融合的代际比较

[J].社会,2012,32(5):1-24.

URL      Magsci      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

本文依据2011年中国社会科学院社会学研究所中国社会状况综合调查数据，描述了老一代农民工和新生代农民工在经济、社会、心理和身份四个层面的社会融入状况，分析了人力资本、社会资本和政策制度等因素对社会融入的影响。研究发现，新生代农民工社会融入状况与老一代农民工相比并没有根本差异；影响社会融入的人力资本因素更显著地体现在农民工的工作技能上；政策制度对农民工社会融入具有重要影响；农民工社会融入的经济&mdash;社会&mdash;心理&mdash;身份四个层次不存在递进关系，经济层次的融入并不必然带来其他层次的融入。

[Li Peilin, Tian Feng.

A cross generational comparison of the social cohesion of migrant workers in China.

Chinese Journal of Sociology, 2012,32(5):1-24. ]

URL      Magsci      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

本文依据2011年中国社会科学院社会学研究所中国社会状况综合调查数据，描述了老一代农民工和新生代农民工在经济、社会、心理和身份四个层面的社会融入状况，分析了人力资本、社会资本和政策制度等因素对社会融入的影响。研究发现，新生代农民工社会融入状况与老一代农民工相比并没有根本差异；影响社会融入的人力资本因素更显著地体现在农民工的工作技能上；政策制度对农民工社会融入具有重要影响；农民工社会融入的经济&mdash;社会&mdash;心理&mdash;身份四个层次不存在递进关系，经济层次的融入并不必然带来其他层次的融入。
[36] 国务院人口普查办公室.2010年第六次全国人口普查资料:分乡镇[M]. 北京:中国统计出版社,2011.

[本文引用: 1]     

[Population Census Office under The State Council. Tabulation on the 2010 Population Census of the People’s Republic of China by Township. Beijing: China Statistics Press,2011.]

[本文引用: 1]     

[37] 国家统计局.中国城市统计年鉴2012.北京:中国统计出版社,2013.

[本文引用: 1]     

[ National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China, China City Statistics Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press,2013.]

[本文引用: 1]     

[38] Raudenbush S W, Bryk A S.

Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis Methods

[M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

[本文引用: 1]     

[39] Kathleen B.

The quality and evaluation of family planning services and contraceptive use in Tanzania[R].

Michigan: Michigan State University,1994.

[本文引用: 1]     

[40] 崔岩.

流动人口心理层面的社会融入和身份认同问题研究

[J].社会学研究,2012,(5):141-160.

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

在我国城市化进程加快的背景下，大量人口从农村涌向城市，从中西部地区流入东部发达地区。在这一过程中，外来人口通过与本地居民互动，形成对自己社会身份的认同，而这一认同又会对外来人口的社会行为产生相应的影响。本文通过对外来人口是否认同其属于本地居民身份，藉以研究外来人口在居住地心理层面的社会融入问题。在建立多层次广义线性模型（GHLM）基础上，本文对制度排斥、社会歧视、相对剥夺感和社区融合等因素对外来人口社会融入的影响进行了讨论，并提出了相应的政策建议。

[Cui Yan.

A study on migrants' psychological integration and self-identity.

Sociological Studies, 2012, (5): 141-160. ]

URL      [本文引用: 1]      摘要

在我国城市化进程加快的背景下，大量人口从农村涌向城市，从中西部地区流入东部发达地区。在这一过程中，外来人口通过与本地居民互动，形成对自己社会身份的认同，而这一认同又会对外来人口的社会行为产生相应的影响。本文通过对外来人口是否认同其属于本地居民身份，藉以研究外来人口在居住地心理层面的社会融入问题。在建立多层次广义线性模型（GHLM）基础上，本文对制度排斥、社会歧视、相对剥夺感和社区融合等因素对外来人口社会融入的影响进行了讨论，并提出了相应的政策建议。
[41] Luke A.

Douglas. Multilevel Modeling

[M]. New York: Sage Publications, 2004.

[本文引用: 1]     

网站版权 © 《地理科学》编辑部
地址：长春市高新北区盛北大街4888号　
邮编：130102
电话：0431-85542217，0431-85542212　
E-mail：geoscien@neigae.ac.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发

/

〈 〉