中國教育獲得的性別差距——經濟發展和計劃生育政策之分析

本文運用OLS模型、DID模型和DIDID模型對2013年中國家庭收入調查的資料進行實證研究，除了分析經濟發展造成的地區差異對教育獲得性別差距之影響外，同時檢視該影響的世代變化趨勢以及計劃生育政策的交叉作用。結果顯示，雖然教育獲得的城鄉差距和地區差距隨著出生世代擴大，但教育獲得的性別差距整體上是隨著世代縮小。不過其與地域因素的交互作用有不同的反映，農村戶籍對教育獲得存在性別上的非對稱影響，即農村的教育性別差距大於城市，且該非對稱影響隨著出生世代擴大，地區同樣存在該問題。此外，計劃生育政策提高居民受教育程度，但其並非是縮小教育獲得性別差距的推手。更早受到生育干預且經濟教育資源更豐富的城鎮居民的教育性別差距一直更小，顯然受到人口政策和經濟教育政策的積極影響更大，推測教育獲得性別差距整體上的縮小主要來自城鎮居民的貢獻。總之，教育差距的形成主要受經濟因素的影響，經濟發展不平衡使農村戶籍和欠發達地區戶籍對女性教育獲得的非對稱影響更大。根據研究結果，建議政府加速振興農村經濟，弱化城鄉對立關係和居民的男性偏好，還要通過產業轉移和發展特色產業縮小地區間的經濟差距。同時需規範教育市場，協調城鄉教育資源分配，開展針對中等教育的大型公益項目，支持農村學生和欠發達地區學生尤其是女學生的教育獲得。政府只有在制度、經濟、文化生活運動和教育政策調控上全面著手，才能從根本解決問題，促進教育平等。

關鍵字

教育獲得；性別差距；城鄉差距；地區差距；經濟發展；計劃生育政策

並列摘要

This study uses the OLS model, the DID model and the DIDID model to analyze the impacts of economic development and family plan policy on the gender gap of educational attainment in Chinese. Descriptive statistical and empirical analyses of the data from CHIP2013 show that, in terms of years of schooling, the gender gap has generally diminished, but both the urban-rural gap and the regional gap have increased in younger cohorts. Not only that, the rural hukou has negative asymmetric impact on women’s educational attainment, that is, the gender gap in rural areas is greater than that in urban areas, and the asymmetric impact has expanded in younger cohorts. Coincidentally, there is an increasingly negative asymmetric effect of the underdeveloped regional hukou on women’s educational attainment. In addition, family planning policy has increased residents’ educational attainment, but it cannot reduce the gender gap which has been closed in urban area, for urban residents have lower fertility rate and more resources since the 1950s so that the diminishing gender gap in overall education attainment resulted mainly from urban residents. The educational gap has been mainly influenced by economic development that has made the rural hukou and the underdeveloped regional hukou exert more asymmetric effects on women’s educational attainment. According to the results, this paper recommends that the government start with comprehensive approaches to be taken on systems, economy, cultural life, and education policies to fundamentally promote the equality of education.