A Study on Farmer's Behaviors of Production and Consumption in The Transforming China

在这个项目中，我们首先使用两阶段LA/AIDS估计了农村中国的家庭需求体系及其结构变化，并收集了1985-1998年农村家庭调查的时间序列和区域横截面数据，然后回顾了农民强制性负担的现状，讨论了农民强制性负担的经济、政治根源和解决措施。从我们的家庭需求估计结果来看，食品类支出和自有价格弹性从1985~92年的1.0%，-1.3%下降到0.7%，--1993年至1998年为0.6，而其他非食品类支出，如衣着、住房、生活用品、教育和其他支出，在同一时期变得更有弹性。在食品类中，主粮和蔬菜的支出弹性最小，分别为0.2和0.6，而肉蛋、其他食品、食用油、白酒和鱼的支出弹性较大，在1985~92年间为1.6~2.3。虽然1993~1998年我国居民的消费弹性和价格弹性均有较大幅度的下降，但白酒、肉蛋、鱼等部分食品的支出弹性保持在1.1~1.6之间。与城镇居民家庭支出弹性比较，可以发现，农村居民家庭对粮食、蔬菜等动物性食品的支出弹性差距较大，除住房外的其他商品需求的收入弹性较大。这意味着，农村的潜在市场不仅广阔，而且很深。在收入允许的情况下，农村对动物性食品和其他工业品的需求将比城市增长得更快。

In this project, We first estimated the household demand system in rural China and it's structural change using a two-stage LA/AIDS and pooled time-series and regional cross-section data from the Rural Household Surveys for 1985-1998, second review the status quo of farmer's compulsory burden in rural China, which is a hot economic and political topic in China, and then discuss its economical and political origins and problem-solving measures.From our household demand estimated results, we found that expenditure and own-price elasticities for food group have greatly fallen from 1.0, -1.3 in 1985〜92 to 0.7, -0.6 in 1993〜98, while for other non-food groups such as clothing, housing, articles for daily use, education, and other expenditures, have become more elastic in the same periods. Within the food group, staple grain and vegetables have the smallest expenditure elasticities of 0.2 and 0.6, while meat ＆ eggs, other foods, cooking oil, liquor and fish have larger elasticities in a range of 1.6〜2.3 in 1985〜92. Although these individual fords' expenditure elasticities, as well as their price elasticities, dropped large in 1993〜98, some foods, such as liquor, meat ＆ eggs, fish keep their expenditure elasticitiesin range of 1.1〜1.6.Compared these results with urban household, it can de found that, expenditure elasticity's gap between grain, vegetables and other foods with animal origin are larger, and demands for almost commodities, except housing, are more income elastic in the rural households. This means that, potential market in the rural is not only wide, but also very deep. Only income permit, demands for foods with animal origin and other industrial commodities in the rural will increase more rapidly than in urban.