近年來針對中國社會福利擴展的研究，社會抗爭論認為地方政府透過增加社會支出、提升人民福利，來避免維權抗爭並維持其統治正當性。也有說法指出，地方官僚、地方財務狀況，和地方經濟發展程度，會對該地社會福利表現造成影響，導致資源分配不均。與此同時，中央政府自計畫經濟時期以來，偏重工業的發展目標，以及仰賴戶口制度規範社會流動的治理模式，亦造成城市與農村之間的社會福利發展差距。在此背景下，本文的關懷議題為究竟中國地方福利差距是否依舊存在？同時，影響地方福利擴張的主要因素與關聯因子為何？鑑此，本研究選擇創新性也相對公平的社會福利政策「最低生活保障」作為研究對象，搜集2007 年至2022 年間中國31 省的政經數據，並透過縱貫分析法進行研究。研究設計上，以各省取得低保的人數比例和低保標準作為依變數，觀察省級政府提供社會福利的資源豐沛與慷慨程度。同時引入社會穩定程度、各省財務、貿易開放程度與城鄉差距等政經數據作為自變數。根據實證分析結果，低保政策在各省的城鎮與農村間，不僅具有明顯的施行差異，分配規則亦存在不一致的情況。其中甚至出現經濟發展愈差、城鄉差距愈大，則農村低保資源愈不足的現象，顯示中國政府以城鎮為發展重心的做法實際上並未改變，依舊對於各省福利差距相當具有影響力。

Recent studies on expanding social welfare in China argued that local governments increase social spending and enhance public welfare to preclude social unrest and to maintain the regime legitimacy. Some suggest that local bureaucracies, financial conditions, and the levels of economic development significantly influence local welfare performance, leading to unequal resource distribution. Meanwhile, since the planned economy era, central government has focused on industrial development and has relied on the household registration (hukou) system to regulate social mobility. These policies have led to welfare development gaps between urban and rural areas. Against this background, this paper aims to address the issues of whether local welfare disparities in China still persist; and what the main factors are that influence local welfare expansion. To achieve this goal, the present study focuses on the “Minimum Living Standard Guarantee” (Dibao) program-China’s innovative and relatively equitable welfare policy-as the analytical locus. Using political and economic data from 31 provinces from 2007 to 2022, the study conducts a longitudinal analysis. The research design employs the proportion of the population receiving Dibao benefits and Dibao standards in each province as the dependent variable. Independent variables include social stability, provincial finances, trade openness, and the urban-rural gap. The empirical analysis reveals that Dibao policies exhibit significant implementation differences between urban and rural areas, along with inconsistencies in distribution rules of resources. More specifically, the study finds out that the larger the urban-rural gap, the fewer resources are allocated to rural Dibao. This indicates that the government’s urban-biased development strategy has persisted; and continues to adversely affect local welfare disparities.
 

最低生活保障、福利地域化、城鄉差距、社會保障、中國大陸

Dibao, Welfare Sub-Nationalization, Urban-Rural Gap, Social Security, China