

World Regional Studies ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (12): 145-160.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2025.12.20240177
Received:2024-03-26
Revised:2024-06-20
Online:2025-12-15
Published:2025-12-23
Contact:
Yilun XU
通讯作者:
徐逸伦
作者简介:彭晓娜(1997—),女,硕士研究生,研究方向为人口地理与社会地理,E-mail: 1169277375@qq.com。
Xiaona PENG, Yilun XU. Impact mechanism of social capital of agricultural transfer population on settlement intention: Based on the perspective of in-migration and out-migration[J]. World Regional Studies, 2025, 34(12): 145-160.
彭晓娜, 徐逸伦. 农业转移人口的社会资本对进城定居的影响机制分析——基于迁入地和迁出地视角[J]. 世界地理研究, 2025, 34(12): 145-160.
| 社会资本的构成 | 内涵 | |
|---|---|---|
| 户籍地 | 关系型社会资本 | 血缘/地缘关系,如家庭成员、亲戚朋友等 |
| 制度型社会资本 | 农村集体权益,如宅基地、承包地等 | |
| 迁入地 | 关系型社会资本 | 社会关系,如:邻居、朋友等 |
| 制度型社会资本 | 公共服务或公共保障,如社区服务、医疗服务和社会保障等 | |
Tab. 1 The connotation and constitution of social capital
| 社会资本的构成 | 内涵 | |
|---|---|---|
| 户籍地 | 关系型社会资本 | 血缘/地缘关系,如家庭成员、亲戚朋友等 |
| 制度型社会资本 | 农村集体权益,如宅基地、承包地等 | |
| 迁入地 | 关系型社会资本 | 社会关系,如:邻居、朋友等 |
| 制度型社会资本 | 公共服务或公共保障,如社区服务、医疗服务和社会保障等 | |
| 变量内容 | 指标说明 | 总样本* | 有定居意愿** | 无定居意愿*** | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 样本数 | 占比 | 样本数 | 占比 | 样本数 | 占比 | ||
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与本地人交往 | 25 519 | 39.04% | 9 813 | 41.74% | 10 986 | 26.25% |
| 与外地人交往 | 5 978 | 9.15% | 2 222 | 9.45% | 11 406 | 27.25% | |
| 与同乡交往 | 17 641 | 26.99% | 5 242 | 26.52% | 3 756 | 8.97% | |
| 不与人交流 | 16 228 | 24.83% | 5 242 | 22.29% | 15 706 | 37.53% | |
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 都没有 | 10 066 | 15.40% | 2 912 | 12.39% | 7 154 | 17.09% |
| 拥有健康档案 | 2 660 | 4.07% | 814 | 3.46% | 1 846 | 4.41% | |
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 6 871 | 10.51% | 2 114 | 8.99% | 4 757 | 11.37% | |
| 有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 2 943 | 4.50% | 954 | 4.06% | 1 989 | 4.75% | |
| 拥有居住证 | 17 881 | 27.36% | 6 511 | 27.69% | 11 370 | 27.17% | |
| 有居住证和健康档案 | 5 878 | 8.99% | 2 191 | 9.32% | 3 687 | 8.81% | |
| 有居住证和社会保障卡 | 12 417 | 19.00% | 5 080 | 21.61% | 7 337 | 17.53% | |
| 有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 6 650 | 10.17% | 2 936 | 12.49 % | 3 714 | 8.87% | |
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | 3 418 | 5.23% | 1 107 | 4.71% | 2 311 | 5.52% |
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | 14 426 | 22.07% | 4 995 | 21.24% | 9 431 | 22.53% | |
| 老家有孩子 | 1 230 | 1.88% | 415 | 1.77% | 815 | 1.95% | |
| 均无 | 46 292 | 70.82% | 16 995 | 72.28% | 29 297 | 70% | |
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | 27 322 | 41.80% | 8 444 | 35.91% | 18 878 | 45.40% |
| 有宅基地和承包地 | 14 058 | 21.51% | 5 044 | 21.45% | 9 014 | 21.68% | |
| 有集体分红 | 6 085 | 9.31% | 2 056 | 8.74% | 4 029 | 9.69% | |
| 都没有 | 17 901 | 27.39% | 7 968 | 33.89% | 9 933 | 23.73% | |
| 性别 | 女 | 34 225 | 52.36% | 12 306 | 52.34% | 21 919 | 52.37% |
| 男 | 31 141 | 47.64% | 11 206 | 47.66% | 19 935 | 47.63% | |
| 年龄 | 30岁以下 | 25 332 | 38.75% | 9 445 | 40.17% | 15 887 | 37.96% |
| 31~45岁 | 25 873 | 39.58% | 9 281 | 39.47% | 16 592 | 39.64% | |
| 46~60岁 | 11 813 | 18.07% | 3 921 | 16.68% | 7 892 | 18.86% | |
| 60岁以上 | 2 348 | 3.59% | 865 | 3.68% | 1 483 | 3.54% | |
| 受教育程度 | 未上过小学 | 2 645 | 4.27% | 1 003 | 4.27% | 1 642 | 3.92% |
| 小学 | 11 711 | 16.43% | 3 864 | 16.43% | 7 847 | 18.75% | |
| 初中 | 30 939 | 44.00% | 10 346 | 44.00% | 20 593 | 49.20% | |
| 高中/中专 | 13 474 | 22.27% | 5 237 | 22.27% | 8 237 | 19.68% | |
| 大学专科 | 4 729 | 8.93% | 2 100 | 8.93% | 2 629 | 6.28% | |
| 大学本科 | 1 788 | 3.94% | 926 | 3.94% | 862 | 2.06% | |
| 研究生 | 80 | 15.00% | 36 | 15.00% | 44 | 11.00% | |
| 婚姻状态 | 结过婚 | 53 587 | 81.98% | 19 281 | 82.00% | 34 306 | 81.97% |
| 未婚 | 11 779 | 18.02% | 4 231 | 18.00% | 7 548 | 18.03% | |
| 收入水平 | 0~3 000 | 13 399 | 20.50% | 4 660 | 19.82% | 8 739 | 20.88% |
| 3 001~6 000 | 30 284 | 46.33% | 10 273 | 43.69% | 20 011 | 47.81% | |
| 6 001~9 000 | 11 998 | 18.36% | 4 410 | 18.76% | 7 588 | 18.13% | |
| 大于9 000 | 9 685 | 14.82% | 4 169 | 17.73% | 5 516 | 13.18% | |
| 身份认同 | 1~16 | (10.1) | (3.7) | (10.9) | (3.8) | (9.6) | (3.6) |
Tab. 2 Descriptive statistics of variables
| 变量内容 | 指标说明 | 总样本* | 有定居意愿** | 无定居意愿*** | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 样本数 | 占比 | 样本数 | 占比 | 样本数 | 占比 | ||
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与本地人交往 | 25 519 | 39.04% | 9 813 | 41.74% | 10 986 | 26.25% |
| 与外地人交往 | 5 978 | 9.15% | 2 222 | 9.45% | 11 406 | 27.25% | |
| 与同乡交往 | 17 641 | 26.99% | 5 242 | 26.52% | 3 756 | 8.97% | |
| 不与人交流 | 16 228 | 24.83% | 5 242 | 22.29% | 15 706 | 37.53% | |
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 都没有 | 10 066 | 15.40% | 2 912 | 12.39% | 7 154 | 17.09% |
| 拥有健康档案 | 2 660 | 4.07% | 814 | 3.46% | 1 846 | 4.41% | |
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 6 871 | 10.51% | 2 114 | 8.99% | 4 757 | 11.37% | |
| 有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 2 943 | 4.50% | 954 | 4.06% | 1 989 | 4.75% | |
| 拥有居住证 | 17 881 | 27.36% | 6 511 | 27.69% | 11 370 | 27.17% | |
| 有居住证和健康档案 | 5 878 | 8.99% | 2 191 | 9.32% | 3 687 | 8.81% | |
| 有居住证和社会保障卡 | 12 417 | 19.00% | 5 080 | 21.61% | 7 337 | 17.53% | |
| 有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 6 650 | 10.17% | 2 936 | 12.49 % | 3 714 | 8.87% | |
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | 3 418 | 5.23% | 1 107 | 4.71% | 2 311 | 5.52% |
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | 14 426 | 22.07% | 4 995 | 21.24% | 9 431 | 22.53% | |
| 老家有孩子 | 1 230 | 1.88% | 415 | 1.77% | 815 | 1.95% | |
| 均无 | 46 292 | 70.82% | 16 995 | 72.28% | 29 297 | 70% | |
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | 27 322 | 41.80% | 8 444 | 35.91% | 18 878 | 45.40% |
| 有宅基地和承包地 | 14 058 | 21.51% | 5 044 | 21.45% | 9 014 | 21.68% | |
| 有集体分红 | 6 085 | 9.31% | 2 056 | 8.74% | 4 029 | 9.69% | |
| 都没有 | 17 901 | 27.39% | 7 968 | 33.89% | 9 933 | 23.73% | |
| 性别 | 女 | 34 225 | 52.36% | 12 306 | 52.34% | 21 919 | 52.37% |
| 男 | 31 141 | 47.64% | 11 206 | 47.66% | 19 935 | 47.63% | |
| 年龄 | 30岁以下 | 25 332 | 38.75% | 9 445 | 40.17% | 15 887 | 37.96% |
| 31~45岁 | 25 873 | 39.58% | 9 281 | 39.47% | 16 592 | 39.64% | |
| 46~60岁 | 11 813 | 18.07% | 3 921 | 16.68% | 7 892 | 18.86% | |
| 60岁以上 | 2 348 | 3.59% | 865 | 3.68% | 1 483 | 3.54% | |
| 受教育程度 | 未上过小学 | 2 645 | 4.27% | 1 003 | 4.27% | 1 642 | 3.92% |
| 小学 | 11 711 | 16.43% | 3 864 | 16.43% | 7 847 | 18.75% | |
| 初中 | 30 939 | 44.00% | 10 346 | 44.00% | 20 593 | 49.20% | |
| 高中/中专 | 13 474 | 22.27% | 5 237 | 22.27% | 8 237 | 19.68% | |
| 大学专科 | 4 729 | 8.93% | 2 100 | 8.93% | 2 629 | 6.28% | |
| 大学本科 | 1 788 | 3.94% | 926 | 3.94% | 862 | 2.06% | |
| 研究生 | 80 | 15.00% | 36 | 15.00% | 44 | 11.00% | |
| 婚姻状态 | 结过婚 | 53 587 | 81.98% | 19 281 | 82.00% | 34 306 | 81.97% |
| 未婚 | 11 779 | 18.02% | 4 231 | 18.00% | 7 548 | 18.03% | |
| 收入水平 | 0~3 000 | 13 399 | 20.50% | 4 660 | 19.82% | 8 739 | 20.88% |
| 3 001~6 000 | 30 284 | 46.33% | 10 273 | 43.69% | 20 011 | 47.81% | |
| 6 001~9 000 | 11 998 | 18.36% | 4 410 | 18.76% | 7 588 | 18.13% | |
| 大于9 000 | 9 685 | 14.82% | 4 169 | 17.73% | 5 516 | 13.18% | |
| 身份认同 | 1~16 | (10.1) | (3.7) | (10.9) | (3.8) | (9.6) | (3.6) |
| 变量 | 模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.018*** | 0.026*** | ||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 与外地人交往 | 0.030*** | 0.032*** | |||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.052*** | 0.048*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.011 | 0.005 | ||
| (0.010) | (0.010) | ||||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.01 | 0.009 | |||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.019** | 0.015 | |||
| (0.010) | (0.010) | ||||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.075*** | 0.075*** | |||
| (0.006) | (0.006) | ||||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.078*** | 0.076*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.104*** | 0.104*** | |||
| (0.006) | (0.006) | ||||
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.136*** | 0.133*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | -0.013 | -0.01 | ||
| (0.014) | (0.014) | ||||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.011** | -0.011** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.026*** | -0.026*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 拥有集体分红 | -0.104*** | -0.099*** | ||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 拥有宅基地和承包地 | -0.091*** | -0.093*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 拥有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.137*** | -0.136*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 性别 | 0.003 | 0.009** | -0.007* | 0 | |
| (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | ||
| 年龄 | 0.000* | 0.000** | 0.001*** | 0.001*** | |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | ||
| 婚姻状态 | 0.009 | -0.001 | 0.015*** | 0.005 | |
| (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.006) | ||
| 受教育程度 | 0.031*** | 0.027*** | 0.028*** | 0.024*** | |
| (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | ||
| 收入水平 | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.006 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.024 | |
Tab. 3 Result of baseline model regression
| 变量 | 模型1 | 模型2 | 模型3 | 模型4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.018*** | 0.026*** | ||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 与外地人交往 | 0.030*** | 0.032*** | |||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.052*** | 0.048*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.011 | 0.005 | ||
| (0.010) | (0.010) | ||||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.01 | 0.009 | |||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.019** | 0.015 | |||
| (0.010) | (0.010) | ||||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.075*** | 0.075*** | |||
| (0.006) | (0.006) | ||||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.078*** | 0.076*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.104*** | 0.104*** | |||
| (0.006) | (0.006) | ||||
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.136*** | 0.133*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | -0.013 | -0.01 | ||
| (0.014) | (0.014) | ||||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.011** | -0.011** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.026*** | -0.026*** | |||
| (0.008) | (0.008) | ||||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 拥有集体分红 | -0.104*** | -0.099*** | ||
| (0.007) | (0.007) | ||||
| 拥有宅基地和承包地 | -0.091*** | -0.093*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 拥有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.137*** | -0.136*** | |||
| (0.005) | (0.005) | ||||
| 性别 | 0.003 | 0.009** | -0.007* | 0 | |
| (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | ||
| 年龄 | 0.000* | 0.000** | 0.001*** | 0.001*** | |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | ||
| 婚姻状态 | 0.009 | -0.001 | 0.015*** | 0.005 | |
| (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.006) | ||
| 受教育程度 | 0.031*** | 0.027*** | 0.028*** | 0.024*** | |
| (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | ||
| 收入水平 | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | 0.000*** | |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.006 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.024 | |
| 变量 | Probit B | OLS B | Logit B | Probit B | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地社关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.058*** | 0.026*** | 0.120*** | 0.073*** |
| (0.014) | (0.005) | (0.024) | (0.014) | ||
| 与外地人交往 | 0.075*** | 0.032*** | 0.147*** | 0.089*** | |
| (0.020) | (0.007) | (0.032) | (0.020) | ||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.153*** | 0.048*** | 0.217*** | 0.132*** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.022) | (0.013) | ||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.025 | 0.005 | 0.028 | 0.015 |
| (0.029) | (0.010) | (0.048) | (0.029) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.029 | 0.009 | 0.045 | 0.027 | |
| (0.021) | (0.007) | (0.035) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.064** | 0.015 | 0.079* | 0.045 | |
| (0.028) | (0.010) | (0.046) | (0.028) | ||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.172*** | 0.075*** | 0.349*** | 0.211*** | |
| (0.017) | (0.006) | (0.027) | (0.017) | ||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.190*** | 0.076*** | 0.353*** | 0.213*** | |
| (0.022) | (0.008) | (0.035) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.240*** | 0.104*** | 0.473*** | 0.288*** | |
| (0.018) | (0.006) | (0.029) | (0.018) | ||
| 拥有居住证、社保卡和健康档案 | 0.331*** | 0.133*** | 0.593*** | 0.362*** | |
| (0.021) | (0.008) | (0.034) | (0.021) | ||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | -0.047 | -0.01 | -0.046 | -0.027 |
| (0.038) | (0.014) | (0.062) | (0.038) | ||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.022* | -0.011** | -0.048** | -0.030** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.020) | (0.012) | ||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.085*** | -0.026*** | -0.119*** | -0.072*** | |
| (0.024) | (0.008) | (0.039) | (0.023) | ||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 拥有集体分红 | -0.257*** | -0.099*** | -0.426*** | -0.262*** |
| (0.019) | (0.007) | (0.032) | (0.019) | ||
| 拥有宅基地和承包地 | -0.256*** | -0.093*** | -0.397*** | -0.245*** | |
| (0.015) | (0.005) | (0.024) | (0.015) | ||
| 拥有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.365*** | -0.136*** | -0.596*** | -0.367*** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.021) | (0.013) | ||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
| 流动范围 | 控制 | ||||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.029 | 0.029 | 0.024 | 0.024 | |
Tab. 4 Results of robustness test results
| 变量 | Probit B | OLS B | Logit B | Probit B | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地社关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.058*** | 0.026*** | 0.120*** | 0.073*** |
| (0.014) | (0.005) | (0.024) | (0.014) | ||
| 与外地人交往 | 0.075*** | 0.032*** | 0.147*** | 0.089*** | |
| (0.020) | (0.007) | (0.032) | (0.020) | ||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.153*** | 0.048*** | 0.217*** | 0.132*** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.022) | (0.013) | ||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.025 | 0.005 | 0.028 | 0.015 |
| (0.029) | (0.010) | (0.048) | (0.029) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.029 | 0.009 | 0.045 | 0.027 | |
| (0.021) | (0.007) | (0.035) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.064** | 0.015 | 0.079* | 0.045 | |
| (0.028) | (0.010) | (0.046) | (0.028) | ||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.172*** | 0.075*** | 0.349*** | 0.211*** | |
| (0.017) | (0.006) | (0.027) | (0.017) | ||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.190*** | 0.076*** | 0.353*** | 0.213*** | |
| (0.022) | (0.008) | (0.035) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.240*** | 0.104*** | 0.473*** | 0.288*** | |
| (0.018) | (0.006) | (0.029) | (0.018) | ||
| 拥有居住证、社保卡和健康档案 | 0.331*** | 0.133*** | 0.593*** | 0.362*** | |
| (0.021) | (0.008) | (0.034) | (0.021) | ||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | -0.047 | -0.01 | -0.046 | -0.027 |
| (0.038) | (0.014) | (0.062) | (0.038) | ||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.022* | -0.011** | -0.048** | -0.030** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.020) | (0.012) | ||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.085*** | -0.026*** | -0.119*** | -0.072*** | |
| (0.024) | (0.008) | (0.039) | (0.023) | ||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 拥有集体分红 | -0.257*** | -0.099*** | -0.426*** | -0.262*** |
| (0.019) | (0.007) | (0.032) | (0.019) | ||
| 拥有宅基地和承包地 | -0.256*** | -0.093*** | -0.397*** | -0.245*** | |
| (0.015) | (0.005) | (0.024) | (0.015) | ||
| 拥有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.365*** | -0.136*** | -0.596*** | -0.367*** | |
| (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.021) | (0.013) | ||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
| 流动范围 | 控制 | ||||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.029 | 0.029 | 0.024 | 0.024 | |
| 变量 | 第一阶段 | 第二阶段 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 定居意愿 | |
| 政治身份 | -0.044*** | 0.123*** | -2.401*** | -0.044 | |
| (0.013) | (0.023) | (0.519) | (0.469) | ||
| 流动年份 | -0.020*** | -0.037*** | 0.514*** | -0.291*** | |
| (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.031) | (0.028) | ||
| 户籍地行政等级 | 0.042*** | 0.054*** | -8.458*** | -2.143*** | |
| (0.010) | (0.019) | (0.426) | (0.385) | ||
| 父母流动经历 | -0.001 | -0.003 | -2.762*** | 1.087*** | |
| (0.004) | (0.008) | (0.182) | (0.165) | ||
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 0.545*** | ||||
| (0.149) | |||||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 0.231*** | ||||
| (0.085) | |||||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | -0.013*** | ||||
| (0.004) | |||||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | -0.004*** | ||||
| (0.001) | |||||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 |
| 第一阶段F值 | 229.63*** | 284.86*** | 215.42*** | 160.77*** | |
| 第二阶段chi2(9) | 380.35*** | ||||
| AR弱工具识别 | 595.16*** | ||||
| Wald弱工具识别 | 396.10*** | ||||
Tab. 5 Results of endogeneity test
| 变量 | 第一阶段 | 第二阶段 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 定居意愿 | |
| 政治身份 | -0.044*** | 0.123*** | -2.401*** | -0.044 | |
| (0.013) | (0.023) | (0.519) | (0.469) | ||
| 流动年份 | -0.020*** | -0.037*** | 0.514*** | -0.291*** | |
| (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.031) | (0.028) | ||
| 户籍地行政等级 | 0.042*** | 0.054*** | -8.458*** | -2.143*** | |
| (0.010) | (0.019) | (0.426) | (0.385) | ||
| 父母流动经历 | -0.001 | -0.003 | -2.762*** | 1.087*** | |
| (0.004) | (0.008) | (0.182) | (0.165) | ||
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 0.545*** | ||||
| (0.149) | |||||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 0.231*** | ||||
| (0.085) | |||||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | -0.013*** | ||||
| (0.004) | |||||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | -0.004*** | ||||
| (0.001) | |||||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 |
| 第一阶段F值 | 229.63*** | 284.86*** | 215.42*** | 160.77*** | |
| 第二阶段chi2(9) | 380.35*** | ||||
| AR弱工具识别 | 595.16*** | ||||
| Wald弱工具识别 | 396.10*** | ||||
| 变量 | 五线城市 | 四线城市 | 三线城市 | 二线城市 | 新一线城市 | 一线城市 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.028** | 0.036** | 0.044*** | -0.003 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| (0.013) | (0.015) | (0.011) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.016) | ||
| 与外地人交往 | -0.02 | 0.052** | -0.004 | -0.01 | 0.007 | 0.051*** | |
| (0.020) | (0.025) | (0.015) | (0.014) | (0.015) | (0.019) | ||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.068*** | 0.073*** | 0.056*** | 0.064*** | 0.058*** | 0.151*** | |
| (0.011) | (0.012) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.017) | ||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.029 | 0.089*** | -0.008 | -0.01 | 0.042 | -0.028 |
| (0.021) | (0.023) | (0.018) | (0.021) | (0.032) | (0.071) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.101*** | -0.034* | 0.011 | -0.012 | -0.062*** | -0.001 | |
| (0.016) | (0.017) | (0.014) | (0.016) | (0.018) | (0.028) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.082*** | 0.028 | 0.057*** | -0.034 | 0.006 | -0.097 | |
| (0.020) | (0.021) | (0.020) | (0.022) | (0.027) | (0.060) | ||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.016 | 0.067*** | 0.043*** | 0.025** | 0.065*** | 0.135*** | |
| (0.014) | (0.016) | (0.012) | (0.012) | (0.015) | (0.020) | ||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.106*** | 0.084*** | 0.047*** | 0.074*** | 0.108*** | 0.154*** | |
| (0.018) | (0.022) | (0.015) | (0.015) | (0.020) | (0.036) | ||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.022 | 0.003 | 0.055*** | 0.008 | 0.114*** | 0.120*** | |
| (0.016) | (0.020) | (0.014) | (0.013) | (0.015) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.112*** | 0.049** | 0.122*** | 0.090*** | 0.184*** | 0.126*** | |
| (0.017) | (0.023) | (0.017) | (0.015) | (0.018) | (0.027) | ||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | 0.006 | 0.054 | -0.052* | 0.046* | -0.067** | -0.094*** |
| (0.033) | (0.049) | (0.029) | (0.028) | (0.031) | (0.036) | ||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.032*** | -0.031** | 0.003 | 0.013 | 0.016 | 0.02 | |
| (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.009) | (0.009) | (0.011) | (0.015) | ||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.096*** | -0.001 | 0.009 | 0.002 | -0.038** | -0.059** | |
| (0.018) | (0.027) | (0.019) | (0.017) | (0.019) | (0.024) | ||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 有集体分红 | -0.084*** | -0.156*** | -0.094*** | -0.122*** | -0.058*** | 0.016 |
| (0.016) | (0.019) | (0.014) | (0.015) | (0.017) | (0.027) | ||
| 有宅基地和承包地 | -0.151*** | -0.152*** | -0.067*** | -0.094*** | -0.069*** | -0.035** | |
| (0.013) | (0.016) | (0.013) | (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.015) | ||
| 有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.155*** | -0.182*** | -0.121*** | -0.143*** | -0.104*** | -0.040*** | |
| (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.015) | ||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
| 观测量 | 10 636 | 7 175 | 12 852 | 14 857 | 13 678 | 6 168 | |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.047 | 0.050 | 0.023 | 0.029 | 0.027 | 0.059 | |
Tab. 6 Results of regional heterogeneity analysis
| 变量 | 五线城市 | 四线城市 | 三线城市 | 二线城市 | 新一线城市 | 一线城市 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 迁入地关系型社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.028** | 0.036** | 0.044*** | -0.003 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| (0.013) | (0.015) | (0.011) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.016) | ||
| 与外地人交往 | -0.02 | 0.052** | -0.004 | -0.01 | 0.007 | 0.051*** | |
| (0.020) | (0.025) | (0.015) | (0.014) | (0.015) | (0.019) | ||
| 与本地人交往 | 0.068*** | 0.073*** | 0.056*** | 0.064*** | 0.058*** | 0.151*** | |
| (0.011) | (0.012) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.017) | ||
| 迁入地制度型社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.029 | 0.089*** | -0.008 | -0.01 | 0.042 | -0.028 |
| (0.021) | (0.023) | (0.018) | (0.021) | (0.032) | (0.071) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.101*** | -0.034* | 0.011 | -0.012 | -0.062*** | -0.001 | |
| (0.016) | (0.017) | (0.014) | (0.016) | (0.018) | (0.028) | ||
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.082*** | 0.028 | 0.057*** | -0.034 | 0.006 | -0.097 | |
| (0.020) | (0.021) | (0.020) | (0.022) | (0.027) | (0.060) | ||
| 拥有居住证 | 0.016 | 0.067*** | 0.043*** | 0.025** | 0.065*** | 0.135*** | |
| (0.014) | (0.016) | (0.012) | (0.012) | (0.015) | (0.020) | ||
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.106*** | 0.084*** | 0.047*** | 0.074*** | 0.108*** | 0.154*** | |
| (0.018) | (0.022) | (0.015) | (0.015) | (0.020) | (0.036) | ||
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.022 | 0.003 | 0.055*** | 0.008 | 0.114*** | 0.120*** | |
| (0.016) | (0.020) | (0.014) | (0.013) | (0.015) | (0.021) | ||
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.112*** | 0.049** | 0.122*** | 0.090*** | 0.184*** | 0.126*** | |
| (0.017) | (0.023) | (0.017) | (0.015) | (0.018) | (0.027) | ||
| 户籍地关系型社会资本 | 老家有孩子 | 0.006 | 0.054 | -0.052* | 0.046* | -0.067** | -0.094*** |
| (0.033) | (0.049) | (0.029) | (0.028) | (0.031) | (0.036) | ||
| 老家有父母和伴侣 | -0.032*** | -0.031** | 0.003 | 0.013 | 0.016 | 0.02 | |
| (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.009) | (0.009) | (0.011) | (0.015) | ||
| 老家有父母、子女和伴侣 | -0.096*** | -0.001 | 0.009 | 0.002 | -0.038** | -0.059** | |
| (0.018) | (0.027) | (0.019) | (0.017) | (0.019) | (0.024) | ||
| 户籍地制度型社会资本 | 有集体分红 | -0.084*** | -0.156*** | -0.094*** | -0.122*** | -0.058*** | 0.016 |
| (0.016) | (0.019) | (0.014) | (0.015) | (0.017) | (0.027) | ||
| 有宅基地和承包地 | -0.151*** | -0.152*** | -0.067*** | -0.094*** | -0.069*** | -0.035** | |
| (0.013) | (0.016) | (0.013) | (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.015) | ||
| 有宅基地、集体分红和承包地 | -0.155*** | -0.182*** | -0.121*** | -0.143*** | -0.104*** | -0.040*** | |
| (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.011) | (0.015) | ||
| 控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
| 观测量 | 10 636 | 7 175 | 12 852 | 14 857 | 13 678 | 6 168 | |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.047 | 0.050 | 0.023 | 0.029 | 0.027 | 0.059 | |
| 变量 | 总效应 | 直接效应 | 间接效应 | 中介效应贡献率 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
关系型 社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.027*** | 0.033*** | -0.006 | -21.36% |
| 与外地人交往 | 0.032*** | 0.044*** | -0.012 | -36.68% | |
| 与本地人交往 | 0.046*** | 0.026*** | 0.021 | 45.08% | |
制度型 社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.005 | -0.019 | 0.023 | 525.81% |
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.011 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 84.63% | |
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.018 | -0.003 | 0.021 | 121.13% | |
| 拥有居住证 | 0.078*** | 0.077*** | 0.001 | 0.89% | |
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.078*** | 0.059*** | 0.019 | 24.15% | |
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.108*** | 0.105*** | 0.003 | 2.53% | |
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.137*** | 0.114*** | 0.023 | 16.75% | |
Tab. 7 Results of mediation effect analysis
| 变量 | 总效应 | 直接效应 | 间接效应 | 中介效应贡献率 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
关系型 社会资本 | 与同乡交往 | 0.027*** | 0.033*** | -0.006 | -21.36% |
| 与外地人交往 | 0.032*** | 0.044*** | -0.012 | -36.68% | |
| 与本地人交往 | 0.046*** | 0.026*** | 0.021 | 45.08% | |
制度型 社会资本 | 拥有健康档案 | 0.005 | -0.019 | 0.023 | 525.81% |
| 拥有社会保障卡 | 0.011 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 84.63% | |
| 拥有社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.018 | -0.003 | 0.021 | 121.13% | |
| 拥有居住证 | 0.078*** | 0.077*** | 0.001 | 0.89% | |
| 拥有居住证和健康档案 | 0.078*** | 0.059*** | 0.019 | 24.15% | |
| 拥有居住证和社会保障卡 | 0.108*** | 0.105*** | 0.003 | 2.53% | |
| 拥有居住证、社会保障卡和健康档案 | 0.137*** | 0.114*** | 0.023 | 16.75% | |
| [1] | 陆杰华, 林嘉琪. 高流动性迁徙的区域性特征、主要挑战及其战略应对——基于"七普"数据的分析. 中共福建省委党校(福建行政学院)学报, 2021(6): 4-14. |
| LU J, LIN J. Regional characteristics, main challenges and strategic responses of high-mobility migration: Based on the analysis of the Seventh National Population Census data. Journal of Fujian Provincial Committee Party School of CPC(Fujian Academy of Governance), 2021(6): 4-14. | |
| [2] | 傅晨, 任辉. 农业转移人口市民化背景下农村土地制度创新的机理:一个分析框架. 经济学家, 2014(3): 74-83. |
| FU C, REN H. The mechanism of rural land system innovation in the context of urbanization of agricultural transfer population: an analytical framework. Economist, 2014(3): 74-83. | |
| [3] | ZHOU J. The New Urbanisation Plan and permanent urban settlement of migrants in Chongqing, China. Population, Space and Place, 2018, 24(6): e2144. |
| [4] | ETTE A, HESS B, SAUER L. Tackling germany's demographic skills shortage: Permanent settlement intentions of the recent wave of labour migrants from non-european countries. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 2016, 17(2): 429-448. |
| [5] | STARK O, BLOOM D. The new economics of labor migration. The American Economic Review, 1985, 75(2): 173-178. |
| [6] | 温士贤. 由文化适应到文化自觉:广州苗族务工者的文化实践. 思想战线, 2020, 46(6): 15-23. |
| WEN S. From acculturation to cultural consciousness: Cultural practice of migrant Miao workers in Guangzhou. Thinking, 2020, 46(6): 15-23. | |
| [7] | 张吉鹏, 黄金, 王军辉, 等. 城市落户门槛与劳动力回流. 经济研究, 2020, 55(7): 175-190. |
| ZHANG J, HUANG J, WANG J, 等. Return migration and the Hukou registration reform in Chinese cities. Economic Research Journal, 2020, 55(7): 175-190. | |
| [8] | 陆文荣. 双重社会隔离与农民工永久迁移城市意愿——基于沪浙5城市的调查. 嘉兴学院学报, 2020, 32(2): 67-76. |
| LU W. On migrant workers dual social segregation and permanent migration intention一A case study on Shanghai and four cities in Zhejiang. Journal of Jiaxing University, 2020, 32(2): 67-76. | |
| [9] | 王桂新, 武俊奎. 城市农民工与本地居民社会距离影响因素分析——以上海为例. 社会学研究, 2011, 25(2): 28-47. |
| WANG G, WU J. Influence factors analysis of social distance between migrants and residents in Shanghai. Sociological Studies, 2011, 25(2): 28-47. | |
| [10] | 李培林, 田丰. 中国农民工社会融入的代际比较. 社会, 2012, 32(5): 1-24. |
| LI P, TIAN F. A cross-generational comparison of the social cohesion of migrant workers in China.Chinese Journal of Sociology, 2012: 1-24. | |
| [11] | 刘少杰. 以行动与结构互动为基础的社会资本研究——评林南社会资本理论的方法原则和理论视野. 国外社会科学, 2004(2): 21-28. |
| LIU S. The study of social capital based on the interaction of action and structure : A review of the methodological principles and theoretical vision of Lin Nan's social capital theory. Social Sciences International, 2004(2): 21-28. | |
| [12] | 边燕杰. 城市居民社会资本的来源及作用:网络观点与调查发现. 中国社会科学, 2004(3): 136-146. |
| BIAN Y. Source and functions of urbanites' social capital:A network approach. Social Sciences in China, 2004(3): 136-146. | |
| [13] | 程诚, 边燕杰. 社会资本与不平等的再生产 以农民工与城市职工的收入差距为例. 社会, 2014, 34(4): 67-90. |
| CHENG C, BIAN Y. Social capital and the reproduction of inequality:The case of income differential between rural migrants and urban workers. Chinese Journal of Sociology, 2014, 34(4): 67-90. | |
| [14] | 崔岩. 流动人口心理层面的社会融入和身份认同问题研究. 社会学研究, 2012, 27(5): 141-160. |
| CUI Y. A study on migrants' psychological integration and self-identity. Sociological Studies, 2012, 27(5): 141-160. | |
| [15] | 王春光. 新生代农民工城市融入进程及问题的社会学分析. 青年探索, 2010(3): 5-15. |
| WANG C. A sociological analysis of the urban integration process and problems of the new generation of migrant workers. Youth Exploration, 2010(03): 5-15. | |
| [16] | 杨宏. 基于社会资本论域的农民工市民化问题研究 求索, 2010(3): 60-61. |
| YANG H. A study on the citizenization of migrant workers based on the field of social capital. Seeker, 2010(3): 60-61. | |
| [17] | 布朗托马斯·福特, 木子西. 社会资本理论综述. 马克思主义与现实, 2000(2): 41-46. |
| BROWN T, MU Z. A review of social capital theory. Marxism & Reality, 2000(2): 41-46. | |
| [18] | 翟学伟. 是"关系",还是社会资本. 社会, 2009, 29(1): 109-121. |
| ZHAI X. Guanxi or social capital? Chinese Journal of Sociology, 2009, 29(1): 109-121. | |
| [19] | ROTHSTEIN B, STOLLE D. The state and social capital: An institutional theory of generalized trust. Comparative Politics, 2008, 40(4): 441-459. |
| [20] | 费孝通. 乡土中国. 长沙:湖南人民出版社, 2022. |
| FEI X. From the Soil. Changsha: Hunan People's Publishing House,2022. | |
| [21] | 刘涛, 韦长传, 仝德. 人力资本、社会支持与流动人口社会融入——以北京市为例. 人口与发展, 2020, 26(2): 11-22. |
| LIU T, WEI C, TONG D. Human capital,social support and social assimilation of floating population:A case study of Beijing. Population and Development, 2020, 26(2): 11-22. | |
| [22] | 丁湘城, 左停. 社会资本与农村发展:一个理论综述. 农村经济, 2009(1): 98-101. |
| DING X, ZUO T. social capital and rural development: A theoretical review. Rural Economy, 2009(1): 98-101. | |
| [23] | ALBA R, NEE V. Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. The International Migration Review, 1997, 31(4): 826-874. |
| [24] | 郭晓欣, 钟世虎, 李子健. 农村流动人口城市化的影响机制——基于社会网络视角的发现. 中国人口科学, 2023, 37(4): 51-66. |
| GUO X, ZHONG S, LI Z. Determinants of rural migrants urbanization : Evidence from the perspective of social network. Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2023, 37(4): 51-66. | |
| [25] | 杨义武, 林万龙, 张莉琴. 地方公共品供给与人口迁移——来自地级及以上城市的经验证据. 中国人口科学, 2017(2): 93-103. |
| YANG Y, LIN W, ZHANG L. The supply of local public goods and population migration:Empirical evidence from 260 Cities at the prefecture level or above. Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2017(2): 93-103. | |
| [26] | 李培林. 流动民工的社会网络和社会地位. 社会学研究, 1996(4): 42-52. |
| LI P. Social networks and social status of migrant workers. Sociological Studies, 1996(04):42-52. | |
| [27] | 范丽娟. 社会支持和打工妹的城市融合. 安徽广播电视大学学报, 2005(4): 12-15. |
| FAN L.Social supports and female farmer workers' integrating with the urban society. Journal of Anhui Open University,2005(4): 12-15. | |
| [28] | 黄祖辉, 毛迎春. 浙江农民市民化——农村居民进城决策及进城农民境况研究. 浙江社会科学, 2004(1): 41-46. |
| HUANG Z, MAO Y. The urbanization of Zhejiang farmers: The decision-making and situation of rural residents moving to cities. Zhejiang Social Sciences, 2004(1): 41-46. | |
| [29] | 黄善林, 樊文静, 孙怡平. 农地依赖性、农地处置方式与市民化意愿的内在关系研究——基于川鄂苏黑四省调研数据. 中国土地科学, 2019, 33(4): 25-33. |
| HUANG S, FAN W, SUN Y. Study on the internal relation between farmland dependence, Agricultural land alienation methods and the willingness of civilization: Based on the survey data of Sichuan, Hubei, Jiangsu and Heilongjiang provinces. China Land Science, 2019, 33(4): 25-33. | |
| [30] | 叶俊焘, 钱文荣. 不同规模城市农民工市民化意愿及新型城镇化的路径选择. 浙江社会科学, 2016(5): 64-74. |
| YE J, QIAN W.Migration workers' urbanization willing in different scale cities and path-selected for the newtype urbanization. Zhejiang social sciences,2016(05):64-74. | |
| [31] | TIEBOUT C. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 1956, 64(5): 416-424. |
| [32] | 朱浩. "一线"还是"非一线":新生代白领移民城市居留意愿及影响机制. 深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2020, 37(5): 38-47. |
| ZHU H. Staying in first-tier cities or not: The choice of the new generation of white-collar migrants and its influence mechanism. Journal of Shenzhen University(Humanities & Social Sciences), 2020, 37(5): 38-47. | |
| [33] | 悦中山, 李树茁, 费尔德曼. 农民工社会融合的概念建构与实证分析. 当代经济科学, 2012, 34(1): 1-11. |
| YUE Z, LI S, MarcusW. F. Concept construction and empirical analysis of social integration for Rural-Urban migrants in China. Modern Economic Science, 2012, 34(1):1-11. | |
| [34] | 杨成凤, 柏广言, 韩会然. 流动人口的城市定居意愿及影响因素——以安徽省为例. 世界地理研究, 2020, 29(6): 1136-1147. |
| YANG C, BO G, HAN H. lnfluencing factors and settlement intention in cities of floating population: A casestudy of Anhui province. World Regional Studies, 2020, 29(6): 1136-1147. | |
| [35] | KARLSON K, HOLM A, BREEN R. Comparing regression coefficients between same-sample nested models using Logit and Probit: A new method. Sociological Methodology, 2012, 42(1): 286-313. |
| [36] | 温忠麟, 欧阳劲樱, 方俊燕. 潜变量交互效应标准化估计:方法比较与选用策略. 心理学报, 2022, 54(1): 91-107. |
| WEN Z, OUYANG J, FANG J. Standardized estimates for latent interaction effects:Method comparison and selection strategy. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2022, 54(1): 91-107. | |
| [37] | QI M, WANG Y. Research on the socio-economic stratification of floating population in China. Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2021(6): 110-123. |
| [38] | 袁微. 二值选择模型内生性检验方法、步骤及Stata应用. 统计与决策, 2018, 34(6): 15-20. |
| YUAN W. Endogeneity test method, procedure and Stata application of binary selection model. Statistics & Decision, 2018, 34(6): 15-20. | |
| [39] | 童雪敏, 晋洪涛, 史清华. 农民工城市融入:人力资本和社会资本视角的实证研究. 经济经纬, 2012(5): 33-37. |
| TONG X, JIN H, SHI Q. An empirical study on assimilation process of urban migrant workers:From the perspectives of human capital and social capital. Economic Survey, 2012 (5):33-37. |
| [1] | Chao WEI, Xuehong XIAO, Honggang XU. The perception and identification of linguistic landscape among tourists and residents in international tourism destinations: A case study of Bangkok and Chiang Mai, Thailand [J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(7): 33-45. |
| [2] | Yinchun HE, Guo CHEN. A study on the construction of heritage identity in the study trip of heritage sites from the embodied perspective [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(8): 166-178. |
| [3] | Chengkun HUANG, Deping CHU, Lanlan WANG, Feiyang LIN, Jiawei LIAO. Place identity construction of rural incoming tourism entrepreneurs from the perspective of everyday life: [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(5): 125-137. |
| [4] | CHENG Guoyu, AN Ning, LIN Mingliang. An emotional geopolitical research on films: Taking three Chinese overseas military operations themed films as examples [J]. WRS, 2019, 28(4): 65-75. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||
