| Literature DB >> 20835379 |
Abstract
The purpose of this paper was to examine children's education financing alternatives among households in rural China. Data on education financing was from a household survey conducted in three poverty villages in Guizhou, China. The difference in financing education by households was verified through non-parametric testing. Findings show that private savings is dominant in financing education of children in school. Formal loans are almost absent even in the highest wealth group examined. The findings implied that the extension of financial services to children's education could motivate parents to send their children for more education, increase disposable income of rural households by reducing precautionary savings, and provide better-educated labors in rural China.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20835379 PMCID: PMC2924502 DOI: 10.1007/s10834-010-9210-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fam Econ Issues ISSN: 1058-0476
Classification of households by wealth, education level of children in school, and financing alternatives
Household income in rural China and Guizhou Province, 1980–2007 (in nominal price) (yuan)
| Year | Household income in rural China (per person) | Household income in rural Guizhou Province (per person) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Cash | Cash proportion (%) | Total | Cash | Cash proportion (%) | |
| 1980 | 217 | 113 | 52 | 190 | 82 | 43 |
| 1985 | 547 | 357 | 65 | 394 | 218 | 55 |
| 1990 | 990 | 677 | 68 | 629 | 357 | 57 |
| 1995 | 2,338 | 1,596 | 68 | 1,574 | 914 | 58 |
| 2000 | 3,146 | 2,382 | 76 | 1,948 | 1,136 | 58 |
| 2005 | 4,631 | 3,916 | 85 | 2,661 | 1,953 | 73 |
| 2007 | 5,791 | 4,958 | 86 | 3,218 | 2,347 | 73 |
Sources: National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2008). China Yearbook of Rural Household Survey. Beijing: China Statistics Press
Financial situation of households in rural China, 1986–2003 (in nominal price) (yuan)
| Year | Financial savingsa | Loan | Loan purpose | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumption | Production | |||
| 1986 | 450 | 302 | Not available | Not available |
| 1990 | 1,119 | 409 | Not available | Not available |
| 1995 | 2,744 | 1,091 | 501 | 590 |
| 1996 | 3,456 | 1,307 | 693 | 614 |
| 1999 | 4,956 | 1,446 | 808 | 638 |
| 2003 | 7,601 | 1,482 | 675 | 539 |
a Financial savings include other financial assets (such as Treasury bond) at the end of the year
Sources: Agriculture Department of China. (2001). National Rural Social-Economic Survey Data Collection from 1986 to 1999. Beijing: Agriculture Press of China; Agriculture Department of China. (2006). Database of Research Centre for Rural Economy. Retrieved May 5th 2006, from www.rcre.org.cn
Per capita living expenditures in rural China and Guizhou Province (in nominal price) (yuan)
| Year | In Rural China | In Rural Guizhou Province | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Edu.a | Edu.(%)b | Total | Edu | Edu.(%) | |
| 1980 | 162 | 8 | 4.9 | 139 | 6 | 4.3 |
| 1985 | 317 | 12 | 3.8 | 255 | 6 | 2.4 |
| 1990 | 585 | 31 | 5.3 | 403 | 17 | 4.2 |
| 1995 | 1,310 | 102 | 7.8 | 931 | 49 | 5.3 |
| 2000 | 1,670 | 187 | 11.2 | 1,097 | 97 | 8.8 |
| 2005 | 2,555 | 296 | 11.6 | 1,552 | 161 | 10.4 |
| 2007 | 3,224 | 306 | 9.5 | 1,913 | 147 | 7.7 |
a Edu. is the expenditures for education, entertainments, and recreation services of rural households
b Edu.(%) = (Education expenditures ÷ total living expenditure) × 100
Sources: National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2008). China Yearbook of Rural Household Survey. Beijing: China Statistics Press
Wealth, income, and presence of education expenditures of the survey households in 2005 (yuan)
| Wealth group | Number of households | Wealth per capita | Income per capita | Presence of education expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of households | Proportion (%) | ||||
| W1 | 158 | 259 | 1,012 | 110 | 70 |
| W2 | 159 | 547 | 1,292 | 95 | 60 |
| W3 | 159 | 859 | 1,491 | 89 | 56 |
| W4 | 159 | 1,285 | 1,720 | 78 | 49 |
| W5 | 158 | 2,980 | 2,690 | 64 | 41 |
| Total/average | 793 | 1,185 (1,242) | 1,641 (1,488) | 436 | 55 |
Wealth includes savings, inventories, land and production assets. The numbers in the parentheses are standard deviations
Source: Data from the Rural Household Survey
Education expenditures of children in school per surveyed household in 2005 (yuan)
| Wealth group | School children per household | Education expenditures per household | Primary (E1) | Primary and Secondary (E2) | Secondary (E3) | Secondary and higher (E4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of households | 270 | 74 | 84 | 8 | ||
| W1 | 2 | 691 (820) | 284 | 1,482 | 1,580 | – |
| W2 | 2 | 763 (1,107) | 259 | 1,124 | 1,636 | 3,750 |
| W3 | 2 | 925 (1,375) | 335 | 1,120 | 1,691 | 6,500 |
| W4 | 2 | 796 (1,023) | 311 | 1,639 | 1,290 | 6,500 |
| W5 | 2 | 1,319 (1,898) | 254 | 2,399 | 2,248 | 5,750 |
| Average | 2 (0.9) | 901 (1,230) | 290 (228) | 1,475 (1,047) | 1,726 (1,509) | 5,625 (2,335) |
Education expenditures include tuitions and other necessary expenses such as food and lodging. The numbers in parentheses are standard deviations
Source: Data is from the Rural Household Survey
Shares of education financing alternatives for school children by wealth
| Wealth groups | Internal financing | External financing | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Savings | Liquidating non-financial assets | Total | Informal loans | Formal loans | Transfers | Total | |
| W1 | 0.66 | 0.14 | 0.79 | 0.16 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.21 |
| W2 | 0.74 | 0.08 | 0.82 | 0.16 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.18 |
| W3 | 0.76 | 0.14 | 0.91 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.09 |
| W4 | 0.72 | 0.13 | 0.85 | 0.12 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.15 |
| W5 | 0.83 | 0.10 | 0.93 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.07 |
| Average | 0.73 (0.43) | 0.12 (0.32) | 0.85 (0.34) | 0.12 (0.30) | 0.01 (0.09) | 0.02 (0.15) | 0.15 (0.34) |
Source: Calculation based on the data from the Rural Household Survey. Standard deviations are in parentheses
Shares of education financing alternatives for school children by education level
| Education level of the children in school | Internal financing | External financing | Mitigationa | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Savings | Liquidating non-financial assets | Informal loans | Formal loans | Transfers | ||
| E1 | 0.71 | 0.08 | 0.00 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.12 |
| E2 | 0.55 | 0.16 | 0.02 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| E3 | 0.60 | 0.11 | 0.00 | 0.15 | 0.11 | 0.02 |
| E4 | 0.40 | 0.00 | 0.09 | 0.51 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
a Mitigation refers to the financial support from government, NGOs and private donations in the form of subsidies
Source: Calculation based on the data from the Rural Household Survey
Fig. 1Distribution density of logarithmic forms of education expenditures and external finance. Note: In the distribution density graph of each variable, the zero observers are truncated. Source: Data from the Rural Household Survey
Kruskal–Wallis test on the mean ranks of internal and external financing in education expenditures among five wealth groups
| Internal financing | External financing | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Savings | Liquidating non-financial assets | Total | Formal loans | Informal loans | Total | |
| χ2(4)a | 6.76 | 1.56 | 10.63* | 2.93 | 13.37** | 10.63* |
| Monte Carlo. Sig.b | 0.15 | 0.82 | 0.03 | 0.57 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
a df = wealth groups − 1
b The null hypothesis (H0) is that there is no difference in the financing methods among the five wealth groups or they are the same. The alternative hypothesis (H1) is that they are different. The test results of total internal financing, informal loans and total external financing accept the H1. Transfer in external financing is neglected because the sample size is too small to receive a reliable test result (less than 10)
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01