| Literature DB >> 35055496 |
Yanjiao Song1, Nina Zhu1, Feng Luo2.
Abstract
The location choice and livelihoods of rural-urban migrants are critical to the sustainable development of cities. By using data from the China Migrants Dynamic Survey (CMDS) in 2017, this paper extant the Rosen-Roback's model by adding factors of urban social network and air pollution to the function of the individual utility of migrants. Both the Probit Model and IV estimates imply evidence of an inverse U-shaped pattern of city size and migrants' permanent settlement in urban China. This view proves that Chinese migrants like to settle permanently in large cities, but not mega-cities, such as Beijing and Shanghai. The internal mechanism is explained by the agglomeration economies and the crowing effect brought by city size. In mega-cities, the attractiveness of the city caused by wage premium cannot offset the combined repulsive force caused by the high housing price, bad urban social network, air pollution, and health deterioration. It is worth noting that air pollution has a significant negative impact on the settlement intention of migrants, such as health conditions and precipitation. Besides, there is heterogeneity among high-skilled migrants and low-skilled migrants in different city sizes. Our findings enhance the understanding of "Escape from megacities" in China and have implications for the reform of the housing security system and the exploration of the urbanization path.Entities:
Keywords: agglomeration economies; city size; crowing effect; permanent settlement intention; rural-urban migrants
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35055496 PMCID: PMC8775828 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19020676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
The summary of variable definitions.
| Variables | Description | |
|---|---|---|
| Dependent variable | Permanent settlement intention | Willingness to settle in the city in the next five years or more |
| Independent variable | City size | Resident population of the city in the urban area |
| Control variables | Age | 15–59 years old |
| Gender | 1 = male; 0 = female | |
| Education level | Formal education (1 = illiteracy; 2 = primary, junior middle school level; 3 = high school level and above) | |
| Married status | Marriage status (0 = single, including divorced and widowed; 1 = married) | |
| Employment | Form of employment (1 = be employed;0 = self-employment) | |
| Wage | The wage level of last month (Dollars) | |
| Flow duration | The duration of moving to the city | |
| Rural homestead | Having a homestead in your hometown (1 = yes; 0 = no) | |
| Social network | The group with the most contacts in your spare time (1 = Fellow countrymen from the same registered residence; 2 = nobody; 3 = The registered residents of the local city) | |
| Rent | The average monthly rental cost in the city (Dollars) | |
| Housing price | The average housing price per square meter in the city (Dollars) | |
| Road congestion | Length of road per 10,000 people in the urban area | |
| Green garden | The Green Park area per 10,000 people in the urban area | |
| Air pollution | average PM2.5 of the city | |
| Health | In the last year, you have been in good health without illness, injury, or physical discomfort (1 = yes; 0 = no) | |
| Health archives | Has the local government of the city established a resident health record for you? (1 = yes; 0 = no) | |
| Temperature | Annual temperature (°C) | |
| Precipitation | Annual precipitation (mm) |
The descriptive statistics of variables.
| Whole Sample | Category of Permanent Settlement | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | ||||||||
| Var | Observation | Mean | std | Min | Max | Mean | std | Mean | std |
| City size | 99,829 | 486.62 | 588. | 14.81 | 2418.33 | 519.76 | 618.78 | 489.66 | 591.55 |
| Permanent settlement intention | 81,435 | 0.45 | 0.50 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Age | 99,829 | 35.23 | 9.45 | 15 | 59 | 35.91 | 8.52 | 34.59 | 9.67 |
| Gender | 99,829 | 0.57 | 0.49 | 0 | 1 | 0.57 | 0.50 | 0.56 | 0.49 |
| Education | 99,829 | 2.31 | 0.51 | 1 | 3 | 0.89 | 0.31 | 0.79 | 0.41 |
| Married status | 98,925 | 0.83 | 0.38 | 0 | 1 | 2.37 | 0.53 | 2.28 | 0.51 |
| Employment | 91,456 | 0.60 | 0.49 | 0 | 1 | 0.55 | 0.49 | 0.63 | 0.48 |
| Wage | 91,456 | 653.02 | 442.78 | 0 | 3149.61 | 730.65 | 535.35 | 609.29 | 373.80 |
| Flow duration | 99,829 | 6.01 | 5.76 | 0 | 41 | 7.57 | 6.20 | 5.12 | 5.20 |
| Rural homestead | 99321 | 0.75 | 0.43 | 0 | 1 | 0.70 | 0.46 | 0.80 | 0.40 |
| Social network with local people | 99,829 | 0.27 | 0.45 | 0 | 1 | 0.37 | 0.49 | 0.22 | 0.43 |
| Rent | 98,248 | 122.61 | 170.27 | 0 | 7874.02 | 158.84 | 211.22 | 101.47 | 136.63 |
| Housing price | 98,248 | 1565.10 | 1179.21 | 396.38 | 7109.76 | 1576.68 | 1207.00 | 1558.35 | 1162.61 |
| Road | 98,248 | 15.75 | 6.94 | 4 | 55 | 15.59 | 7.41 | 15.67 | 6.90 |
| Green garden | 98,248 | 13.79 | 4.06 | 6 | 45 | 13.82 | 4.17 | 13.72 | 3.91 |
| PM2.5 | 99,829 | 79.57 | 14.22 | 20 | 119 | 79.08 | 14.65 | 79.91 | 13.98 |
| Health | 99,829 | 0.52 | 0.50 | 0 | 1 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.53 | 0.50 |
| Health archives | 99,829 | 0.29 | 0.45 | 0 | 1 | 0.32 | 0.47 | 0.26 | 0.44 |
| Temperature | 99,829 | 15.40 | 4.87 | −0.35 | 24.67 | 15.06 | 4.89 | 15.63 | 4.85 |
| Precipitation | 99,829 | 1287.41 | 705.41 | 110.46 | 2778.80 | 1215.61 | 680.65 | 1336.50 | 717.75 |
Figure 1The spatial pattern of urban size in urban China.
Figure 2City size and the probability of settling permanently in the city.
The binary Probit regression of city size and migrants’ permanent settlement intention.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| dx/dy | dx/dy | Probit | Logit | OLS | |
| City size | 0.127 *** | 0.276 *** | 0.373 *** | 0.133 *** | 0.618 *** |
| (4.78) | (10.39) | (12.18) | (12.11) | (12.15) | |
| City size square | −0.051 *** | −0.072 *** | −0.093 *** | −0.034 *** | −0.156 *** |
| (−4.29) | (−6.18) | (−7.64) | (−7.80) | (−7.80) | |
| age | 0.074 *** | 0.067 *** | 0.067 *** | 0.021 *** | 0.110 *** |
| (16.66) | (15.22) | (15.15) | (14.21) | (14.95) | |
| Age square | −0.001 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.000 *** | −0.002 *** |
| (−17.28) | (−16.34) | (−16.31) | (−15.48) | (−16.09) | |
| Gender (base group: female) | 0.019 * | 0.031 *** | 0.030 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.046 *** |
| (1.96) | (3.22) | (3.14) | (3.48) | (2.91) | |
| Marital status (base group: single) | 0.350 *** | 0.413 *** | 0.412 *** | 0.140 *** | 0.690 *** |
| (22.13) | (25.67) | (25.63) | (25.42) | (25.43) | |
| Primary and junior (base group: illiteracy) | 0.012 | 0.032 | 0.026 | 0.008 | 0.046 |
| (0.34) | (0.89) | (0.73) | (0.68) | (0.77) | |
| High school and above (base group: illiteracy) | 0.425 *** | 0.407 *** | 0.399 *** | 0.142 *** | 0.655 *** |
| (11.61) | (11.03) | (10.82) | (11.07) | (10.69) | |
| Rural homestead | −0.304 *** | −0.229 *** | −0.226 *** | −0.081 *** | −0.369 *** |
| (−27.51) | (−21.28) | (−20.96) | (−21.11) | (−20.87) | |
| Flow duration | 0.042 *** | 0.037 *** | 0.038 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.061 *** |
| (46.45) | (41.91) | (42.61) | (44.17) | (42.23) | |
| Employment (base group: unemployment) | −0.118 *** | −0.073 *** | −0.059 *** | −0.020 *** | −0.093 *** |
| (−11.94) | (−7.43) | (−6.05) | (−5.84) | (−5.81) | |
| Wage | 0.049 *** | 0.059 *** | 0.063 *** | 0.022 *** | 0.108 *** |
| (9.30) | (11.57) | (12.12) | (12.38) | (12.01) | |
| Interaction with nobody (base group: Social network with fellow-townsman) | −0.072 *** | −0.079 *** | −0.028 *** | −0.133 *** | |
| (−5.95) | (−6.50) | (−6.51) | (−6.64) | ||
| Social network with local people (base group: Social network with fellow-townsman) | 0.330 *** | 0.314 *** | 0.115 *** | 0.511 *** | |
| (30.52) | (28.29) | (29.01) | (28.20) | ||
| Rent | −0.006 *** | ||||
| (−3.76) | |||||
| Housing price | −0.084 *** | −0.029 *** | −0.138 *** | ||
| (−6.92) | (−6.68) | (−6.94) | |||
| Road | 0.004 *** | 0.004 *** | 0.002 *** | 0.007 *** | |
| (4.68) | (4.60) | (4.95) | (4.75) | ||
| Green land | −0.001 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.001 | |
| (−1.23) | (−0.44) | (−0.65) | (−0.67) | ||
| Air pollution | −0.002 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.002 *** | |
| (−4.43) | (−4.08) | (−4.08) | (−4.13) | ||
| Health | −0.088 *** | −0.091 *** | −0.032 *** | −0.150 *** | |
| (−9.50) | (−9.83) | (−9.88) | (−9.87) | ||
| Health archives | 0.137 *** | 0.138 *** | 0.050 *** | 0.227 *** | |
| (13.44) | (13.54) | (13.70) | (13.59) | ||
| LnPrecipitation | −0.156 *** | −0.153 *** | −0.265 *** | −0.058 *** | |
| (−11.30) | (−10.99) | (−11.40) | (−11.57) | ||
| Temperature | 0.006 *** | 0.006 *** | 0.0116 *** | 0.002 *** | |
| (3.19) | (3.27) | (3.59) | (3.81) | ||
| _cons | −2.004 *** | −2.284 *** | −1.632 *** | −0.042 | −2.731 *** |
| (−21.40) | (−23.08) | (−11.80) | (−0.86) | (−11.77) | |
| N | 76273 | 75185 | 75185 | 75185 | 75185 |
Note: t statistics in parentheses *** p < 0.01.
The results of IV estimation of endogeneity.
| Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | OLS | IVreg2 | IV |
|
| |||
| citysize_2002 | - | 1.986 *** | 1.738 *** |
| (259.87) | (117.52) | ||
| citysize_2002_square | - | 0.340 *** | 0.305 *** |
| (42.38) | (40.72) | ||
|
| |||
| City size | 0.618 *** | 0.208 *** | 0.597 *** |
| (12.15) | (16.18) | (16.58) | |
| City size square | −0.156 *** | −0.055 *** | −0.156 *** |
| (−7.80) | (−11.59) | (−11.77) | |
| Ln (wage) | 0.108 *** | 0.025 *** | 0.069 *** |
| (12.01) | (13.06) | (11.20) | |
| Social network | −0.133 *** | −0.027 *** | −0.076 *** |
| (−6.64) | (−6.03) | (−6.02) | |
| 0.511 *** | 0.111 *** | 0.301 *** | |
| (28.20) | (27.01) | (26.28) | |
| Ln (housing price) | −0.138 *** | −0.058 *** | −0.172 *** |
| (−6.94) | (−11.50) | (−12.07) | |
| Air pollution | −0.002 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.002 *** |
| (−4.13) | (−4.50) | (−4.43) | |
| Health | −0.150 *** | −0.030 *** | −0.083 *** |
| (−9.87) | (−8.77) | (−8.69) | |
| Health archives | 0.227 *** | 0.052 *** | 0.143 *** |
| (13.59) | (13.52) | (13.36) | |
| Demographic variables | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Family variables | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Natural amenity | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| _cons | 0.202 *** | 0.176 *** | −0.954 *** |
| (3.93) | (3.28) | (−6.16) | |
|
| 75185 | 69597 | 69597 |
|
| 0.101 | 0.460 | 0.460 |
| Cragg-Donald Wald F statistic | - | 960 | |
| Stock-Yogo bias critical value | 10% (7.03) | ||
| Wald test of exogeneity(chi2(2)) | - | 217.59 | |
| 0.000 |
Note: t statistics in parentheses *** p < 0.01.
The robustness checks of the urban area and citizen identity.
| Variables | Model 8 | Model 9 |
|---|---|---|
| Independent Variable: Area Square | Dependent Variable: Citizen Identity | |
| l_living | ||
| Urban Area | 0.086 *** | |
| (16.51) | ||
| Urban Area square | −0.004 *** | |
| (−12.70) | ||
| City size | 0.302 *** | |
| (9.07) | ||
| Citysize_square | −0.064 *** | |
| (−4.96) | ||
| Ln (wage) | 0.062 *** | 0.019 *** |
| (12.07) | (3.50) | |
| Social network | −0.078 *** | −0.001 |
| (−6.48) | (−0.05) | |
| 0.320 *** | 0.392 *** | |
| (28.83) | (31.27) | |
| Ln (housing price) | −0.101 *** | −0.487 *** |
| (−8.56) | (−37.81) | |
| Air pollution | −0.002 *** | −0.000 |
| (−6.86) | (−1.16) | |
| Health | −0.091 *** | 0.211 *** |
| (−9.84) | (21.52) | |
| Health archives | 0.130 *** | 0.223 *** |
| (12.78) | (19.71) | |
| Demographic variables | Yes | Yes |
| Family variables | Yes | Yes |
| Natural amenity | Yes | Yes |
| _cons | −1.451 *** | 4.035 *** |
| (−10.37) | (27.47) | |
| N | 75,185 | 75,185 |
Note: t statistics in parentheses *** p < 0.01.
The heterogeneity test of city size and settlement intention among high-low skilled migrants.
| Variables | Model 10 | Model 11 |
|---|---|---|
| High-Skilled Migrants | Low-Skilled Migrants | |
| City size | 0.359 *** | 0.475 *** |
| (4.05) | (13.99) | |
| City size_ square | −0.106 *** | −0.123 *** |
| (−3.08) | (−9.30) | |
| Ln (wage) | 0.105 *** | 0.061 *** |
| (6.01) | (11.39) | |
| Social network | −0.138 *** | −0.083 *** |
| (−3.38) | (−6.53) | |
| Excellent air quality | 0.279 *** | 0.311 *** |
| (9.48) | (25.87) | |
| Ln (housing price) | −0.094 *** | −0.123 *** |
| (−2.86) | (−9.14) | |
| Good weather(air quality ≤ 50) | 0.214 ** | 0.358 *** |
| (2.36) | (9.89) | |
| Health | −0.112 *** | −0.087 *** |
| (−4.18) | (−8.85) | |
| Health archives | 0.140 *** | 0.145 *** |
| (4.91) | (13.30) | |
| Demographic variables | Yes | Yes |
| Family variables | Yes | Yes |
| Natural amenity | Yes | Yes |
| _cons | −2.521 *** | −1.059 *** |
| (−6.05) | (−7.34) | |
| N | 9843 | 65342 |
Note: t statistics in parentheses ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.
Figure 3The spatial agglomeration economics and crowding effect of city size.
The mechanism of city size on urban settlement intention.
| Variables | Model 12 | Model 13 |
|---|---|---|
| dx/dy | dx/dy | |
| City size | 0.535 *** | 0.499 *** |
| (14.26) | (11.47) | |
| Citysize_square | −0.125 *** | −0.100 *** |
| (−4.91) | (−3.38) | |
| City_size × Ln (wage) | 0.110 *** | 0.042 *** |
| (14.26) | (4.63) | |
| City_size × Social_network | 0.152 *** | 0.083 *** |
| (9.80) | (4.16) | |
| City_size × Ln (housing_price) | 0.176 *** | 0.040 * |
| (10.24) | (1.94) | |
| City_size ×Air_quality | 0.012 *** | 0.009 *** |
| (17.63) | (11.36) | |
| City_size ×Health | 0.052 *** | 0.053 *** |
| (4.11) | (3.38) | |
| City_size ×Health_archives | 0.013 | −0.059 *** |
| (0.73) | (−2.80) | |
| Ln (wage) | 0.114 *** | 0.068 *** |
| (25.05) | (12.88) | |
| Urban social network | 0.427 *** | 0.324 *** |
| (44.96) | (28.82) | |
| Ln (Housing_ price) | −0.067 *** | −0.105 *** |
| (−6.14) | (−8.32) | |
| Air pollution | −0.000 | −0.001 ** |
| (−1.53) | (−2.44) | |
| Health | −0.097 *** | −0.094 *** |
| (−12.00) | (−10.11) | |
| Health archives | 0.172 *** | 0.142 *** |
| (19.10) | (13.57) | |
| Demographic variables | No | Yes |
| Family variables | No | Yes |
| Natural amenity | No | Yes |
| _cons | −0.673 *** | −1.673 *** |
| (−6.88) | (−11.82) | |
|
| 75185 | 75185 |
Note: t statistics in parentheses * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.