Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:07:53.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nonfarm Work and Marketization of the Chinese Countryside*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

William L. Parish ,
Xiaoye Zhe  and
Fang Li
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article examines the extent to which labour markets are emerging in the Chinese countryside, focusing on nonfarm work, and whether women participate in those new markets. The examination is based on a 1993 survey that provides new detail on types of work, employment channels, migration and income

Type
China, China Studies and The China Quarterly: A Symposium of Editorial Reflections on the Occasion of the 35th Anniversary of The China Quarterly
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 143 , September 1995 , pp. 697 - 730
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Oi, Jean C., State and Peasant in Contemporary China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989)Google Scholar; Oi, Jean C., “The fate of the collective after the commune,” in Deborah, Davis and Ezra, Vogel (eds.), Chinese Society on the Eve of Tiananmen (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Council of East Asian Studies, 1990)Google Scholar; Oi, Jean C., “Fiscal reform and the economic foundations of local state corporatism in China,” World Politics, Vol. 45 (1992), pp. 99–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nan Lin and Mai-shou Hao, “Local market socialism: reform in rural China,” in Theory and Society (forthcoming); Byrd, William and Gelb, Alan, “Township, village, and private industry in China's economic reform,” Policy, research, and external affairs working papers, WPS 406 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1990)Google Scholar; Wiemer, Calla, “State policy and rural resource allocation in China as seen through a Hebei province township, 1970–85,” World Development, Vol. 22 (1994), pp. 935–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Nee, Victor, “A theory of market transition: from redistribution to markets in state socialism,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 54 (1989), pp. 663–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar; V. Nee, “Social inequalities in reforming state socialism: between redistribution and markets in China,”

3 Knight, John and Song, Lina, “Workers in China's rural industries,” in Griffin, Keith B. and Zhao, Renwei (eds.). The Distribution of Income in China (London: Macmillan, 1993), p. 186.Google Scholar

4 Oshima, “Inter-regional movements of the labor force.”

5 Zhongdong Ma and Kao-Lee Liaw, “Explaining hierarchical and interprovincial migrations of Chinese young adults by personal factors and place attributes,” Mathematical Population Studies (forthcoming); Zhongdong Ma and Kao-Lee Liaw, “Education selectivity in the internal migrations of mainland China,” Journal of Population Studies, Taipei (forthcoming); Liang, Zai and White, Michael J., “Market transition, government policies, and interprovincial migration in China, 1983–88Google Scholar,” Economic Development and Cultural Change (forthcoming).

6 Perkins, Dwight, “The influence of economic reforms on China's urbanization,” in Reginald Kwok, William L. Parish and Anthony, Yeh (eds.), Chinese Urban Reform (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1990)Google ScholarParish, William L., “Rural industrialization in Fujian and Taiwan,” in Lyons, Thomas P. and Victor, Nee (eds.), The Economic Transformation of South China (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, East Asia Program, 1994)Google Scholar; Grant Blank and William L. Parish, “Rural industry and nonfarm employment,” in Kwok et al., Chinese Urban Reform; Knight and Song, “Workers in China's rural industries.”

7 More precisely, in a cross-sectional earnings function equation, where logged income is the dependent variable, the regression coefficient for years of education is about 0.08, though there is some variation in the exact coefficient from sample to sample and from time to time, e.g. Sakamoto, Arthur and Chen, Meichu D., “Further evidence on returns to schooling by establishment size,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 56 (1991), pp. 765–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 For example, Berg, Ivar, Education and Jobs: The Great Training Robbery (Boston: Beacon, 1970)Google Scholar; Bowles, Samuel and Gintis, Herbert, Schooling in Capitalist America (New York: Basic Books, 1976)Google Scholar; Collins, Randall, The Credential Society (New York: Academic Press, 1979)Google Scholar; and Dore, Ronald, The Diploma Disease (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976).Google Scholar

9 E.g. Schultz, Theodore W., “The value of the ability to deal with disequilibria,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 13 (1975), pp. 827–846Google Scholar; George Psacharopoulus, Returns to Education (Jossey-Bass, 1973).

10 Based on reanalysis of May labour force survey data from the Directorate General of Budget Accounting and Statistics, Taipei.

11 Compare Mincer, Jacob, Schooling, Experience, and Earnings (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1974).Google Scholar

12 Peng, Yusheng, “Wage determination in rural and urban industrial China,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 57 (1992), pp. 198–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Keith, Griffin and Renwei, Zhao (eds.), The Distribution of Income in China (London: Macmillan, 1993)Google Scholar, passim.

1 Zhang, Ning, “A conflict of interest: current problems in educational reform,” in Andrew, Watson (ed.), Economic Reform and Social Change in China (London: Routledge, 1992)Google Scholar; Pepper, Suzanne, China's Education Reform in the 1980s: Policies, Issues, and Historical Perspectives, China research monograph no. 36 (Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, 1990)Google Scholar; Rosen, Stanley, “Women, education, and modernization,” in Ruth, Hayhoe (ed.), Education and Modernization: The Chinese Experience (Oxford: Pergamon, 1991)Google Scholar; Seeberg, Vilma, Literacy in China (Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1990)Google Scholar; Thogersen, Stig, Secondary Education in China After Mao (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1990)Google Scholar; Lavely, William, Zhenyu, Xiao, Bohua, Li and Freedman, Ronald, “The rise in female education in China: national and regional patterns,” The China Quarterly, No. 121 (1990), pp. 61–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gao, Xiaoxian, “China's modernization and changes in the status of rural women,” in Gilmartin, Christina K.etal. (eds.), Engendering China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994), pp. 94–95.Google Scholar

1 Wolf, Diane L., “Linking women's labor with the global economy: factory workers and their families in rural Java,” in Kathryn, Ward (ed.), Women Workers and Global Restructuring (Ithaca: ILR Press, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, 1990)Google Scholar; Papanek, Hanna and Schwede, Laurel, “Women are good with money: earning and managing in an Indonesian city,” in Judith, Bruce and Daisy, Dwyer (eds.), A Home Divided: Women and Income in the Third World (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988)Google Scholar; Blumberg, Rae Lesser, “Introduction: the ‘triple overlap’ of gender stratification, economy, and the family,” in Gender, Family, and Economy: The Triple Overlap (Newbury Park: Sage, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 On the universality of these patterns in Chinese social settings, see Greenhalgh, Susan, “Sexual stratification: the other side of ‘growth with equity’ in East Asia,” Population and Development Review, Vol. 11 (1985), pp. 265–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bell, Lynda, “For better, for worse: women and the world market in rural China,” Modern China, Vol. 20 (1994), pp. 180–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Salaff, Janet, Working Daughters of Hong Kong (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).Google Scholar

16 Jacka, Tamara, “The public/private dichotomy and the gender division of labor,” in Andrew, Watson (ed.). Economic Reform and Social Change in China (London: Routledge, 1992)Google Scholar; Croll, Elisabeth J., “The new peasant economy in China,” and Davin, Delia, “The implications of contract agriculture for the employment and status of Chinese peasant women,” both in Stephan Feuchtwang, A. Hussain and T., Pairault (eds.). Transforming China's Economy in the Eighties: Volume I (London: Zed, 1988); Gao, “Rural women,” pp. 80–97.Google Scholar

17 Potter, Sulamith Heins and Potter, Jack, China's Peasants (New York: Cambridge, 1990); Chan, Madsen and Unger, Chen Village under Mao and Deng.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Benton, Lauren, Invisible Factories: The Informal Economy and Industrial Development in Spain (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990)Google Scholar; Ward, , Women Workers and Global Restructuring; Mies, Maria, Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen and Claudia von Werlhof, Women: The Last Colony (New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1988)Google Scholar; Beneria, Lourdes and Feldman, Shelley, Unequal Burden: Economic Crises, Persistent Poverty, and Women's Work (Boulder: Westview Press, 1992).Google Scholar

19 Zhongguo, chengxiang jumin jiating shenghuo diaocha keti zu, Zhongguo chengxiang jumin jiating shenghuo diaocha baogao (Research Report on Chinese Urban and Rural Residents’ Family Life) (Beijing: Zhongguo da baike quanshu chubanshe, 1994).Google Scholar

20 Many readers know of this county through articles and a book by Siu, Helen F., Agents and Victims in South China: Accomplices in Rural Revolution (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 For a study of rural industrialization in one village from this county, see Yang, Minchuan, “Reshaping peasant culture and community: rural industrialization in a Chinese village,” Modern China, Vol. 20 (1994) pp. 157–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 As a main job, nonfarm work averages 303 days per year. As a second job, it averages only 150 days per year, suggesting much more seasonal and other forms of transient work.

23 Tongjiju, Guojia, Zhongguo tongji zhaiyao, 1994 (Statistical Survey of China, 1994) (Beijing: China Statistics Press, 1994), p. 21.Google Scholar

24 Comparisons to a 1988 survey are highly problematic - both because different counties were sampled and because the 1988 survey found too few first jobs in nonfarm work (12%) when compared to official statistics for the same year (21%). Nevertheless, the addition of second jobs caused the percentage of villagers in nonfarm work to increase by only 5 percentage points in 1988 (reanalysis of raw data from Griffin and Zhao, Distribution of Income). In 1993 the increase was 12 percentage points (see average of male and female figures in Table 2). Though methodologically problematic, the larger 1993 increase is consistent with more nonfarm second jobs in 1993.

25 These comparatively high levels of education are unlikely to be a sampling fluke, for compared to other national surveys, our sample is not unusually well educated. For example, among all village labourers (farm and nonfarm), 27% are illiterate or semi-illiterate, whereas in large 1990 and 1991 national surveys, only 17% to 21% are so poorly educated. See Guojia, Tongjiju Nongcun Shehui Jingji Diaocha Zongdui (ed.), ’92 Zhongguo nongcun zhuhu diaocha nianjian (’92 Annual Survey of Chinese Rural Households) (Beijing: China Statistics Press, 1993), p. 3.Google Scholar

26 State Statistical Bureau, China Statistical Yearbook 1993 (Beijing: China Statistics Press, 1993), pp. 113–14, 330.Google Scholar

27 This speculation is based in part on a reanalysis of 1988 survey data, which shows the reported regional concentration. Also, the 1988 data show 18% of first jobs in the private sector, not too different from 1993. In second jobs, 34% were in the private sector, which was less than in 1993. This would be consistent with a growth of the private, informal sector in the following five years. Original data from Griffin and Zhao, Distribution of Income.

28 Comparison to nonfarm job channels in Taiwan provides some perspective on how very special these patterns are. In 1990 Taiwan, 42% used personal connections, 26% started or continued in the family's running of their own business, 20% replied to an advertisement, and only 8% went through government channels (reanalysis of May 1990 official labour force survey). This is a situation of open, and semi-open, competition approached in the China sample only by final “other” group, which includes joint ventures.

29 Unfortunately, we do not know whether these outsiders are in farming or nonfarm activities. However, separate statistics on outmigrants show that only one-tenth of those working outside their home village are in agriculture, which suggests that most migrants are in nonfarm jobs.

30 We want males not females, since females will typically leave the village for marriage reasons alone, while males are more likely to have left for reason of work.

31 Based on aggregate income, urban proximity and migration patterns, we classify our Jiangsu, Guangdong and Sichuan sample sites as core areas with high labour demand.

32 We checked this pattern province by province. Pujian is the only other locale where administrative family connections fail to improve nonfarm work opportunities.

33 Among several alternate specifications of the relationships in Table 9, we also considered the per capita output value of each village as a control for wealth of local environment. The results were similar to those presented here.

34 Griffin and Zhao, Distribution of Income, also report higher income returns for women.

35 A note of caution. Though quite different from American patterns (Mincer, Schooling), the patterns are less distinct when compared to Taiwan. In Taiwan, the initial rise in income is steeper (0.06) than in China (0.04). But the pattern of a long slow increase in income covering an initial period of over 20 years is shared, suggesting that more than simple market/non-market differences are involved. (Taiwan figures based on reanaly sis of private employees in the May 1990 official labour force survey.)

36 Further signs of that equality of pay include a lower dispersion of wages, as measured by a standard deviation, when compared to other sectors. Also, in a reanaly sis of the raw data from Griffin and Zhao, Distribution of Income, education had a somewhat greater, but still limited, effect on income in the rural collective sector. Though the illiterate were less well paid, primary to college graduates all made about the same incomes. The Griffin/Zhao data has too little data on the self-employed sector for reanalysis of that sector.

37 Cf. Nee, “Theory of market transition,” ”Social inequalities.”

38 Cf. Oi, “Fiscal reform.”

39 Cf. Oi, State and Peasant, “Fate of the collective”; Lin and Hao, “Local market socialism.”

40 Wiemer, “State policy.” A cautionary note is that in our data, though rural collective employees make much more than farmers, they make no more or less than private sector workers (see Table 9). Thus, the restraints on free migration could be the more important explanation for slow employment growth in some locales.

41 Cf. Nee, “Theory of market transition,” “Social inequalities.” On some of the shared similarities with Latin America, see Portes, Alejandro, “Industrial development and labor absorption,” Population and Development Review, Vol. 10 (1984), pp. 589–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar