38 4 2014 7 Vol. 38 No. 4 July 2014 50 Population Research * 30 4 100872 Livelihood and Development Capacity of Families Obeying the Family Planning Policy in Rural China A Sustainable Livelihood Analytical Framework Du Benfeng Li Biqing Abstract This paper examines and evaluates livelihood capital and development capacity of families obeying the family planning policy in rural China employing a sustainable livelihood analytical framework. Comparisons are made between families obeying the family planning policy and those violating the policy and families obeying the family planning policy are classified into different types according to their structure of children and development stages. Results show that child structure is affecting development capacity of rural families obeying the family planning policy and they have less livelihood capitals when they are at stages of nurturing the young owing income and supporting the old with relatively long period of inadequate development capacity. Development capacity is considerably challenged when the families enter into the stage of supporting the old with the lowest level of family livelihood. Keywords Family Planning Livelihood Capital Family Development Capacity Sustainable Livelihood A- nalysis Authors Du Benfeng is Professor Center for Population and Development StudiesRenmin University of China Li Biqing is Master Student Renmin University of China. Email dubenfeng@ ruc. edu. cn * 71373272 12YJAZH012
4 51 1 Scoones 1998 20 60 70 2002 2001 20 90 World Bank DFID Sussex IDS 2012 2 2. 1 UNDP CARE DFID DFID DFID 1997 IDS 2009 1 5
52 38 Figure 1 1 Sustainable Livelihood Analytical Framework 2. 2 20 80 2010 7631 1019 6612 470 147 5995 5993 1 18
4 53 1 Table 1 Family Type 50 50 4. 91 4. 91 63 113 6. 18 11. 09 109 222 10. 70 21. 79 119 341 11. 68 33. 46 86 427 8. 44 41. 90 116 543 11. 38 53. 29 132 675 12. 95 66. 24 202 877 19. 82 86. 06 142 1019 13. 94 100. 00 15 15 3. 19 3. 19 56 71 11. 91 15. 11 108 179 22. 98 38. 09 41 220 8. 72 46. 81 40 260 8. 51 55. 32 54 314 11. 49 66. 81 55 369 11. 70 78. 51 61 430 12. 98 91. 49 40 470 8. 51 100. 00 12 12 8. 16 8. 16 9 21 6. 12 14. 29 15 36 10. 20 24. 49 18 54 12. 24 36. 73 24 78 16. 33 53. 06 28 106 19. 05 72. 11 27 133 18. 37 90. 48 8 141 5. 44 95. 92 6 147 4. 08 100. 00 221 221 3. 69 3. 69 298 519 4. 97 8. 66 822 1341 13. 72 22. 38 767 2108 12. 80 35. 17 331 2439 5. 52 40. 70 795 3234 13. 27 53. 96 685 3919 11. 43 65. 39 1227 5146 20. 47 85. 87 847 5993 14. 13 100. 00 2. 3 2007
54 38 5 5 2 Table 2 2 Indexes of Livelihood Capital in Rural Households H N F P S h1 0. 3 h2 0. 3 h3 0. 4 n1 1 /6 n2 1 /6 n3 1 /6 n4 1 /6 n5 1 /6 n6 1 /6 f1 0. 8 f2 0. 2 p1 0. 5 p2 0. 5 s1 0. 5 s2 0. 5 H = 0. 3* h1 + 0. 3* h2 + 0. 4* h3 N = 1 /6 * n1 + 1 /6 * n2 + 1 /6 * n3 + 1 /6 * n4 + 1 /6 * n5 + 1 /6 * n6 F = 0. 8* f1 + 0. 2* f2 P = 0. 5* p1 + 0. 5* p2 P = 0. 5* s1 + 0. 5* s2 C - - - C = H + N + F + P + S 2. 3. 1 7 3 2009 3 Table 3 Age and Education of Family Members 16 0 / 0 17 ~ 44 3 1 45 ~ 59 2 2 60 ~ 74 1 3 75 0 4 5 6 7
4 55 2. 3. 2 2. 3. 3 0. 8 0. 2 2. 3. 4 0. 5 2. 3. 5 0. 5 0 ~ 1 3 3. 1 SAS 4 Table 4 4 Livelihood Capital Values of Different Types of Families t 5993 2439 3554-0. 175 0. 183 0. 170 *** 0. 007 0. 008 0. 007 0. 175 0. 002 0. 002 0. 001 0. 190 0. 071 0. 076 0. 068 0. 017 0. 054 0. 056 0. 052 0. 031 0. 309 0. 324 0. 299 *** 0. 05***
56 38 4 3. 2 3. 2. 1 5 Table 5 5 Livelihood Capital Values of Families with Different Child Structure 221 298 822 767 331 795 685 1227 847 0. 104 0. 179 0. 185 0. 196 0. 203 0. 200 0. 186 0. 175 0. 124 0. 008 0. 008 0. 009 0. 008 0. 008 0. 007 0. 008 0. 007 0. 006 0. 005 0. 002 0. 002 0. 003 0. 001 0. 002 0. 002 0. 002 0. 001 0. 099 0. 077 0. 075 0. 087 0. 070 0. 081 0. 076 0. 065 0. 052 0. 050 0. 055 0. 056 0. 059 0. 058 0. 060 0. 051 0. 051 0. 048 0. 188 0. 321 0. 326 0. 353 0. 341 0. 350 0. 322 0. 300 0. 231 CFPS2010 T 6 331 6% 795 15%
4 57 Table 6 6 Comparison of Livelihood Capital Values of Families with Different Child Structure *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 0. 05
58 38 3. 2. 2 16 16 60 60 16 60 16 60 60 16 16 60 7 7 Table 7 Distribution of Families 1008 858 932 756 3554 861 814 370 394 2439 1869 1672 1302 1150 5993 2 Figure 2 2 Comparison of Livelihood Capital Values of Families at Different Stages 8 9
4 59 Table 8 8 Livelihood Capital Values of Families Obeying or Violating the Family Planning Policy at Different Stages 0. 217 0. 200 0. 196 0. 178 0. 088 0. 139 0. 198 0. 180 0. 007 0. 007 0. 008 0. 007 0. 006 0. 010 0. 011 0. 008 0. 002 0. 002 0. 001 0. 003 0. 001 0. 001 0. 002 0. 002 0. 081 0. 084 0. 070 0. 068 0. 038 0. 060 0. 089 0. 085 0. 055 0. 054 0. 052 0. 051 0. 046 0. 052 0. 072 0. 058 0. 361 0. 346 0. 328 0. 307 0. 179 0. 261 0. 371 0. 332 Table 9 9 t T Test of Livelihood Capital Values of Families Obeying or Violating the Family Planning Policy at Different Stages *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 0. 05 3. 3 10 R - Square 0. 172 0. 060 0. 057 0. 087
60 38 10 Table 10 Regression Analysis of Various Livelihood Capital 5993 5993 5993 5993 5993 5993 *** *** *** *** *** *** R - Square 0. 172 0. 022 0. 005 0. 060 0. 050 0. 095 Adj R - Sq 0. 169 0. 019 0. 002 0. 057 0. 047 0. 093 0. 039 *** 0. 002 0. 000 0. 006 0. 006 0. 075 *** 0. 045 *** 0. 003 0. 000 0. 003 0. 007 0. 082 *** 0. 049 *** 0. 002 0. 001 0. 012 0. 010 *** 0. 103 *** 0. 060 *** 0. 002 0. 000-0. 007 0. 009 0. 090 *** 0. 057 *** 0. 001 0. 000 0. 007 0. 011 *** 0. 105 *** 0. 049 *** 0. 002 0. 000 0. 004 0. 002 0. 081 *** 0. 048 *** 0. 001 0. 000-0. 002 0. 002 0. 068 *** 0. 016 0. 000 0. 000-0. 004 0. 003 0. 022-0. 017 *** 0. 001 0. 001-0. 009 *** 0. 000-0. 032 *** - 0. 087 *** 0. 002 *** 0. 000-0. 015 *** 0. 004-0. 128 *** - 0. 021 *** 0. 002 *** 0. 000 0. 008 0. 010 *** 0. 001-0. 00831-0. 001 0. 000-0. 005 0. 008-0. 006 0. 000 0. 001-0. 001 *** - 0. 007 *** 0. 000-0. 007 *** - 0. 014 0. 001 0. 000-0. 018 0. 020 *** - 0. 009-0. 015 0. 000 0. 000-0. 021 0. 021 *** - 0. 012 0. 012 *** - 0. 001 0. 000 0. 016 *** 0. 004 0. 040 *** - 0. 040 0. 002 0. 181 *** 0. 072 *** - 0. 141 - - 0. 010 0. 479 *** 0. 282 *** - 0. 109-0. 020-0. 193 0. 131 *** - 0. 145 *** 0. 011 *** 0. 002-0. 021 *** - 0. 269 *** 0. 029 *** 0. 007 *** 0. 095 - - *** 0. 05-10
4 61 4 1 2 3 /References 1.. 2004 10 8-12 Han Zheng. 2004. Fragility and Rural Poverty. Issues in Agricultural Economy 10 8-12. 2.. 2007 4 32-39 Li Xiaoyun. 2007. Fragility Analysis Method of Rural Household and Application in China. Chinese Rural Economy 4 32-39 3.. 2009 1 61-68 Su Fang Xu Zhongmin and Shang Haiyang. 2009. An Overview of Sustainable Livelihoods Approach. Advances in Earth Science 1 61-68. 4. 2000 /2001. 2001 88-96 World Bank. 2001. 2000 /2001 Wold Development Report. Beijing. China Financial and Economic Publishing House. 5.. 2007 1 29-34 Tian Yuchun and Liu Lingqi. 2007. Study on Endowment Insurance Mechanism of Households Obeying the Family Planning Policy in Rural Area. Population Journal 1 29-34. 6.. 2012 4 37-44 Wu Fan Li Jianmin. 2012. Policy Approaches to Development Capacity of Family. Population Research 4 37-44. 7.. 2002 4 127-139 Yang Tuan. 2002. Evolution of the Research Paradign of Social Policy and Its Enlightenment. Social Sciences In China 4
62 38 127-139. 8.. 2009 3 58-64 Yang Yunyan and Zhao Feng. 2009. A Survey of Farmers Livelihood Capital in the Framework of the Sustainable Livelihood Approach A Case Study of the Reservoir Zone of the South-to-North Water Transfer Middle Line Project. Issues in Agricultural Economy 3 58-64. 9.. 1988 6 58-63 Zeng Yi. 1988. A Very Popular Interdiscipline in Demography Family Demography. Chinese Journal of Population Science 6 58-63. 10.. 1999 193 Zha Ruichuan Hu Weilue and Zhai Zhenwu. 1999. Demography of 100 years. Beijing Publishing House. 11 Scoones. Sustainable Livelihood A Framework for Analysis. 1998. IDS Working Paper 72 Brighton IDS. 2014-05