Inequality Of Opportunity, Migration And Spatial Optimization

In the fast developing country as China, inequality of opportunity is become more and more prominent now. Migration is an important way to improve quality of life and obtain equal opportunity, during the process of urbanization of China. But because of some obstacles like Hukou system, labors move in China may not improve their welfare, and migrants need to optimal there chose on spatial. So firstly, by analysis theory of labor mobility, policy change of Hukou and the space pattern of labor mobility in China, this paper used three kinds of methods to measure inequality of opportunity, and then investigates the effects of labor migration on inequality of opportunity. Secondly, expound and prove the impact of labor migration on welfare (income, happiness and welfare index). Thirdly, test the influence of urban size change to inequality of opportunity and welfare of residents, then used numerical simulation analysis to find the path of space optimization to migrants. Specifically, the main conclusion as following:First, in the past ten years, the situation of labor mobility in China did not change so much. Compared to2000, the city population size basically maintained the low-low agglomeration in West China in2010, and high-high agglomeration in the east. And compared to2000, the west as main net outflow of population region, low-low agglomeration area had expanded in2010.Second, inequality of opportunity in China is high. From the perspective of distribution frequency of subjective inequality of opportunity index, many investigate feel equal opportunity. In the successful control perspective, also many investigate believe that inequality of opportunity is not particularly high. However, intergenerational income elasticity shows that, inequality of opportunity is high in China which intergenerational income elasticity is about0.6. The mean of city’s absolute inequality of opportunity is low, but the mean of relative inequality of opportunity is high. In contrast, the mean of province’s absolute inequality of opportunity and relative inequality of opportunity is higher. And inequality of opportunity account for about40%of income inequality.Third, labor mobility reduces inequality of opportunity relatively. The migrants’ perceived inequality of opportunity index is lower than non-migrants’. Compare to non-migrants, migrants feel semi controllable factors lower important on success. Compared with other groups, migrants who did not get Hukou feel uncontrollable factors more important on success. Intergenerational income elasticity of migrants is less than half of those that stay. The key problem of intergenerational income mobility in China is that some people were trapped by the low income kind of intergenerational transmission. Educational factor plays an important role in determining the intergenerational income elasticity, and migration enforces this influence.Fourth, different types of migration have heterogeneous effects on migrants’ welfare. Outside of city migration increase income of migrant, but inside of city migration did not. This income growth mainly comes from the increase of human capital externalities. Migrants who got Hukou did not reduced their happiness, but those who did not obtained Hukou losing their happiness. Outside of city migration reduce welfare index of migrant, and inside of city migration increase welfare index of migrant.Fifth, China can realize Pareto improvement of residents’ welfare, by space optimization of migration. Absolute inequality of opportunity, relative inequality of opportunity and urban size present an inverse U-shaped relationship. On the extreme points of U curve between absolute inequality of opportunity and urban size, the size of population is about6.59million. On the extreme points of U curve between relative inequality of opportunity and urban size, the size of population is about7.02million. Happiness and population size of City area presents a U-shaped relationship; the lowest point of the U-shaped curve is about300million. Welfare index and population size of City presents a U-shaped relationship; the lowest point of the U-shaped curve is about700million. From perspective of welfare, Chinese immigrants exhibit irrational phenomenon in geospatial now. When re-construct China’s urban system, cities which population of city area more than300million and population of city less than700million should be the best chooses, and migrants could go to cities which can improve warfare both of themselves and original residents.