Social Protection Reform Project 中国-欧盟社会保障改革项目 中国的最低生活保障标准及其确定方法China’s Minimal Living Guarantee Standards and Their Making Methods 关信平 教授 南开大学社会建设与管理研究院 Xinping Guan, Prof. Institutes of Social Development & Administration Sep 15-16, Beijing China

一、最低生活保障标准的含义与意义 I. The concept and significance of Dibao standard

1. 中国最低生活保障标准的含义 1. The concept of Dibao （1）定义 The definition： 1. 中国最低生活保障标准的含义 1. The concept of Dibao （1）定义 The definition： 最低生活保障制度：国家对家庭人均收入低于当地最低生活保障标准的困难家庭给予现金性生活救助的社会救助制度。 The Minimal Living Guarantee System, or Dibao: is a project in social assistance system by which government s provide cash benefits to those whose family income below the certain local standards.

“最低生活保障标准” Dibao standard： 用于界定低保对象的现金标准，即低保划界标准 A cash amount that used as a threshold line to define the qualified beneficiaries of Dibao.

（2）特点 Basic features： 测量指标特点 Measurement indicators: 收入标准 Income indicator 现金标准 Cash value 家庭人均收入标准 Family income p.c. measurement 贫困划界标准 Poverty threshold standard 低标准特点 Low standard

（3）意义 Functions 确定救助对象的手段：对最困难家庭的瞄准性：强标准 确定救助水平的手段：最低保障标准和最高保障责任 \ 弱标准 A means to define eligibility: targeting to the poorest, a strong standard 确定救助水平的手段：最低保障标准和最高保障责任 \ 弱标准 A means to determine benefit level: the minimal living security and the maximal compulsory governmental responsibility 国家承担社会救助责任的一个边界 A standard to define one of the governments’ responsibilities in social assistance: cash benefit provision

（4）应用 Applications： 基本应用范围：应用到最低生活保障制度 The basic application area: to the Dibao project 扩展应用范围：目前已应用到其他社会救助项目（包括许多民间社会救助的项目） Extended application areas: Currently it has been extended to other official social assistance projects, including some NGOs’ social assistance actions 低保标准与贫困标准的关系 The Relationship between Dibao standard and the standard of Poverty Alleviation & Development Program (PADP)

二、最低生活保障标准的制定方法 II. The methods of making Dibao standard

1. 国家政策 National Policy level （1）发展过程 Developmental history 早期一般性规定（从1999到2011） General regulations in the early stage (from 1999-2011) 国家标准化指导意见的形成（2011年的《关于进一步规范城乡居民最低生活保障标准制定和调整工作的指导意见》） The formation of the national directories in 2011 (“The directories for further regulating the work of making and adjusting Dibao standards” by four Ministries/ Bureaus of Central Government, 2011)

科学性原则: “Scientific principle” 合理性原则: Rational Principle （2）当前的基本原则 Current general principles 科学性原则: “Scientific principle” 合理性原则: Rational Principle 动态调整原则: Adjustable Principle

（3） 三种基本模式 Three basic patterns 基本生活费用支出法: Basic Living Expenditure Methods 恩格尔系数法: 必需食品消费支出 / 上年度最低收入家庭恩格尔系数 Engle Index Methods： Minimal food expenditure / Engle Index p.c. among Dibao families in the last year 消费支出比例法: Consumptive expenditure Ratio Methods

2. 地方实践：各种模式及其比较 Local Practices: Various patterns and the comparisons （1）各地实行中央政府推荐三种方法的情况 The local implementations of the three methods recommended by central governments （2）其他方法 Other methods 与最低工资标准挂钩的方法 Some percentage to local Minimal Wage 与人均可支配收入挂钩的方法 Some percentage to local income p.c.

三、 中国城乡居民最低生活保障标准的 特点及运行中存在的问题 III. The basic features and the problems of the Dibao standard in China

1. 水平偏低 Low level standards （1）当前各地实际低保标准及全国平均水平 The current actual national and local dibao standards

表1 全国城市平均低保标准与全国人均消费及人均收入的比率 表1 全国城市平均低保标准与全国人均消费及人均收入的比率 Table 1 The percentage of National average of the urban Dibao standards to the national urban consumptive expenses p.c. and national income p.c. (%) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 全国平均城市低保标准占上年年人均消费的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national consumptive expenses p.c 24.56 25.65 26.13 26.87 27.33 全国平均城市低保标准占当年人均消费的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national consumptive expenses p.c 20.73 20.54 20.05 全国平均城市低保标准占上年人均收入的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national income p.c 18.09 18.16 18.24 18.27 全国平均城市低保标准占当年人均收入的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national income p.c 15.76 15.85 16.13 16.62 17.08 全国平均城市低保标准为上年收入中位数的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national median income 20.72 20.37 20.36 全国平均城市低保标准为当年收入中位数的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national median income 18.08 18.02 18.51 18.49

图1 全国城市平均低保标准与全国人均消费及人均收入的比率 Figure 1 The percentage of National average of the urban Dibao standards to the national urban consumptive expenses p.c. and national income p.c. (%)

表2 全国平均农村低保标准与全国人均消费及人均收入的比率（%） Table 2 The percentage of National average of the rural Dibao standards to the national rural consumptive expenses p.c. and national income p.c. (%) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 全国平均农村低保标准为上年人均消费支出的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national consumptive expenses p.c 35.20 39.20 39.60 41.2 41.91 全国平均农村低保标准为当年人均消费支出的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national consumptive expenses p.c 32.04 32.91 35 36.74 33.12 全国平均农村低保标准为上年人均收入的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national income p.c 29.03 29.64 30.74 31.21 全国平均农村低保标准为当年人均收入的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national income p.c 23.72 24.62 26.12 27.36 26.47 全国平均农村低保标准为上年人均收入中位数的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to last year’s national median income 33.39 34.68 35.12 全国平均农村低保标准为当年人均收入中位数的比率 The percentage of National average of Dibao standards to the same year’s national median income 27.74 29.46 30.78 29.24

图2 全国农村平均低保标准与全国人均消费及人均收入的比率 Figure 2 The percentage of National average of the rural DIBAO standards to the national rural consumptive expenses p.c. and national income p.c. (%)

表3 2013年城乡低保标准占当年城乡人均收入最低和最高的各五个省 Table 3 The five lowest and 5 highest provincial averages of Dibao standard to the provincial income p.c. 农村低保标准为当年城乡人均收入的百分比 Percentage of average rural Dibao standards to the rural income p.c. 城市低保标准占当年城乡人均收入的百分比 Percentage of average urban Dibao standards to the urban income p.c. 最低的五个省 最高的五个省 省份 Provinces 比例 % 河 南 Henan 20.02 北 京 Beijing 34.13 广东Guangdong 13.80 内蒙古 Inner-Mongolia 21.67 吉 林 Jilin 21.14 江 苏 Jiangsu 34.95 福建Fujian 14.15 江 西 Jiangxi 21.71 福 建Fujian 21.24 海 南 Hainan 36.23 宁夏Ningxia 15.81 天 津 Tianjin 22.30 湖 北Hubei 22.84 甘 肃 Gansu 37.96 浙江Zhejiang 16.34 黑龙江 Heilongjiang 23.74 四 川Sichuan 23.21 39.73 四川Sichuan 16.44 西 藏 Tibet 25.92

（2） 低保标准的国际比较 国际高标准（大多数发达国家）：收入中位数的50%-60% International comparative analysis of the Dibao Standard   国际高标准（大多数发达国家）：收入中位数的50%-60% International high standard (most of the developed countries: 50%-60% of median income 国际基本标准（大多数发展中国家及中等收入国家）：每天两美元 International basic standard (for most developing countries & middle-income countries: US$2/day 国际最低标准（针对穷国的标准）：每天1.25美元 International minimal standard (for the poor countries) US$1.25 / day 中国城市的平均标准（2014）：收入中位值的18.5%，或 2.15美元/天 The average urban standard (2014): 18.5% of Median income, or US$2.15 / day 中国农村的平均标准（2014）：收入中位值的29.2%，或 1.2美元/天 The average rural standard (2014): 29.2% of Median income, or US$1.2 / day

2014年底 :（按2014年12月31日的汇率） In the end of 2014 有8个省区的农村平均低保标准低于每人每天1美元（按当时的汇率） 农村平均低保标准最低的省只有每人每天0.82美元。 农村平均低保标准最高的达到了每人每天3.4美元 In the end of 2014 （At the exchange rate at Dec 31, 2014) In 8 provinces the average rural Dibao Standards were below US$1/day; The lowest provincial average was just US$0.84/day The highest provincial average was US$3.4/day

2014年底 :（按2014年12月31日的汇率） In the end of 2014 有6个省区的城市平均低保标准低于每人每天2美元 城市平均低保标准最低的省只有每人每天1.63美元。 城市平均低保标准最高的达到了每人每天3.83美元 In the end of 2014 （At the exchange rate at Dec 31, 2014) In 6 provinces the average urban Dibao Standards were below US$2/day; The lowest provincial average was just US$1.63/day The highest provincial average was US$3.83/day

2.标准单一 The mono-standard 仅有一个测量收入指标（没有消费等标准） Only a income measurement, no other measurements: e.g. consumptive, health, education, etc. 仅有一个划界标准（缺乏等级标准） Only one threshold line, and cannot apply to different levels of poverty 仅有家庭人均收入标准，没有与家庭人口数挂钩的浮动 Only family average standard, the number of family member is not considered   3. 标准制定方法不统一：多种方法、各地自行决定、缺乏全国统一底线 Fragmented feature: multiple methods, local decisions, and no national floor standard

4. 强划界标准、弱保障标准 5. 低保标准实际执行中的问题，尤其是在农村 A strong function in eligibility threshold, but weak function in benefit level 5. 低保标准实际执行中的问题，尤其是在农村 The problems in the implementation of Dibao Standard, especially in rural areas.

四、改革最低生活保障标准的政策建议 IV Policy recommendations: for further reforms of the Dibao standard

1. 提高标准 to raise the standard level (1) 目前制约低保标准的主要因素 The current limitation factors to the increase of the Dibao standard 根本因素：某些地方政府对“改善民生”的反应不到位 The fundamental factor: local government’s less responses to the central government’s call for “improving people’s well-being” 观念因素：对“福利陷阱”、“福利养懒人”的担忧 Ideological factor: worrying about “welfare trap”, “welfare for laziness”, etc. 其他因素 Other factors: 部分地方政府财力有限 Less fiscal capacities in some local governments 与其他制度的协调问题：如最低工资标准、扶贫标准等 The difficulties in coordinating with other programs/regulations: e.g. the minimal wage regulation, PADP program, etc

建议 Suggestions： 坚持“保障与改善民生”总体方向，提高低保标准 若干配套措施 Some co-measurements To raise the Dibao standard under the central government’s general principle of “secure and improve people’s well-being 若干配套措施 Some co-measurements 在提标的同时，积极促进就业 To have a more active employment strategy 试行多级标准 To try a multi-tier standard system 大力发展服务救助，尤其是加强专业社会工作的服务 To have more social services for the poor, especially professional social workers’ involvement.

（2）统一标准 To have a unified standard 统一全国最低标准 To have a national floor standard 统一城乡标准 To have unified standards applying to both rural and urban areas 统一低保与扶贫标准 To have the same standards for both Dibao and PADP

（3）采用相对标准：收入或消费的中位数为基数 To apply a relative standard: some percentage to the median income, e.g. （4）改变单一的现金标准、提高类别标准 To change the single cash standard system and introduce and increase the importance of categorical standards, such as old-age, disability, etc

Social Protection Reform Project 中国-欧盟社会保障改革项目 谢 谢！ Thanks!

社会救助水平的国际比较:（公共支出占GDP的比例） 发达国家平均水平 3.0% 发达国家平均水平 3.0% 发展中国家平均水平 1.6% 发展中国家穷国的平均水平 1.1% 中国的水平（包括救灾和扶贫） 0.84%

2003-2014全国财政社会支出情况 年份 财政支出总额 教育支出 医疗卫生支出 社会保障与就业 保障性住房 2-5合计 占财政支出总额的比例 % 占GDP的比例 % 社保基金总支出占GDP的比例 % 财政社会支出+社保基金支出占GDP的比例 % 2003 27868.78 3140.26 778.05 3273.19 7191.5 25.8 5.27 2004 28486.89 3624.84 854.64 3911.88 8391.36 29.5 5.22 2.89 8.10 2005 33930.28 4289.98 1036.81 4697.33 10024.12 5.39 2.92 8.30 2006 40422.73 5169.05 1320.23 5749.3 12238.58 30.3 5.62 2.99 8.60 2007 49781.35 7122.32 1989.96 5447.16 14559.44 29.2 5.43 2.97 8.38 2008 62592.66 9010.21 2757.04 6804.29 18571.54 29.7 5.86 3.16 9.00 2009 76299.93 10437.54 3994.19 7606.68 725.94 22764.35 29.8 6.59 3.61 10.15 2010 89874.16 12550.02 4804.18 9130.62 2376.88 28861.7 32.1 7.06 3.74 10.73 2011 109247.79 16497.33 6429.51 11109.4 3820.69 37856.93 34.7 7.82 3.94 11.67 2012 125952.97 21242.10 7245.11 12585.52 4479.62 45552.35 36.2 8.53 4.49 12.90 2013 140212.1 22001.76 8279.90 14490.54 4480.55 49252.75 35.1 4.91 13.12 2014 151785.56 23041.71 9263.32 15968.85 5043.72 53317.60