中國社會保險制度改革之就業效果研究

Abstract

2019 年中國實施《降低社會保險費率綜合方案》，將企業職工基本養老保險單位繳費率高於 16% 的地區降至 16%。改革前的省際費率差異使樣本省份形成 0、2、3 與 4 個百分點的名目降幅。本研究使用 2016、2018 及 2020 年中國家庭追蹤調查資料，以浙江、廣東為對照組，其餘 23 個樣本省份為實驗組，運用包含個體與年度固定效果的差異中之差異法，分析名目降費對 16—59 歲工作年齡人口就業、非農就業、就業品質與工資的影響。 結果顯示，完整控制個人、家庭與省級特徵後，實驗組相對於對照組的就業機率提高 2.94 個百分點，非農就業機率提高 3.97 個百分點；控制政策前行業衝擊、採用替代追蹤樣本、傾向分數配對、逆機率留存加權及半參數差異中之差異等分析，均未改變主要估計的正向方向。相較之下，當期在職者的勞動契約、參保、兩種正規就業指標與工資未呈現一致性改善，無法據此認定就業品質有所改善，工資影響亦未有明確結論。此外政策強度的線性估計為正，但分類降幅結果不具單調性。異質性分析顯示，女性與青壯年的就業反應較大，鄉村相對城鎮只呈現較弱差異。教育程度的組間聯合檢定未發現顯著差異，但高中與大專以上兩組的就業係數分別顯著為正；實驗組的受僱就業機率在政策後亦較對照組顯著提高。 本研究結論較一致地支持社會保險名目降費與就業增量相關，但尚不足以證明就業品質同步改善。由於本研究樣本觀察的是個體結果，並不直接記錄企業招聘或僱員總數，且政策前僅有兩期、對照組只有兩省，2020 年調查與新冠疫情衝擊重疊，故因果解讀仍須審慎。研究結果表明，降費可透過降低企業的非工資用工成本發揮穩定就業的作用，但應同時兼顧社保基金可持續性、公平徵管與勞工保障，使就業數量增加逐步轉化為更穩定且更有保障的就業。

China's 2019 social insurance reform reduced the employer contribution rate for basic pension insurance to 16 percent in provinces above that threshold, producing nominal cuts of zero to four percentage points. Using three waves (2016, 2018, and 2020) of the China Family Panel Studies, the study compares Zhejiang and Guangdong with 23 treatment provinces. Individual and year-fixed-effects difference-in-differences (DID) models estimate effects on employment, nonagricultural employment, employment quality, and wages among individuals aged 16–59. With individual, household, and provincial controls, the reform is associated with relative increases of 2.94 percentage points in employment and 3.97 percentage points in nonagricultural employment. Robustness checks controlling for pre-policy industry shocks and using alternative panels, propensity-score matching, retention weighting, and semiparametric DID preserve the positive direction. Results for labor contracts, social insurance, two formal employment measures, and wages among current workers are mixed, establishing neither improved employment quality nor a conclusive wage effect. The linear estimate for policy intensity is positive, but category-specific estimates are non-monotonic. Employment responses are larger among women and adults aged 16–39, whereas the rural–urban difference is only weakly supported. Education-group coefficients do not differ jointly, although the upper-secondary and tertiary estimates are each positive and statistically significant. Wage employment also increases significantly in treatment provinces relative to the comparison provinces. Overall, the findings more consistently link nominal contribution-rate reductions to employment growth than to improved employment quality. The data capture individual outcomes, not firm hiring or headcounts. Causal interpretation is further limited by two pre-policy waves, two comparison provinces, and the overlap between the 2020 survey and the COVID-19 pandemic. Contribution-rate reductions may stabilize employment by lowering nonwage labor costs, but should be paired with sustainable social insurance financing, equitable enforcement, and worker protection to translate employment gains into more stable and secure jobs.