人才补贴政策、异质性劳动力流动与经济福利

Talent Subsidy Policy, Heterogeneous Labor Migration, and Economic Welfare

徐邵军，刘修岩

2026 第 28 卷第 03 期页码 122-136

DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2026.03.009

摘要

如何构建适配不同城市发展禀赋的差异化引才政策，是充分释放劳动力技能红利、优化技能空间配置结构以及加快实现共同富裕亟须解决的重要问题。文章构建了包含异质性劳动力跨地区流动的量化空间一般均衡模型，揭示了城市人才补贴政策对异质性劳动力空间供给弹性和技能空间分布的作用机制，并利用2020年城市数据对理论模型进行拟合，对各城市最优人才补贴比例的制定、不同人才补贴政策方案带来的异质性劳动力福利改善以及技能空间分布和经济增长进行反事实分析。结果表明，劳动力流动对人才补贴的反应存在空间异质性，具体的流动规模、技能结构的空间重置由城市最优发展目标、异质性劳动技能互补共同决定。此外，过度进行全国范围内的人才补贴、“抢人”竞争未必有利于提升劳动力技能的空间配置效率，新一线城市实施人才补贴政策更有利于实现经济增长、异质性劳动力福利的提升以及区域经济协调发展这三个政策目标之间的和谐相融。

Against the backdrop of demographic structural shifts and the diminishing infinite elasticity of labor supply, the intense “talent war” among cities competing for high-skilled labor has escalated. However, decentralized talent subsidy decisions based on local interests often overlook cross-regional externalities and the global efficiency of spatial skill allocation, easily leading to public resource distortion and functional factor misallocation. How to design differentiated talent attraction policies adapted to various city endowments to fully unleash skill dividends and promote coordinated regional development has become a major practical issue. This paper develops a quantitative spatial equilibrium model incorporating cross-regional migration of heterogeneous labor to illuminate how municipal talent subsidies shape the spatial elasticity of heterogeneous labor supply and reconfigure skill distribution. It calibrates the model using 2020 city-level data in China and conducts counterfactual simulations to quantify the optimal talent subsidy rate, the improvement of heterogeneous labor welfare brought by different talent subsidy policy schemes, spatial skill distribution, and economic growth. The results show that labor migration responsiveness to subsidies exhibits significant spatial heterogeneity, jointly determined by municipal development objectives and skill complementarity. Critically, it demonstrates that excessive nationwide subsidy competitions impose net welfare losses by distorting spatial allocation efficiency. Instead, talent subsidies in emerging first-tier cities uniquely achieve synergy among three policy goals: stimulating economic growth, enhancing welfare for both skilled and unskilled workers, and promoting regional convergence, highlighting their pivotal role in efficient spatial policy design. The policy implication is to establish differentiated subsidy strategies matching the city tier. First-tier and new first-tier cities should focus on targeted subsidies to leverage agglomeration spillovers, while third- and fourth-tier cities should avoid blindly imitating high-monetary subsidies and instead enhance city attractiveness by improving infrastructure, increasing urban amenities, and reducing migration barriers to prevent resource misallocation risks.

关键词： 最优人才补贴比率,异质性劳动力空间分布,技能空间分布

参考文献

1 陈新明, 刘丰榕, 朱玉慧兰. “抢人大战”会推高城市房价吗?——基于“人才新政”的政策效应检验[J]. 管理现代化, 2020, (3).

2 段巍, 吴福象, 王明. 政策偏向、省会首位度与城市规模分布[J]. 中国工业经济, 2020, (4).

3 李小帆. 人地匹配视角下我国住宅用地供给的空间效率分析——兼论用地指标跨区域交易的作用[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2023, (5).

4 刘修岩, 李松林. 房价、迁移摩擦与中国城市的规模分布——理论模型与结构式估计[J]. 经济研究, 2017, (7).

5 邵朝对, 陈啟涛. 土地偏向、人才补贴和技能分布: 人地协同的最优空间政策[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2025, (3). DOI:10.13821/j.cnki.ceq.2025.03.08

6 徐恺, 彭晴, 李杰. 中国城市间不同技能劳动力的分布合理吗?——基于高、低技能劳动力互补的视角[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2024, (2).

7 徐邵军, 孙巍. 异质性劳动力流动、房价变动与要素价格扭曲[J]. 财经研究, 2022, (6). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.20220216.402

8 余明桂, 贺蒙蒙, 张萌萌. 人才引进政策、劳动力优化配置与制造业智能化[J]. 中国工业经济, 2024, (5).

9 张文武. 城市人才引进政策与高技能劳动力流动[J]. 统计研究, 2025, (6).

10 赵扶扬, 陈斌开. 土地的区域间配置与新发展格局——基于量化空间均衡的研究[J]. 中国工业经济, 2021, (8). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2021.08.006

11 郑代良, 钟书华. 高层次人才政策的演进历程及其中国特色[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2012, (13). DOI:10.6049/kjjbydc.2011040708

12 踪家峰, 周亮. 大城市支付了更高的工资吗?[J]. 经济学(季刊), 2015, (4). DOI:10.13821/j.cnki.ceq.2014.04.12

13 Aschauer D A. Does public capital crowd out private capital? [J]. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1989, 24(2): 171–188. DOI:10.1016/0304-3932(89)90002-0

14 Behrens K, Duranton T, Robert-Nicoud F. Productive cities: Sorting, selection, and agglomeration [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 2014, 122(3): 507–553. DOI:10.1086/675534

15 Bosker M, Deichmann U, Roberts M. Hukou and highways the impact of China’s spatial development policies on urbanization and regional inequality [J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 2018, 71: 91–109. DOI:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2018.05.007

16 Combes P P, Duranton G, Gobillon L. Spatial wage disparities: Sorting matters! [J]. Journal of Urban Economics, 2008, 63(2): 723–742. DOI:10.1016/j.jue.2007.04.004

17 Couture V, Handbury J. Urban revival in America [J]. Journal of Urban Economics, 2020, 119: 103267. DOI:10.1016/j.jue.2020.103267

18 Desmet K, Rossi-Hansberg E. Urban accounting and welfare [J]. American Economic Review, 2013, 103(6): 2296–2327. DOI:10.1257/aer.103.6.2296

19 Diamond R. The determinants and welfare implications of US workers’ diverging location choices by skill: 1980-2000 [J]. American Economic Review, 2016, 106(3): 479–524. DOI:10.1257/aer.20131706

20 Eeckhout J, Pinheiro R, Schmidheiny K. Spatial sorting [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 2014, 122(3): 554–620. DOI:10.1086/676141

21 Fajgelbaum P D, Gaubert C. Optimal spatial policies, geography, and sorting [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2020, 135(2): 959–1036. DOI:10.1093/qje/qjaa001

22 Hsieh C T, Moretti E. Housing constraints and spatial misallocation [J]. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2019, 11(2): 1–39. DOI:10.3386/w21154

23 Leeper E M, Walker T B, Yang S C S. Government investment and fiscal stimulus [J]. Journal of Monetary Economics, 2010, 57(8): 1000–1012. DOI:10.1016/j.jmoneco.2010.09.002

24 Ma L, Tang Y. Geography, trade, and internal migration in China [J]. Journal of Urban Economics, 2020, 115: 103181. DOI:10.1016/j.jue.2019.06.004

25 Ottaviano G I P, van Ypersele T. Market size and tax competition [J]. Journal of International Economics, 2005, 67(1): 25–46. DOI:10.1016/j.jinteco.2004.08.010

26 Rossi-Hansberg E, Sarte P D, Schwartzman F. Cognitive hubs and spatial redistribution[R]. Working Paper 26267, 2019.