外文翻譯--中國(guó)城市的人口和消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)查

1、<p><b>　　中文3440字</b></p><p>　　外文題目： Demographics and Consumption Patterns in Urban China </p><p>　　出 處：Population Rese

2、arch and Policy Review,2010,no.29 </p><p>　　作 者： Farhat Yusuf Gordon Brook </p><p>　　Demographics

3、and Consumption Patterns in Urban China</p><p>　　Farhat Yusuf Gordon Brook</p><p>　　Abstract：This study examines differences among urban Chinese consumers and their consumption patterns in thre

4、e major cities—Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin—utilising data from a nationally representative sample survey conducted in 2005. Differences were found in these consumers’ age distribution, education level, household compos

5、ition, birth and death rates, income, expenditure patterns and consumer durable ownership rates. Beijing and Shanghai, the two most affluent cities in China, exhibited the</p><p>　　Introduction</p>&l

6、t;p>　　The increasing prominence of China on the world stage is evident in many areas. In October 2003 they became only the third country to achieve manned space flight. August 2008 saw Beijing host the summer Olympic

7、Games. Economically, China is one of the largest and fastest growing consumer markets in the world. For example, its domestic market for consumer electronics (video, audio and game console products) and personal compute

8、rs is expected to be worth US$50 billion in 2011, having grown by 20%</p><p>　　Such research has tended to consider urban China as a homogeneous market segment, contrasting it with rural China (see e.g.: Cu

9、i and Liu 2000; Sun and Wu 2004; McEwan et al. 2006). Other researchers have examined the overall utility of urban versus rural segmentation (Yusuf et al. 2008) or particular products in the urban China market segment (D

10、ickson et al. 2004). Pursuing a different paradigm, Swanson (1989) and Cui and Liu (2000) examined geographic segmentation of China, not</p><p>　　differentiating between urban and rural consumers in each ge

11、ographic segment, to investigate regional differences. While these authors have examined the differences between regions, and the differences between urban and rural consumers, no research was found directly examining di

12、fferences between the urban Chinese consumers of different regions. This study is an attempt to fill this gap.</p><p>　　To address this research question, two objectives were formulated. First, to identify t

13、he consumption patterns of households in urban China as a whole, and three of its most important urban areas—the cities of Shanghai, Beijing and Tianjin. Shanghai is China’s commercial and financial hub, its largest cit

14、y and the locale with the highest GDP per capita. Beijing, being the capital, is the center of administration, culture and economic management. Tianjin is a typical city on the East coast of Ch</p><p>　　Cons

15、umption Patterns</p><p>　　Table 1 compares the per capita expenditure in each of the three cities with that in urban China. It is evident from the table that the overall cost of living in the three cities wa

16、s much higher than the national average; it was most expensive to live in Shanghai, followed by Beijing, and Tianjin was least expensive—though it was still 21% costlier than urban China as a whole. Of the 14 items list

17、ed in Table 4, there were 11 items in Shanghai, 10 in Beijing and only 2 in Tianjin where the expen</p><p>　　Table1 Relative per capita expenditure on broad item categories in Shanghai, Beijing and Tianjin r

18、egions compared to urban China, 2005.</p><p>　　It appears that apart from those living in Beijing who spent relatively less on food, the other two cities were very close to the national average for urban Chi

19、na. A larger proportion of the food budget was spent on dining out in Shanghai but even in Beijing and Tianjin this proportion was higher than the urban national average. Expenditure on liquor and beverages in these two

20、 cities was higher than in Shanghai, but their expenditure on tobacco was lower. On the other hand, while the proportion</p><p>　　Table2 Proportion of households’ total per capita expenditure on broad item c

21、ategories in urban China,Shanghai, Beijing and Tianjin regions, 2005.</p><p>　　It appears from Table 6 that for seven of these items (air conditioners, cameras, colour televisions, computers, refrigerators,

22、and video recorders) the three cities had higher ownership rates than the national average, for one (motor cycles), the three cities had lower ownership rates while for the remaining items the situation was somewhat mixe

23、d.</p><p>　　Bicycles were still the most common mode of transport in Beijing and Tianjin but not so in Shanghai. Beijing had the highest ownership of motor cars but Tianjin lagged behind the national average

24、. Electric fans were more common in Shanghai but in Beijing and Tianjin their usage was less than the national average. It may have something to do with the climate of Shanghai. Ownership of fax machines was highest in S

25、hanghai, but freezers were least popular there. Hi-fi stereo component systems and ph</p><p>　　The very high (more than one per household) ownership of air conditioners, colour televisions, mobile phones, re

26、frigerators, video disc players and washing machines but a very low rate for dishwashers is worth noting. The very low acceptance of dishwashers could well be due to cultural rather than economic reasons.</p><

27、p>　　Discussion</p><p>　　Following Cui and Liu’s (2000) regional segmentation, Shanghai is in East China, while both Beijing and Tianjin are in North China. If the regional basis is dominant, one could rea

28、sonably expect there to be greater similarity between the consumption patterns evident in the two North China cities than between the South China city and either of the North China cities. Alternately, consumption is gen

29、erally related to income, and may prove to be a more substantial variable than geographic region. If</p><p>　　Considering the data of Table 5, it is apparent that in terms of total per capita expenditure, fo

30、r four item categories (transport, communications, culture and recreation, and water, electricity and fuel) Beijing and Shanghai are similar, and substantially different to Tianjin. This would support the importance of i

31、ncome as a basis for segmentation. The same similarity can be seen between the two northern cities, Beijing and Tianjin, with regard to dining out, liquor and beverages, healthcare an</p><p>　　These findings

32、 do not allow the identification of a single definitive basis for differentiating Chinese urban consumer market segments. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, while the majority of findings suggest the importance of

33、economic-based segmentation, there are a substantial number of findings supporting geographic region-based segmentation, and so both factors are commended. Secondly, as cities from only three regions have been considered

34、 this does not provide sufficient evidence to </p><p>　　Conclusion</p><p>　　In conclusion, this paper has examined differences among urban Chinese consumers and their consumption in three major

35、cities. These consumers were found to differ in age distribution, education level, household composition, birth and death rates, income, expenditure patterns and consumer durable ownership rates. Differences were also f

36、ound in the cost of living in each of Shanghai, Beijing and Tianjin. These differences suggest that the urban China does not constitute a homogeneous market.</p><p>　　Further research is needed using the ind

37、ividual households’ records for an indepth analysis of the correlates of consumption behaviour. Such research could involve controlling for the confounding of and interrelationships between consumption levels and indepen

38、dent variables—demographic, socio-economic and geographic—using regression modeling and other statistical techniques.</p><p><b>　　譯 文：</b></p><p>　　中國(guó)城市的人口和消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)查</p><p&

39、gt;　　摘要：這項(xiàng)研究，調(diào)查了中國(guó)三個(gè)主要城市：北京、上海、天津的消費(fèi)者及他們的消費(fèi)模式的差異。利用我國(guó)2005年進(jìn)行的數(shù)據(jù)采集調(diào)查，從消費(fèi)者的年齡分布、 教育程度、 家庭組成、 出生和死亡率、 收入、 開支模式和耐用消費(fèi)品所有權(quán)中找到差異。主要以北京和上海，這兩個(gè)中國(guó)最富裕的城市中擁有耐用消費(fèi)品和生活費(fèi)用最高的消費(fèi)者的差異做比較。然而以前的研究，經(jīng)常利用農(nóng)村與城市二分法或利用中國(guó)地理區(qū)域分法進(jìn)行研究，這些研究提出中國(guó)的不同城市并不能

40、構(gòu)成一個(gè)均勻的市場(chǎng)?？偠灾?，本文提出地理區(qū)域和城鄉(xiāng)差異造成的收入差異是組成這一重要市場(chǎng)的基礎(chǔ)。</p><p><b>　　一、引言</b></p><p>　　中國(guó)在世界舞臺(tái)上的重要性在很多方面日益凸顯。2003 年 10 月中國(guó)成為了第三個(gè)實(shí)現(xiàn)載人航天飛行的國(guó)家。2008 年 8 月全世界見證了北京夏季奧運(yùn)會(huì)的成功。經(jīng)濟(jì)上，中國(guó)是世界上最大和增長(zhǎng)最快的消費(fèi)市場(chǎng)之

41、一，例如其國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)的消費(fèi)類電子產(chǎn)品 （視頻、 音頻和游戲控制臺(tái)產(chǎn)品） 和個(gè)人計(jì)算機(jī)預(yù)計(jì)將在 2011 年有500 億美元的規(guī)模，預(yù)計(jì)的根據(jù)是自2008 以后的 3 年中每年保持 20%的增長(zhǎng)率。至于經(jīng)濟(jì)結(jié)構(gòu)，相較于較早的共產(chǎn)主義時(shí)期，當(dāng)代中國(guó)的經(jīng)濟(jì)也正在迅速成為市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)。不過，這也給中國(guó)帶來了更多的收入不平等問題 （方等(2002)、 Khan和Riskin （2001）、孟等（2005））。2003 年，農(nóng)村人均純收入2622 元人民

42、幣，然而，那些生活在城市地區(qū)的人們卻有人均8472元人民幣的收入（2005中國(guó)年鑒）。鑒于城鎮(zhèn)居民有更大的財(cái)政權(quán)力，很多研究人員因此集中調(diào)查中國(guó)城鎮(zhèn)消費(fèi)者是可以理解的。這種研究已傾向于相較于農(nóng)村市場(chǎng)而言，將中國(guó)城市市場(chǎng)看做一個(gè)穩(wěn)定的市場(chǎng)（崔和劉（2000）、孫和吳（2004）McEwan 等（2006））。其他研究人員研究過將城市與農(nóng)村分割 （Yusu</p><p><b>　　二、消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)</

43、b></p><p>　　表 1 比較了這三個(gè)城市的每年的人均開支。很明顯這三個(gè)城市居民整體的生活費(fèi)用遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于全國(guó)平均水平 ；我們從表中看到上海的居住成本最高，北京第二，天津最便宜，盡管這仍是比整個(gè)中國(guó)城市的平均水平貴21%。</p><p>　　表1 2005年上海、北京、天津的人均開支和中國(guó)城市平均水平的比較</p><p>　　表 1 中所列的 14

44、 個(gè)項(xiàng)目中，開支達(dá)到或超過全國(guó)平均水平60%的，上海有11項(xiàng)，北京有10項(xiàng)，天津只有兩項(xiàng)。北京煙草的開支是唯一一項(xiàng)比全國(guó)平均水平低的項(xiàng)目，而在天津，居民花在衣服上的開支比全國(guó)平均水平低得多的同時(shí)花在煙草和通信上的錢和全國(guó)平均水平相當(dāng)。考慮到這三個(gè)城市的生活費(fèi)用遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于全國(guó)城市的平均水平，表 2將總支出分為各個(gè)項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行了比較。我們引進(jìn)中國(guó)城市總戶數(shù)的數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行比較。</p><p>　　表2 上海、北京、天津和全國(guó)其

45、他城市在家庭支出上各個(gè)項(xiàng)目所占的比例</p><p>　　可以看到除了那些住在北京的人花費(fèi)較少的錢在食物上，其他兩個(gè)城市在這方面的支出是非常接近于全國(guó)平均水平的。在上海，在餐廳吃飯占了食品支出的較大一塊，但即使在北京和天津，這一比例仍然高于全國(guó)城市平均水平。這兩個(gè)城市居民對(duì)酒及飲料開支是高于上海人的。但他們對(duì)煙草的開支較低。另一方面，雖然三個(gè)城市每年花在服裝上的開支比全國(guó)城市平均水平要低，但是他們?cè)诩彝ピO(shè)施和服務(wù)

46、上的開支所占比例較全國(guó)城市的平均水平是差不多的。在北京和天津，藥品和醫(yī)療服務(wù)占據(jù)了家庭預(yù)算的較大比例，但這一支出在上海就相對(duì)較少。交通運(yùn)輸?shù)拈_支占總開支的比重是北京跟上海最高，但是在天津，這一支出甚至低于全國(guó)平均水平。類似的情況還出現(xiàn)在教育，文化娛樂和休閑活動(dòng)的總支出上。雖然天津人在家庭住房方面花錢的比例方面最多，北京人最低，但是算人民幣的話就不是這樣了。和中國(guó)平均水平 RMB249 相比，在這三個(gè)城市房屋的平均開支上海、北京和天津分別

47、為 667，456和562。能源消耗品的開支在北京最低在天津最高。除了北京市可能有地方性的能源補(bǔ)貼法案外，沒有其他明顯的原因造成了這個(gè)差異。值得說明的是這兩個(gè)城市相距僅 100 公里，因此氣候差異不大可</p><p>　　從表 3 可以看到，有七個(gè)項(xiàng)目 （空調(diào)、 照相機(jī)、 彩色電視機(jī)、 計(jì)算機(jī)、 冰箱和錄像機(jī)），這三個(gè)城市的擁有率比全國(guó)城市平均水平多。只有一個(gè)項(xiàng)目(摩托車)， 這三個(gè)城市的平均擁有率低于國(guó)家平均

48、擁有率，其他項(xiàng)目則相對(duì)比較混亂。</p><p>　　表 3 2005年在上海、北京、天津和中國(guó)城市平均水平下每1000戶城鎮(zhèn)居民家庭擁有的主要耐用消費(fèi)品</p><p>　　在北京和天津，自行車仍然是最常見的交通工具，但是在上海則不是。北京擁有全國(guó)最多的汽車但天津落后于全國(guó)平均水平。家用電器在上海最多，但在北京和天津它們的使用低于全國(guó)平均水平。這可能是與上海的氣候有關(guān)。傳真機(jī)的所有權(quán)最

49、高的是上海，但在那里冰箱最不受歡迎。立體聲音響系統(tǒng)和電話 （移動(dòng)和固定） 在上海和北京更受歡迎，但天津落后于全國(guó)平均水平。鋼琴、 冰箱和視頻光盤播放器的擁有率，在這三個(gè)城市中出現(xiàn)了同樣的情況。</p><p>　　值得注意的是空調(diào)、 彩色電視機(jī)、 移動(dòng)電話、 冰箱、 視頻光盤播放器和洗衣機(jī)的擁有率很高 （超過每戶一個(gè)），但洗碗機(jī)的所有權(quán)卻很低的。極低的洗碗機(jī)使用率很可能是由于文化而不是經(jīng)濟(jì)上的原因。</p&

50、gt;<p><b>　　三、評(píng)論</b></p><p>　　根據(jù)崔和劉（2000）的區(qū)域分類，上海屬于我國(guó)東部地區(qū)，而北京和天津?qū)儆谥袊?guó)北部地區(qū)。如果區(qū)域分類是主要的，我們可以很合理地預(yù)測(cè)兩個(gè)中國(guó)北方城市的消費(fèi)模式明顯的比中國(guó)南方城市或者凡是不是北方的城市有更大的相似性。但是，消費(fèi)一般與收入有關(guān)，而且相對(duì)地理區(qū)域而言是個(gè)更大的變量。如果經(jīng)濟(jì)上的考慮是影響消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)的主要原因，

51、那么北京和上海，而不是北京和天津在消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)上有更大的相似性就更好解釋而且更合理了。</p><p>　　考慮到表 2 的數(shù)據(jù)，很明顯可以看到在所有人均開支方面，四項(xiàng)類別 （運(yùn)輸、 通訊、 文化及休閑、水，電力和燃料） 北京和上海是類似，和天津大大不同。這將支持收入作為區(qū)分基礎(chǔ)的理論。北京和天津這兩個(gè)北部城市在餐飲、 酒和飲料、醫(yī)療保健服務(wù)和教育方面可以看到有一定的相似性。這將支持地理區(qū)域不同作為區(qū)分基礎(chǔ)的理論。兩

52、個(gè)項(xiàng)目類別： 煙草和家庭用品和服務(wù)方面，上海和天津比北京與所有其他城市表現(xiàn)出更大相似性。其余四個(gè)項(xiàng)目不容易分類。我們?cè)倏幢?3 的數(shù)據(jù)，耐用消費(fèi)品擁有率方面，北京和上海在七個(gè)項(xiàng)目類別 （空調(diào)、 照相機(jī)、 計(jì)算機(jī)、 移動(dòng)和固網(wǎng)電話、 鋼琴和冰箱) 有更大相似性體現(xiàn)了收入對(duì)于消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)的重要性，雖然北京和天津在四個(gè)耐用消費(fèi)品擁有率方面 （自行車和電動(dòng)自行車、 電動(dòng)風(fēng)扇和冰箱）有更多類似支持了區(qū)域差別作為基礎(chǔ)特性的理論。在四項(xiàng)類別上(汽車、錄象

53、機(jī)、 洗碗機(jī)、 洗衣機(jī)）上海和天津表現(xiàn)出更大的相似性。</p><p>　　這些結(jié)果并不能定義中國(guó)城市消費(fèi)者消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)的不同。有兩個(gè)原因。第一，雖然大部分結(jié)果表明基于經(jīng)濟(jì)來區(qū)分的重要性，但還是有相當(dāng)多的調(diào)查結(jié)果支持基于地理區(qū)域的區(qū)分，所以兩種因素都應(yīng)該仍可。第二，只考慮三個(gè)不同地區(qū)的城市并不能提供足夠的證據(jù)表明區(qū)域區(qū)分沒有它的價(jià)值。要支持這一理論（指區(qū)域劃分是無意義的）就需要比這片文章更全面地審查各區(qū)域的不同城市。

54、所以更好的結(jié)論是，我們建議在區(qū)分中國(guó)城市消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)不同時(shí)，區(qū)域不同和經(jīng)濟(jì)變量都應(yīng)被考慮在內(nèi)。雖然崔和劉寫到“收入的明顯影響是體現(xiàn)在新型西方產(chǎn)品和奢侈品消費(fèi)上 ”(崔和劉第 66–67)，我們會(huì)進(jìn)一步建議，基于這項(xiàng)研究的結(jié)果，收入最起碼在影響消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu)方面與地理區(qū)域有著同樣大的影響。</p><p><b>　　四、總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　總而言之。本文調(diào)查了中國(guó)

55、三個(gè)主要城市的消費(fèi)者和他們的消費(fèi)差異。我們發(fā)現(xiàn)這些消費(fèi)者有不同的年齡分布、 教育程度、 家庭組成、 出生和死亡率、 收入、 開支模式和消耗品擁有率。同時(shí)上海、 北京和天津的生活費(fèi)用有很大差異。這些差異表明了中國(guó)的城市并不構(gòu)成一個(gè)均勻的市場(chǎng)。需要利用不同的個(gè)別家庭的消費(fèi)行為作進(jìn)一步研究。這種研究可能涉及到消費(fèi)水平作為獨(dú)立變量和其他變量之間的相互關(guān)系，比如人口、 社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)和地理，這需要使用回歸建模和其他</p><p&g