基于区域差距的教育投资效率研究
|
摘要
改革开放以来,我国教育事业进入快速发展时期,基础教育、职业教育、高等教育发展迅速,教育投资水平从远远低于国际平均水平逐渐提高,目前已经接近同等发达程度国家的平均水平。随着教育发展速度的加快、水平的提高,教育对地区经济、文化、社会发展的作用开始显现。分析中国区域的发展状态和发展趋势,大量经验表明,经济的持续发展不能单纯依靠区域的土地、矿产资源等自然条件,教育的发展将为后发展地区的追赶提供基础、创造可能。党的十七大以来,中央一直坚持以科学发展观为指导,坚持全面、协调、可持续发展,并将人才强国战略与科教兴国战略、可持续发展战略放到同等高度。基于此,我们认为提高区域教育投资水平将是促进区域经济协调发展、缩小区域经济差距的重要方式。考虑中国区域间发展的不平衡因素中,教育投资差距过大是制约后发展地区经济可持续发展的重要原因,所以,如何在进一步促进经济增长的同时,缩小区域教育投资差距是我国全面建设小康社会,建设科学发展的、具有中国特色社会主义国家所要面临的重要课题,是实现中华民族伟大复兴、实现国人梦想所需要的强力手段。
本文的研究思路是基于有关区域教育投资的基本理论,如人力资本理论、教育投资主体多元化等分析中国区域人均教育投资差距的演变过程。通过构建动力学模型测算出区域教育投资的效率水平并分析决定区域教育投资差距的主要因素。在此基础上,依据“公平与效率共同提高”的原则,把区域人均教育投资和政府教育投资比例的状态模型结合起来,从控制论的角度设计优化我国区域教育投资结构、缩小区域教育投资差距和提高区域教育投资效率的方案,从而提出相应的政策措施。论文的主要研究结论如下：
(1)刻画了区域教育投资差距(公平问题)的动态演化路径
采用变异系数和泰尔指数分析中国区域人均教育投资差距的演进表明：1998年以后,地区间人均教育投资的相对差距在缩小,但绝对差距在增大,变异系数呈“倒U型分布”,而2002-2004年是中国区域人均教育投资差距变化的“转折点”(“倒U型分布”的拐点)。通过变异系数的分析,1998年到2002年之间,变异系数逐渐增高,到2002年达到0.772(最高),从2004年开始明显下降,到2008年下降到0.3；考虑泰尔指数,1996年的泰尔指数为0.09,而后呈总体上升趋势,2001年到2004年均为0.12,2006年达到最高值为0.178,而后开始下降,到2008年降为0.146。
基于变异系数“倒U型分布”形态,本文构建了两个阶段(1998年至2004年,2005年至2010年)的区域人均教育投资差距(公平问题)的动态演化模型。考虑区域教育投资对教育发展促进作用的相对滞后性因素,利用中国各区域教育投资的相关数据构建区域教育投资模型发现,区域教育投资增长率与初始教育投资的对数呈负相关,而与地区生产总值增长率、财政教育经费增长率呈正相关。说明在1998年以后,特别是本世纪以来,中国各地区教育投资的相对差距正在缩小,开始出现β条件趋同现象,主要原因是西部大开发等政策驱动和投资体制变迁的结果。
(2)构建区域教育投资效率的DEA模型评价教育投资效率
本文从区域教育系统的投入——产出视角,将投入指标设定为“国家财政教育经费”、“社会捐资和集资办学经费”等；将产出指标设定为“中小学在校生数”、“高校在校生数”等,分析各地区教育投资效率。采用数据包络分析(DEA)方法的研究表明,从区域整体上看,东南沿海地区教育投资效率相对最低,而中、西部地区教育投资效率相对比较高。就投资体制和经费来源比较分析,“社会捐资和集资办学经费”的相对损失率最高,“其他教育经费”、“社会团体和公民个人办学经费”的相对损失率次之,“国家财政教育经费”相对损失率最低。
构建区域教育投资效率与投资体制(国家财政教育投资占教育投资总额的比例、学费和学杂费占教育投资总额的比例)、在校大学生占区域学生总数的比例、区域教职工人均工资占上海教职工人均工资比例的关系模型显示,国家财政教育投资占教育经费总额的比例、高校在校本科生人数占全部在校生人数的比例、区域教职工人均工资水平等因素都直接影响区域教育投资效率。其中,区域教职工平均工资占比越大,教育投资效率越低。
(3)在“效率与公平共同提高”的原则下对区域教育投资进行优化控制
本文尊重教育投资的“效率与公平”谁更重要的历史争论,提出“效率与公平共同提高”的原则。并把“效率与公平共同提高”的原则量化为目标函数,以效率和人均在校生数为控制变量,建立人均教育投资的状态方程,并引入哈密顿函数,从而确定各区域人均在校生数、大学生占全部学生的比例、投资效率等之间长期公平的优化关系的控制规则。根据这一规则,在对高等教育的社会需求日益提高的情况下,即“在校大学生占全部在校生的比例”不断提高的情况下,要促进效率与公平共同提高,就必须把缩小区域教育投资差距(提高教育公平程度)与“区域教育投资效率”保持在较高的水平上或不断同步提高。这对指导不同区域优化教育投资具有重要意义。
(4)完善区域教育投资“公平与效率”的同步提高趋势
随着区域经济布局调整和经济发展方式的转变,高校毕业生的就业环境明显改善。这种发展趋势对区域教育产生了更大的需求,从而反作用于区域教育投资的快速增长。中、西部地区经济的增长速度已经高于东部地区,这为加快中、西部地区财政教育投资创造了良好的条件。中央教育财政向中、西部地区的倾斜,以及教育制度和教育体制、机制的进一步改革与完善,将促使区域教育投资“公平与效率”的同步提高。
Regional development experience at home and abroad shows that:A regional is difficult to maintain sustained economic development by relying on land, mineral resources and other natural conditions, and the development of education provides the the basis for pursuing for the latecomer regions.Thus improving the regional education investment in China is one of the most important way to promote the coordinated development of the regional economy, reduce regional economic gap. How to further promote economic growth, at the same time, reducing regional education investment gap is currently one of the important problems facing China.
This study is based on the ideas of human capital theory, education investment diversification and other basic theories of relevant regional education investment,analysis of evolution process of Chinese regional education investment gap, by constructing dynamic model to analyze and decide the main factors of the regional education investment gap, and work out regional education investment efficiency.On this basis, according to the principle of "justice and efficiency" common enhancement, area per capita education investment and government investment proportion of state model combined, from the point of view of cybernetics to design China optimization of regional education investment layout, narrowing regional education investment gap scheme, and put forward the corresponding policies and measures.
(1) Modeling analysis of the evolution and the determinants of Chinese area per capita education investment difference
This paper analyzes the evolution of China's regional differences in investment in education by using variation coefficient and Theil coefficient.Studies have shown that the absolute gap in China's per capita investment in education has extended while the relative gap has narrowed in recent years. Theil index and variation coefficient have "inverted U-distribution" and the "inflection point"("inverted U-distribution" a turning point) of the gap between regional changes of China's per capita investment in education is from2002to2006.
From the variation coefficient, the coefficient of variation in2002achieves the highest (0.722). and then began to decline in2008, reduced to0.3; From tyer coefficient, the tyer coefficient in1996is0.09, and then have an ascendant trend on the whole, reaching the highest (0.178) in2006, and then began to decline in2008. reduced to0.146.
Different with previous research, this paper built a dynamic evolution model.with a two stage (from1998to2004.from2005to2010) of regional differences (fairness)in per capita education investment.This paper builds a model of investment in regional education by using the relevant data of the investment in education in various regions of China.Studies have shown that the growth rate of investment in regional education has negative correlation with the number of initial investment in education and has positive correlation with regional GDP growth and growth rate of fiscal spending on education. This shows that since1998, especially after2000, the gap in various parts of China's investment in education has been narrowed and has been began to appear β condition for convergence, these are the results of developing the western region and changing in the investment system.The development of the western region, revitalizing northeast, the rise of central over the years, all over the country per capita education investment has grow very fast, and backward areas per capita education investment growth faster, thus began to appear around the per capita education investment trend of convergence, this basical reason is that after the development of the western region, the central financial tilt and western local finance for education investment is growing rapidly, as well as the western non-governmental folk investment (including social groups and individual education, education funding, miscellaneous fees, etc.) grows rapidly and other reasons.
(2) China's regional education investment efficiency of data envelopment analysis (DEA) about model and system factor analysis
Different with previous research, this paper, this paper analyzes the using efficient of education investment in every region by using data envelopment analysis method from the input-output angle while taking "state financial funding for education""community donors and fund-raising school funding" as input index and "a number of college students" as the output index. Studies have shown that relative using efficiency of the spending on education in the southeast coastal areas is the lowest while it is relatively high in central and western regions.
Just in comparison with investment system and funding sources, relative loss rate of education investment in every region, social donations and fund-raising school funding are the highest and other funds for education, social organizations and individual citizens follow one by one while the state financial education fund is the lowest. And using econometric software relevant data to construct regional education investment efficiency and investment system (tuition and miscellaneous fees accounted for the proportion of the total education investment) model. To discuss.Education investment system and the market factors on the education investment efficiency influence with distinguishing three kinds factors.
(3) The Analysis on Optimal Control of the education investment of Chinese Regional based on the principle of "efficiency and fair improve together"
It has many debates about education investment efficiency and fair which is more important problem.It is "absolutely fair" before reform and opening up, it is "efficiency comes first, balances fairness" since the reform and opening up; For in the future, some scholars put forward that it should be "fair priority, and giving consideration to efficiency" other scholars also put forward that it should be "fair and efficiency phase equilibrium". This paper argues that it should take the policy of "efficiency and fair improve together"
In this way, the principle of the efficiency and fair improve together is quantized as the objective function, efficiency and the per capita number of students as control variable, the establishment of per capita education investment and government education investment accounted for the proportion of all education into the equation of state, and introducing Hamilton function, so as to determine the long-term equilibrium between the optimal control of the relationship of the area per capita student number, college students accounted for the proportion of all students, investment efficiency, and so on.
The rules require, in increasing social demand about the higher education cases, namely " the proportion that college students accounted for all students" improving circumstances, it is necessary to put the narrowing regional education gap (improve education fair degree) and "regional education investment efficiency" keep at higher level or improve synchronous. It is important instruction significance to guide the optimization of education investment provinces.
(4) Increasing at the same trend of the fairness and efficiency of regional investment in education
With the evolution of the regional economy layout and the shift from extensive to intensive type of the mode of economic development (the improvement of proportion of knowledge-intensive industries and so on). the employment environment of college graduates will change greatly, and the demand of Regional Education is becoming large, thus stimulating the rapid growth of the regional investment in education;On the other hand, the economic growth rate in the Midwest region will be higher than the eastern region, and the growth of fiscal revenue will also be higher than the eastern region, which provides good conditions to accelerate the Midwest Regional financial investment in education. Central Education Finance tilt to the central and western regions, as well as the education system and the education system, further reform and improve the mechanism, which will simultaneously improve the fairness and efficiency of the regional education investment.
本文的研究思路是基于有关区域教育投资的基本理论,如人力资本理论、教育投资主体多元化等分析中国区域人均教育投资差距的演变过程。通过构建动力学模型测算出区域教育投资的效率水平并分析决定区域教育投资差距的主要因素。在此基础上,依据“公平与效率共同提高”的原则,把区域人均教育投资和政府教育投资比例的状态模型结合起来,从控制论的角度设计优化我国区域教育投资结构、缩小区域教育投资差距和提高区域教育投资效率的方案,从而提出相应的政策措施。论文的主要研究结论如下：
(1)刻画了区域教育投资差距(公平问题)的动态演化路径
采用变异系数和泰尔指数分析中国区域人均教育投资差距的演进表明：1998年以后,地区间人均教育投资的相对差距在缩小,但绝对差距在增大,变异系数呈“倒U型分布”,而2002-2004年是中国区域人均教育投资差距变化的“转折点”(“倒U型分布”的拐点)。通过变异系数的分析,1998年到2002年之间,变异系数逐渐增高,到2002年达到0.772(最高),从2004年开始明显下降,到2008年下降到0.3；考虑泰尔指数,1996年的泰尔指数为0.09,而后呈总体上升趋势,2001年到2004年均为0.12,2006年达到最高值为0.178,而后开始下降,到2008年降为0.146。
基于变异系数“倒U型分布”形态,本文构建了两个阶段(1998年至2004年,2005年至2010年)的区域人均教育投资差距(公平问题)的动态演化模型。考虑区域教育投资对教育发展促进作用的相对滞后性因素,利用中国各区域教育投资的相关数据构建区域教育投资模型发现,区域教育投资增长率与初始教育投资的对数呈负相关,而与地区生产总值增长率、财政教育经费增长率呈正相关。说明在1998年以后,特别是本世纪以来,中国各地区教育投资的相对差距正在缩小,开始出现β条件趋同现象,主要原因是西部大开发等政策驱动和投资体制变迁的结果。
(2)构建区域教育投资效率的DEA模型评价教育投资效率
本文从区域教育系统的投入——产出视角,将投入指标设定为“国家财政教育经费”、“社会捐资和集资办学经费”等；将产出指标设定为“中小学在校生数”、“高校在校生数”等,分析各地区教育投资效率。采用数据包络分析(DEA)方法的研究表明,从区域整体上看,东南沿海地区教育投资效率相对最低,而中、西部地区教育投资效率相对比较高。就投资体制和经费来源比较分析,“社会捐资和集资办学经费”的相对损失率最高,“其他教育经费”、“社会团体和公民个人办学经费”的相对损失率次之,“国家财政教育经费”相对损失率最低。
构建区域教育投资效率与投资体制(国家财政教育投资占教育投资总额的比例、学费和学杂费占教育投资总额的比例)、在校大学生占区域学生总数的比例、区域教职工人均工资占上海教职工人均工资比例的关系模型显示,国家财政教育投资占教育经费总额的比例、高校在校本科生人数占全部在校生人数的比例、区域教职工人均工资水平等因素都直接影响区域教育投资效率。其中,区域教职工平均工资占比越大,教育投资效率越低。
(3)在“效率与公平共同提高”的原则下对区域教育投资进行优化控制
本文尊重教育投资的“效率与公平”谁更重要的历史争论,提出“效率与公平共同提高”的原则。并把“效率与公平共同提高”的原则量化为目标函数,以效率和人均在校生数为控制变量,建立人均教育投资的状态方程,并引入哈密顿函数,从而确定各区域人均在校生数、大学生占全部学生的比例、投资效率等之间长期公平的优化关系的控制规则。根据这一规则,在对高等教育的社会需求日益提高的情况下,即“在校大学生占全部在校生的比例”不断提高的情况下,要促进效率与公平共同提高,就必须把缩小区域教育投资差距(提高教育公平程度)与“区域教育投资效率”保持在较高的水平上或不断同步提高。这对指导不同区域优化教育投资具有重要意义。
(4)完善区域教育投资“公平与效率”的同步提高趋势
随着区域经济布局调整和经济发展方式的转变,高校毕业生的就业环境明显改善。这种发展趋势对区域教育产生了更大的需求,从而反作用于区域教育投资的快速增长。中、西部地区经济的增长速度已经高于东部地区,这为加快中、西部地区财政教育投资创造了良好的条件。中央教育财政向中、西部地区的倾斜,以及教育制度和教育体制、机制的进一步改革与完善,将促使区域教育投资“公平与效率”的同步提高。
Regional development experience at home and abroad shows that:A regional is difficult to maintain sustained economic development by relying on land, mineral resources and other natural conditions, and the development of education provides the the basis for pursuing for the latecomer regions.Thus improving the regional education investment in China is one of the most important way to promote the coordinated development of the regional economy, reduce regional economic gap. How to further promote economic growth, at the same time, reducing regional education investment gap is currently one of the important problems facing China.
This study is based on the ideas of human capital theory, education investment diversification and other basic theories of relevant regional education investment,analysis of evolution process of Chinese regional education investment gap, by constructing dynamic model to analyze and decide the main factors of the regional education investment gap, and work out regional education investment efficiency.On this basis, according to the principle of "justice and efficiency" common enhancement, area per capita education investment and government investment proportion of state model combined, from the point of view of cybernetics to design China optimization of regional education investment layout, narrowing regional education investment gap scheme, and put forward the corresponding policies and measures.
(1) Modeling analysis of the evolution and the determinants of Chinese area per capita education investment difference
This paper analyzes the evolution of China's regional differences in investment in education by using variation coefficient and Theil coefficient.Studies have shown that the absolute gap in China's per capita investment in education has extended while the relative gap has narrowed in recent years. Theil index and variation coefficient have "inverted U-distribution" and the "inflection point"("inverted U-distribution" a turning point) of the gap between regional changes of China's per capita investment in education is from2002to2006.
From the variation coefficient, the coefficient of variation in2002achieves the highest (0.722). and then began to decline in2008, reduced to0.3; From tyer coefficient, the tyer coefficient in1996is0.09, and then have an ascendant trend on the whole, reaching the highest (0.178) in2006, and then began to decline in2008. reduced to0.146.
Different with previous research, this paper built a dynamic evolution model.with a two stage (from1998to2004.from2005to2010) of regional differences (fairness)in per capita education investment.This paper builds a model of investment in regional education by using the relevant data of the investment in education in various regions of China.Studies have shown that the growth rate of investment in regional education has negative correlation with the number of initial investment in education and has positive correlation with regional GDP growth and growth rate of fiscal spending on education. This shows that since1998, especially after2000, the gap in various parts of China's investment in education has been narrowed and has been began to appear β condition for convergence, these are the results of developing the western region and changing in the investment system.The development of the western region, revitalizing northeast, the rise of central over the years, all over the country per capita education investment has grow very fast, and backward areas per capita education investment growth faster, thus began to appear around the per capita education investment trend of convergence, this basical reason is that after the development of the western region, the central financial tilt and western local finance for education investment is growing rapidly, as well as the western non-governmental folk investment (including social groups and individual education, education funding, miscellaneous fees, etc.) grows rapidly and other reasons.
(2) China's regional education investment efficiency of data envelopment analysis (DEA) about model and system factor analysis
Different with previous research, this paper, this paper analyzes the using efficient of education investment in every region by using data envelopment analysis method from the input-output angle while taking "state financial funding for education""community donors and fund-raising school funding" as input index and "a number of college students" as the output index. Studies have shown that relative using efficiency of the spending on education in the southeast coastal areas is the lowest while it is relatively high in central and western regions.
Just in comparison with investment system and funding sources, relative loss rate of education investment in every region, social donations and fund-raising school funding are the highest and other funds for education, social organizations and individual citizens follow one by one while the state financial education fund is the lowest. And using econometric software relevant data to construct regional education investment efficiency and investment system (tuition and miscellaneous fees accounted for the proportion of the total education investment) model. To discuss.Education investment system and the market factors on the education investment efficiency influence with distinguishing three kinds factors.
(3) The Analysis on Optimal Control of the education investment of Chinese Regional based on the principle of "efficiency and fair improve together"
It has many debates about education investment efficiency and fair which is more important problem.It is "absolutely fair" before reform and opening up, it is "efficiency comes first, balances fairness" since the reform and opening up; For in the future, some scholars put forward that it should be "fair priority, and giving consideration to efficiency" other scholars also put forward that it should be "fair and efficiency phase equilibrium". This paper argues that it should take the policy of "efficiency and fair improve together"
In this way, the principle of the efficiency and fair improve together is quantized as the objective function, efficiency and the per capita number of students as control variable, the establishment of per capita education investment and government education investment accounted for the proportion of all education into the equation of state, and introducing Hamilton function, so as to determine the long-term equilibrium between the optimal control of the relationship of the area per capita student number, college students accounted for the proportion of all students, investment efficiency, and so on.
The rules require, in increasing social demand about the higher education cases, namely " the proportion that college students accounted for all students" improving circumstances, it is necessary to put the narrowing regional education gap (improve education fair degree) and "regional education investment efficiency" keep at higher level or improve synchronous. It is important instruction significance to guide the optimization of education investment provinces.
(4) Increasing at the same trend of the fairness and efficiency of regional investment in education
With the evolution of the regional economy layout and the shift from extensive to intensive type of the mode of economic development (the improvement of proportion of knowledge-intensive industries and so on). the employment environment of college graduates will change greatly, and the demand of Regional Education is becoming large, thus stimulating the rapid growth of the regional investment in education;On the other hand, the economic growth rate in the Midwest region will be higher than the eastern region, and the growth of fiscal revenue will also be higher than the eastern region, which provides good conditions to accelerate the Midwest Regional financial investment in education. Central Education Finance tilt to the central and western regions, as well as the education system and the education system, further reform and improve the mechanism, which will simultaneously improve the fairness and efficiency of the regional education investment.
引文
[1]Caudill S. Estimating a mixture of stochastic frontier models via the EM algorithm: A multiproduct cost function application[J]. Empirical Economics,2003,28 (3) 581-598.
[2]Johnes G. A fourth desideratum:The CES cost function and the sustainable configuration of multiproduct firms[J]. Bulletin of Economic Research,2004,56 (4):329-332.
[3]Johnes G., Johnes J., Thanassoulis E., Lenton P., & Emrouznejad A. An exploratory analysis of the cost structure of higher education in England[J]. London:Department for Education and Skills Research Report,2005:641-651.
[4]董银果,郝立芳.中国教育投资回报率度量的关键问题探析[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版)2011,37(1)：115-191.
[5]赵志华,吴长莉,赵晓兰.企业对高等教育投资的收益分析[J].河北师范大学学报(教育科学版),2011,13(5)：97-100.
[6]史万兵,赵士谦.荷兰高等教育投资绩效评价制度的经验与启示[J].大连理工大学学报社会科版),2011,32 (3)：67-70.
[7]庄浩.高等教育投资泡沫化研究[J].吉林工程技术师范学院学报,2011,27(6)：5052.
[8]易莹莹.个人教育投资的风险收益测度[J].南京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2011,13(2)：47-52.
[9]Mun C. Tsang and Yanqing Ding. Resource Utilization and Disparities in Compulsory Education in China[J]. China Review,2005, (1).-20-47
[10]郑丽琳.教育投资对经济增长影响程度的区域差异[J].重庆工商大学学报 (西部论坛),2006,16(2)：60-62.
[11]Min-Dong Paul Lee. Widening Gap of Educational Opportunity? A Longitudinal Study of Educational Inequality in China[R]. Research Paper.2006, (6).
[12]傅晓霞,吴丽梅.中国地区教育差异剔析[J].唐山师范学院学报,2007,29(3)：123-126.
[13]钟宇平,陆根书.论中国公共教育资源配置的公平问题[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),1999,19(2)：56-61.
[14]陈赟.关于我国教育投入研究：总量、结构及地区差异[J].荆门职业技术学院学报,2007,(1)：31-36.
[15]祁型雨.区域教育发展的差异与教育政策的宏观调控[J].教育评论,1999,(6)：4-7.
[16]Lihong Huang. Elitism and Equality in Chinese Higher Education:Studies of Student Socio-economic Background[J]. Investment in Education and Career Aspirations.2005.
[17]刘精明.高等教育扩展与入学机会差异：1978—2003[J].社会,2006,26(3)：158-209.
[18]Garcia-Penalosa C., Walde K. Efficiency and equity effects of subsidies to higher education[J]. Oxf. Econ. Pap.2000,52 (4):702-722.
[19]Jacobs B., van der Ploeg F. Guide to reform of higher education:a European perspective[J]. Econ. Policy,2006,21 (47):535-592.
[20]Gupta S., Verhoeven M. The efficiency of government expenditure Experiences from Africa[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2001,23 (4):433-467.
[21]Richard Ashford, Shampa Biswas. International Journal of Educational Development,2010, 30:481-487.
[22]Ingvild Almas, Alexander W. Cappelen, Jo Thori Lind, Erik (?). S(?)rensen, Bertil Tungodden. Measuring unfair equality[J]. Journal of Public Economics,2011,95 (7-8):488-499.
[23]Perelman S., Santin D. Measuring educational efficiency at student level with parametric stochastic distance functions:An application to Spanish PISA results[J]. Education Economics,2011,19 (1):29-49.
[24]De Fraja G., Reverse discrimination and efficiency in education[J]. International Economic Review,2005,46 (3):1009-1031.
[25]Litao Zhao. Between local community and central state:Financing basic education in China[J]. International Journal of Educational Development,2009,29 (4):366-373.
[26]傅毓维,邵争艳.Malmquist(?)指数在评价中国区域高等教育资源配置变化中的应用[J].技术经济,2006,2：93-95.
[27]杨雅清,高志军,李景春.论优化区域高等教育结构与资源配置的途径[J].河北科技师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,(4)：8-11.
[28]张宗海.试论区域高等教育发展战略的规划[J].教育研究,2006,(9)：122-124.
[29]任雪莲,伊继东.区域高等教育均衡发展初探[J].高等教育研究,2006,22(4)：38-42.
[30]高峰.我国高等教育布局的问题与对策[J].现代教育科学,2003,6：85-86.
[31]颜莉冰.高等教育资源的区域公平性研究[J].高教探索,2005,5：33-36.
[32]周仲高,傅艺.区域教育人口与经济的分布特征与联动模式——以浙江省为例[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(6)：68-94.
[33]唐忠旺,刘兴旺,吴启茂.湖南高等教育区域分布特点探析[J].当代教育论坛.2008, (2)34-37.
[34]赵宏斌,刘念才,梁妮,苗招娣.我国高校的区域分布研究：基于人口、GDP的视角[J].高等教育研究,2007,28(1)：43-49.
[35]Barr N., Crawford I. Financing higher education:Answers from the UK[J].. London/New York:Routledge.,2005.
[36]Baum S., Schwartz S. How much debt is too much? Defining bench-marks for manageable student debt[J]. Washington DC, USA:The Project on Student Debt and The College Board, 2006.
[37]Chapman B. Income contingent loans for higher education:Inter-national reforms[J]. In E. A. Hanushek & F. Welch Eds., Handbook of the economics of education.2006: 1435-1503, Elsevier.
[38]Belzil C., Leonardi M. Can risk aversion explain schooling attainments? Evidence from Italy [J]. Labour Economics,2007,14 (6):957-970.
[39]Hartog J., Serrano L. D. Earnings risk and demand for higher education:A cross-section test for Spain[J]. Journal of Applied Economics, X (2007),1-28.
[40]Andersson F., Konrad K. A. Globalization and risky human-capital investment[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2003,10 (3):211-228.
[41]Santosh Mehrotra. The cost and financing of the right to education in India:Can we fill the financing gap? [J]. International Journal of Educational Development,2012,32: 65-71.
[42]Napel S., Schneider A. Intergenerational talent transmission, inequality and social mobility[J]. Economics Letters,2008,99 (2):405-409.
[43]Vandenberghe V., Debande 0. Refinancing Europe's higher education through deferred and income-contingent fees:an empirical assessment using Belgian, German& UK data [J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2008,24:364-386.
[44]Chapman B., Leigh A. Do very high tax rates induce bunching? Implications for the design of income contingent loan schemes[J]. Econ. Rec.,2009,85 (270):276-289.
[45]Cigno A., Luporini A. Scholarships or student loans? Subsidizing higher education in the presence of moral hazard[J]. J. Public Econ. Theory,2009,11 (1) 55-87.
[46]Chapman B., Lounkaew K. Income contingent student loans for Thailand:Alternatives compared [J]. Economics of Education Review,2010,29 (5):695-709.
[47]Chapman B., Lounkaew K., Polsiri P., Sarachitti R., Sitthipongpanich T. Thailand's Student Loans Fund:Interest rate subsidies and repayment burdens[J]. Economics of Education Review,2010,29 (5):685-694.
[48]Elena Del Rey, Maria Racionero. Financing schemes for higher education[J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2010,26:104-113
[49]Nicolae Todeaa, Doina Maria Tileab. Comparative analysis between the models for financing of education in Romania and the United Kingdom[J]. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,2011,15:717-721.
[50]Migali G., Walker I. Estimates of the causal effects of education on earnings over the lifecycle with cohort effects and endogenous education[J]. Lancaster University Working Paper Series,2011.
[51]Godofsky J., Zukin C., Van Horn C. Unfulfilled expectations:Recent college graduates struggle in a troubled economy [J]. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Rutgers University,2011.
[52]Giuseppe Migali, Funding higher education and wage uncertainty:Income contingent loan versus mortgage loan[J]. Economics of Education Review,2012,31:871-889.
[53]Justman M., Thisse, J.-F. Local public funding of higher education when skilled labor is imperfectly mobile[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2000,7 (3):247-258.
[54]Jung H., Thorbecke. The impact of public education expenditure on human capital, growth and poverty in Tanzania and Zambia:A general equilibrium approach [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2003,25 (8):701-725. 55] Hanushek E. The failure of input-based school ing policios[J]. The Economic Journal, 2003,113 (485):64-98.
[56]Poutvaara P. Educating Europe:should public education be financed with graduate taxes or income-contingent loans [J]. CESifo Economic Studies,2004,50 (4):663-684.
[57]Grimm M. Educational policies and poverty reduction in Cote d' Ivoire[J].. Journal of Policy Modeling,2005,27 (2):231-247.
[58]Konrad K., Spadaro A. Education redistributive taxation and confidence [J]. Journal of Public Economics,2006,90 (1-2):171-188.
[59]Betts J., Roemer J. Equalizing opportunity for racial and socioeconomic groups in the United States through educational finance reform[J]. In P. Peterson (Ed.), Schools and the equal opportunity problem. MIT Press,2007.
[60]Waltenberg F. Vandenberghe V. What does it take to achieve equality of opportunity in education An empirical investigation based on Brazilian data[J]. Economics of Education Review,2007,26 (6):710-724.
[61]Roemer J. Equality of opportunity [R]. In S. Durlauf & L. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics. Palgrave Macmillan,2008.
[62]Dearden L., Fitzsimons E., Goodman A., Kaplan G. Higher education funding reforms in England:The distributional effects and the shifting balance of costs[J]. Economic Journal,2008,118 (526):100-125.
[63]Migali G. Effort, default and alternative higher education funding schemes in essays in public economics[J]. Ph.D. thesis. UK:Warwick University,2008.
[64]Haupt A., Janeba E. Education redistribution and the threat of brain drain[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2009,16:1-24.
[65]Andrea Schneider. Redistributive taxation vs. education subsidies:Fostering equality and social mobility in an intergenerational model[J]. Economics of Education Review, 2010,29 (4):597-605.
[66]Di Gioacchino D., Sabani L. Education policy and inequality:a political economy approach [J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2009,25 (4):463-478.
[67]Patrizia Ordinea, Giuseppe Roseb. The supply of education quality in a spatial model with asymmetric moving costs[J]. Research in Economics,2008,62 (4):197-214.
[68]Panu Poutvaara. The expansion of higher education and time-consistent taxation[J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2011,27, (2):257-267.
[69]李真,李全生.高等教育投资的现状分析及其改革[J].北京化工大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2)：61-64.
[70]郭常亮,欧阳有旺.高等教育资金来源多元化的理性思考[J].价格月刊,2005(12)：30-31.
[71]李永宁.高等教育投资体制变迁与高校财务管理职能的扩展[J].事业会计,2006,(6)：7-11.
[72]张振,邢家合.如何完善我国高等教育投融资体制[M].商业时代,2006,30：5960.
[73]江洋.欧盟根据33个国家现状提出高教经费改革新建议[J].中国教育报,2010年8月17日第3版：59-60.
[74]徐国成,徐充.人力资本理论与我国教育投资战略新探[J].长春工程学院学报(社会科学版) 2008,9(3)：40-42.
[75]马娴.人力资本理论与教育投资问题新探[J].云南师范大学学报,2004,36(2)：72-75.
[76]李亚萍,张涛.军事教育投资效益浅析[J].军事经济研究,2009,9：9-11.
[77]孙江涛.我国高等教育投资体制政策历史回顾、价值分析及启示[J].高教研究,2009,1：29-31.
[78]董银果,郝立芳.中国教育投资回报率度量的关键问题探析[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版)2011,37(1).
[79]娄成武,史万兵编著.教育经济与管理[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[80]元剑.从教育产品的融合属性看政府投资教育的理论依据与政策选择[J].教育与管理,2008,(10)：6-8.
[81]古宏伟.转轨时期中国中低收入家庭教育投资分析[M].北京：中国金融出版社,2009.
[82]陈志伟.浅析教育投资的生产性与消费性[J].全国贸易经济类核心期刊,2009,33：65.
[83]甘国华.高等教育成本分担研究[J].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2007.
[84]张子照.我国教育投资主体元化的理论与实践[J].理工高教研究,2003,22(2)：27-29.
[85]国家教育部,国家统计局.全国教育经费执行情况统计公告,2001-2012.
[86]王祖林.中国高等教育投资主体多元化理论探索[J].民办教育研究,2009,(9)：7-10.
[87]唐睿迪,信托计划：起点稍高的教育投资[J].大众理财,2009.11(11)：60.
[88]何秀超.美国教育投资体系现状与政策[J].光明日报,2005,(8)：1-2.
[89][美]埃尔查南.科恩,特雷.G.盖斯克著.范元伟译.教育经济学[M].上海：人民出版社,2009.
[90]李幸福.我国高等教育“过度”现象的经济学分析[J].平顶山学院学报,2008,(10)：123-126.
[91]邹小华.高等教育过度及其化解.南昌大学学报(人文社会科学版).2008,(3)：154-157.
[92]武向荣,教育扩展中的过度教育现象及其收入效应[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版).2007.(5)：125-128.
[93]丁静林.论我国高等教育投资体制的变革[J].铜仁职业技术学院学报(社会科学版),2009,(6)：27-32.
[94]林宏,陈广汉.居民收入差距测量的方法和指标[J].统计与预测,2003(6)：30-34.
[95]商丽浩,曹小玲.浙江省基础教育投资差异分析[J].教育与经济,2003,(1)：42-45.
[96]王天玉.省域内义务教育投资地区差异研究—以云南省为例[D].云南师范大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[97]江文涛.农村义务教育投资的地区差异[J].财经科学,2006,(3)：86-93.
[98]郑丽琳.教育投资对经济增长影响程度的区域差异[J].重庆工商大学学报,2006,4(2)：60-62.
[99]国家统计局.中国教育经费统计年鉴[M].北京：中国统计出版社,2010
[100]戴毅.对我国教育投资的财政思考[J].2009,(5)：115.
[101]张宏霞.我国财政教育投资现状、问题及对策[J].教育财政,2009,8(8)：4-8.
[102]李东航.广西区域高等教育与区域经济发展的适应性研究[D].广西社会科学,2010,(11)：33-38.
[103]焦郁.我国高等教育毛入学率居世界第一”纯属误谈[J].光明日报,2005年1月15日.
[104]周芸.我国教育投资中政府调控行为[J].政经视点,2009,(10)：43-44.
[105]周书馨.中美教育投资来源及总量比较研究[J].教育学术月刊,2009,(10)：63-68.
[106]徐绪卿.我国民办高等教育回顾及中长期发展思路[J].浙江树人大学学报(人文社会科学版),2009(1)：1-9.
[107]何玉静,何遐.政府间教育经费转移支付与基础教育经费地区差异分析[J].河南教育学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,19(2)：31-33.
[108]张玲,曹艳春.中国教育投入现状分析与政策建议[J].教育理论与实践,2002,22(1)：24-27.
[109]岳琴.对教育投入政策的比较分析及建议[J].吉林省经济管理干部学院学报,2002,16(3)53-56.
[110]徐现祥,舒元.物质资本、人力资本与中国地区双峰趋同[J].世界经济,2005,28(1)：47-57.
[111]程凤春,郝保伟.丹麦教育投资的特点及其未来走向———兼析经济高度发达、高税收、高福利国家教育投资的特点及未来走向[J].比较教育研究,2006,(1)：80-83.
[112][日]金子元著,刘文君编译.高等教育的社会经济学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[2]Johnes G. A fourth desideratum:The CES cost function and the sustainable configuration of multiproduct firms[J]. Bulletin of Economic Research,2004,56 (4):329-332.
[3]Johnes G., Johnes J., Thanassoulis E., Lenton P., & Emrouznejad A. An exploratory analysis of the cost structure of higher education in England[J]. London:Department for Education and Skills Research Report,2005:641-651.
[4]董银果,郝立芳.中国教育投资回报率度量的关键问题探析[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版)2011,37(1)：115-191.
[5]赵志华,吴长莉,赵晓兰.企业对高等教育投资的收益分析[J].河北师范大学学报(教育科学版),2011,13(5)：97-100.
[6]史万兵,赵士谦.荷兰高等教育投资绩效评价制度的经验与启示[J].大连理工大学学报社会科版),2011,32 (3)：67-70.
[7]庄浩.高等教育投资泡沫化研究[J].吉林工程技术师范学院学报,2011,27(6)：5052.
[8]易莹莹.个人教育投资的风险收益测度[J].南京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2011,13(2)：47-52.
[9]Mun C. Tsang and Yanqing Ding. Resource Utilization and Disparities in Compulsory Education in China[J]. China Review,2005, (1).-20-47
[10]郑丽琳.教育投资对经济增长影响程度的区域差异[J].重庆工商大学学报 (西部论坛),2006,16(2)：60-62.
[11]Min-Dong Paul Lee. Widening Gap of Educational Opportunity? A Longitudinal Study of Educational Inequality in China[R]. Research Paper.2006, (6).
[12]傅晓霞,吴丽梅.中国地区教育差异剔析[J].唐山师范学院学报,2007,29(3)：123-126.
[13]钟宇平,陆根书.论中国公共教育资源配置的公平问题[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),1999,19(2)：56-61.
[14]陈赟.关于我国教育投入研究：总量、结构及地区差异[J].荆门职业技术学院学报,2007,(1)：31-36.
[15]祁型雨.区域教育发展的差异与教育政策的宏观调控[J].教育评论,1999,(6)：4-7.
[16]Lihong Huang. Elitism and Equality in Chinese Higher Education:Studies of Student Socio-economic Background[J]. Investment in Education and Career Aspirations.2005.
[17]刘精明.高等教育扩展与入学机会差异：1978—2003[J].社会,2006,26(3)：158-209.
[18]Garcia-Penalosa C., Walde K. Efficiency and equity effects of subsidies to higher education[J]. Oxf. Econ. Pap.2000,52 (4):702-722.
[19]Jacobs B., van der Ploeg F. Guide to reform of higher education:a European perspective[J]. Econ. Policy,2006,21 (47):535-592.
[20]Gupta S., Verhoeven M. The efficiency of government expenditure Experiences from Africa[J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2001,23 (4):433-467.
[21]Richard Ashford, Shampa Biswas. International Journal of Educational Development,2010, 30:481-487.
[22]Ingvild Almas, Alexander W. Cappelen, Jo Thori Lind, Erik (?). S(?)rensen, Bertil Tungodden. Measuring unfair equality[J]. Journal of Public Economics,2011,95 (7-8):488-499.
[23]Perelman S., Santin D. Measuring educational efficiency at student level with parametric stochastic distance functions:An application to Spanish PISA results[J]. Education Economics,2011,19 (1):29-49.
[24]De Fraja G., Reverse discrimination and efficiency in education[J]. International Economic Review,2005,46 (3):1009-1031.
[25]Litao Zhao. Between local community and central state:Financing basic education in China[J]. International Journal of Educational Development,2009,29 (4):366-373.
[26]傅毓维,邵争艳.Malmquist(?)指数在评价中国区域高等教育资源配置变化中的应用[J].技术经济,2006,2：93-95.
[27]杨雅清,高志军,李景春.论优化区域高等教育结构与资源配置的途径[J].河北科技师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,(4)：8-11.
[28]张宗海.试论区域高等教育发展战略的规划[J].教育研究,2006,(9)：122-124.
[29]任雪莲,伊继东.区域高等教育均衡发展初探[J].高等教育研究,2006,22(4)：38-42.
[30]高峰.我国高等教育布局的问题与对策[J].现代教育科学,2003,6：85-86.
[31]颜莉冰.高等教育资源的区域公平性研究[J].高教探索,2005,5：33-36.
[32]周仲高,傅艺.区域教育人口与经济的分布特征与联动模式——以浙江省为例[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(6)：68-94.
[33]唐忠旺,刘兴旺,吴启茂.湖南高等教育区域分布特点探析[J].当代教育论坛.2008, (2)34-37.
[34]赵宏斌,刘念才,梁妮,苗招娣.我国高校的区域分布研究：基于人口、GDP的视角[J].高等教育研究,2007,28(1)：43-49.
[35]Barr N., Crawford I. Financing higher education:Answers from the UK[J].. London/New York:Routledge.,2005.
[36]Baum S., Schwartz S. How much debt is too much? Defining bench-marks for manageable student debt[J]. Washington DC, USA:The Project on Student Debt and The College Board, 2006.
[37]Chapman B. Income contingent loans for higher education:Inter-national reforms[J]. In E. A. Hanushek & F. Welch Eds., Handbook of the economics of education.2006: 1435-1503, Elsevier.
[38]Belzil C., Leonardi M. Can risk aversion explain schooling attainments? Evidence from Italy [J]. Labour Economics,2007,14 (6):957-970.
[39]Hartog J., Serrano L. D. Earnings risk and demand for higher education:A cross-section test for Spain[J]. Journal of Applied Economics, X (2007),1-28.
[40]Andersson F., Konrad K. A. Globalization and risky human-capital investment[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2003,10 (3):211-228.
[41]Santosh Mehrotra. The cost and financing of the right to education in India:Can we fill the financing gap? [J]. International Journal of Educational Development,2012,32: 65-71.
[42]Napel S., Schneider A. Intergenerational talent transmission, inequality and social mobility[J]. Economics Letters,2008,99 (2):405-409.
[43]Vandenberghe V., Debande 0. Refinancing Europe's higher education through deferred and income-contingent fees:an empirical assessment using Belgian, German& UK data [J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2008,24:364-386.
[44]Chapman B., Leigh A. Do very high tax rates induce bunching? Implications for the design of income contingent loan schemes[J]. Econ. Rec.,2009,85 (270):276-289.
[45]Cigno A., Luporini A. Scholarships or student loans? Subsidizing higher education in the presence of moral hazard[J]. J. Public Econ. Theory,2009,11 (1) 55-87.
[46]Chapman B., Lounkaew K. Income contingent student loans for Thailand:Alternatives compared [J]. Economics of Education Review,2010,29 (5):695-709.
[47]Chapman B., Lounkaew K., Polsiri P., Sarachitti R., Sitthipongpanich T. Thailand's Student Loans Fund:Interest rate subsidies and repayment burdens[J]. Economics of Education Review,2010,29 (5):685-694.
[48]Elena Del Rey, Maria Racionero. Financing schemes for higher education[J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2010,26:104-113
[49]Nicolae Todeaa, Doina Maria Tileab. Comparative analysis between the models for financing of education in Romania and the United Kingdom[J]. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,2011,15:717-721.
[50]Migali G., Walker I. Estimates of the causal effects of education on earnings over the lifecycle with cohort effects and endogenous education[J]. Lancaster University Working Paper Series,2011.
[51]Godofsky J., Zukin C., Van Horn C. Unfulfilled expectations:Recent college graduates struggle in a troubled economy [J]. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Rutgers University,2011.
[52]Giuseppe Migali, Funding higher education and wage uncertainty:Income contingent loan versus mortgage loan[J]. Economics of Education Review,2012,31:871-889.
[53]Justman M., Thisse, J.-F. Local public funding of higher education when skilled labor is imperfectly mobile[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2000,7 (3):247-258.
[54]Jung H., Thorbecke. The impact of public education expenditure on human capital, growth and poverty in Tanzania and Zambia:A general equilibrium approach [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling,2003,25 (8):701-725. 55] Hanushek E. The failure of input-based school ing policios[J]. The Economic Journal, 2003,113 (485):64-98.
[56]Poutvaara P. Educating Europe:should public education be financed with graduate taxes or income-contingent loans [J]. CESifo Economic Studies,2004,50 (4):663-684.
[57]Grimm M. Educational policies and poverty reduction in Cote d' Ivoire[J].. Journal of Policy Modeling,2005,27 (2):231-247.
[58]Konrad K., Spadaro A. Education redistributive taxation and confidence [J]. Journal of Public Economics,2006,90 (1-2):171-188.
[59]Betts J., Roemer J. Equalizing opportunity for racial and socioeconomic groups in the United States through educational finance reform[J]. In P. Peterson (Ed.), Schools and the equal opportunity problem. MIT Press,2007.
[60]Waltenberg F. Vandenberghe V. What does it take to achieve equality of opportunity in education An empirical investigation based on Brazilian data[J]. Economics of Education Review,2007,26 (6):710-724.
[61]Roemer J. Equality of opportunity [R]. In S. Durlauf & L. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics. Palgrave Macmillan,2008.
[62]Dearden L., Fitzsimons E., Goodman A., Kaplan G. Higher education funding reforms in England:The distributional effects and the shifting balance of costs[J]. Economic Journal,2008,118 (526):100-125.
[63]Migali G. Effort, default and alternative higher education funding schemes in essays in public economics[J]. Ph.D. thesis. UK:Warwick University,2008.
[64]Haupt A., Janeba E. Education redistribution and the threat of brain drain[J]. International Tax and Public Finance,2009,16:1-24.
[65]Andrea Schneider. Redistributive taxation vs. education subsidies:Fostering equality and social mobility in an intergenerational model[J]. Economics of Education Review, 2010,29 (4):597-605.
[66]Di Gioacchino D., Sabani L. Education policy and inequality:a political economy approach [J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2009,25 (4):463-478.
[67]Patrizia Ordinea, Giuseppe Roseb. The supply of education quality in a spatial model with asymmetric moving costs[J]. Research in Economics,2008,62 (4):197-214.
[68]Panu Poutvaara. The expansion of higher education and time-consistent taxation[J]. European Journal of Political Economy,2011,27, (2):257-267.
[69]李真,李全生.高等教育投资的现状分析及其改革[J].北京化工大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2)：61-64.
[70]郭常亮,欧阳有旺.高等教育资金来源多元化的理性思考[J].价格月刊,2005(12)：30-31.
[71]李永宁.高等教育投资体制变迁与高校财务管理职能的扩展[J].事业会计,2006,(6)：7-11.
[72]张振,邢家合.如何完善我国高等教育投融资体制[M].商业时代,2006,30：5960.
[73]江洋.欧盟根据33个国家现状提出高教经费改革新建议[J].中国教育报,2010年8月17日第3版：59-60.
[74]徐国成,徐充.人力资本理论与我国教育投资战略新探[J].长春工程学院学报(社会科学版) 2008,9(3)：40-42.
[75]马娴.人力资本理论与教育投资问题新探[J].云南师范大学学报,2004,36(2)：72-75.
[76]李亚萍,张涛.军事教育投资效益浅析[J].军事经济研究,2009,9：9-11.
[77]孙江涛.我国高等教育投资体制政策历史回顾、价值分析及启示[J].高教研究,2009,1：29-31.
[78]董银果,郝立芳.中国教育投资回报率度量的关键问题探析[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版)2011,37(1).
[79]娄成武,史万兵编著.教育经济与管理[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[80]元剑.从教育产品的融合属性看政府投资教育的理论依据与政策选择[J].教育与管理,2008,(10)：6-8.
[81]古宏伟.转轨时期中国中低收入家庭教育投资分析[M].北京：中国金融出版社,2009.
[82]陈志伟.浅析教育投资的生产性与消费性[J].全国贸易经济类核心期刊,2009,33：65.
[83]甘国华.高等教育成本分担研究[J].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2007.
[84]张子照.我国教育投资主体元化的理论与实践[J].理工高教研究,2003,22(2)：27-29.
[85]国家教育部,国家统计局.全国教育经费执行情况统计公告,2001-2012.
[86]王祖林.中国高等教育投资主体多元化理论探索[J].民办教育研究,2009,(9)：7-10.
[87]唐睿迪,信托计划：起点稍高的教育投资[J].大众理财,2009.11(11)：60.
[88]何秀超.美国教育投资体系现状与政策[J].光明日报,2005,(8)：1-2.
[89][美]埃尔查南.科恩,特雷.G.盖斯克著.范元伟译.教育经济学[M].上海：人民出版社,2009.
[90]李幸福.我国高等教育“过度”现象的经济学分析[J].平顶山学院学报,2008,(10)：123-126.
[91]邹小华.高等教育过度及其化解.南昌大学学报(人文社会科学版).2008,(3)：154-157.
[92]武向荣,教育扩展中的过度教育现象及其收入效应[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版).2007.(5)：125-128.
[93]丁静林.论我国高等教育投资体制的变革[J].铜仁职业技术学院学报(社会科学版),2009,(6)：27-32.
[94]林宏,陈广汉.居民收入差距测量的方法和指标[J].统计与预测,2003(6)：30-34.
[95]商丽浩,曹小玲.浙江省基础教育投资差异分析[J].教育与经济,2003,(1)：42-45.
[96]王天玉.省域内义务教育投资地区差异研究—以云南省为例[D].云南师范大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[97]江文涛.农村义务教育投资的地区差异[J].财经科学,2006,(3)：86-93.
[98]郑丽琳.教育投资对经济增长影响程度的区域差异[J].重庆工商大学学报,2006,4(2)：60-62.
[99]国家统计局.中国教育经费统计年鉴[M].北京：中国统计出版社,2010
[100]戴毅.对我国教育投资的财政思考[J].2009,(5)：115.
[101]张宏霞.我国财政教育投资现状、问题及对策[J].教育财政,2009,8(8)：4-8.
[102]李东航.广西区域高等教育与区域经济发展的适应性研究[D].广西社会科学,2010,(11)：33-38.
[103]焦郁.我国高等教育毛入学率居世界第一”纯属误谈[J].光明日报,2005年1月15日.
[104]周芸.我国教育投资中政府调控行为[J].政经视点,2009,(10)：43-44.
[105]周书馨.中美教育投资来源及总量比较研究[J].教育学术月刊,2009,(10)：63-68.
[106]徐绪卿.我国民办高等教育回顾及中长期发展思路[J].浙江树人大学学报(人文社会科学版),2009(1)：1-9.
[107]何玉静,何遐.政府间教育经费转移支付与基础教育经费地区差异分析[J].河南教育学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000,19(2)：31-33.
[108]张玲,曹艳春.中国教育投入现状分析与政策建议[J].教育理论与实践,2002,22(1)：24-27.
[109]岳琴.对教育投入政策的比较分析及建议[J].吉林省经济管理干部学院学报,2002,16(3)53-56.
[110]徐现祥,舒元.物质资本、人力资本与中国地区双峰趋同[J].世界经济,2005,28(1)：47-57.
[111]程凤春,郝保伟.丹麦教育投资的特点及其未来走向———兼析经济高度发达、高税收、高福利国家教育投资的特点及未来走向[J].比较教育研究,2006,(1)：80-83.
[112][日]金子元著,刘文君编译.高等教育的社会经济学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.