農(nóng)民工相關(guān)外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯一：</b></p><p>　　國際移民審查，1990.8</p><p>　　政府政策對浙江省農(nóng)民工的影響</p><p><b>　　楊秀師</b></p><p>　　中國試圖同時實現(xiàn)農(nóng)村發(fā)展，并嚴(yán)格控制其永久移民，尤其是控制大城市的移民，這與其他發(fā)展中

2、國家形成鮮明的對比。中國的農(nóng)村移民運動可以促進越來越多的農(nóng)民通過遷徙的途徑尋求到在城市就業(yè)的收益。但農(nóng)民永久改變其居民身份，特別是在大中城市，很大程度上還是不可能的，遷徙只是一種可行的臨時性選擇的運動。</p><p>　　中國政府贊許這樣一種運動，就像在試驗這樣的流動性在應(yīng)付農(nóng)村過剩勞動力中的價值一樣。與需求大量勞動力和服務(wù)的城市相比，農(nóng)村發(fā)展的歷程，需要更多的資源。從政府的角度來看，臨時流動比較易于實現(xiàn)放寬或

3、者緊縮式地控制，而永久移民相對來講會困難許多。與此同時，臨時移民可能更受青睞,因為它有助于防止大規(guī)模的永久移民帶來的城市社會混亂和不斷增加的壓力(Standing 1985)。</p><p>　　在農(nóng)村和城市的生活質(zhì)量存在相當(dāng)大差異的背景下，農(nóng)村地區(qū)和不同類型城市住宅的數(shù)據(jù)的分析表明，浙江省的永久移民無疑會少于特定的值，如果沒政府政策法規(guī)的干預(yù)。</p><p>　　在中國的政治經(jīng)濟系統(tǒng)

4、中，臨時居民不負(fù)擔(dān)城市的教育設(shè)施。因為他們沒有改變他們的戶籍，因此不能像城市居民一樣，享有政府在就業(yè)、補貼或分配糧食供應(yīng)方面的援助。但事實上,他們中的很多人都將城市作為生活、工作和學(xué)習(xí)的長期目的地。</p><p>　　他們中的大部分事實上已經(jīng)是城市居民，這些暫住居民們?yōu)槌鞘刑峁┝顺鞘幸约俺鞘芯用袼璧姆?wù)，他們還幾乎利用了城市所有的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，如住房、交通、電力、日常食品和消費品等。因此，在考慮移民對于城市的綜合

5、影響上，這部分實際上的居民必須加以考慮，如果不予以考慮，在城市規(guī)劃服務(wù)方面會產(chǎn)生問題，同時也會影響城市生活質(zhì)量。</p><p>　　在中國的農(nóng)村與城市經(jīng)濟體制造成的壓力下，中國已經(jīng)在靈活運用它的移民政策。(Chapman Prothero 1983)教導(dǎo)我們，這些國家的許多人事實上不僅僅只屬于農(nóng)村和城市。這些個體已經(jīng)是農(nóng)村和城市社區(qū)其中的一份子，他們?yōu)楫?dāng)?shù)刈龀隽酥匾暙I，而我們的政策也應(yīng)該惠及到他們。要想較好地

6、做到這點，我們的政策需要注意到所有形式的人口遷移，包括臨時的運動，我們要用理論上公式，在我們研究的基礎(chǔ)上，努力開發(fā)有效的且符合要求的政策。</p><p>　　臨時的運動在對于大城市的處理問題上，以及在城市化上扮演重要的角色，同時有助于實現(xiàn)農(nóng)村發(fā)展，減少農(nóng)村和城市之間不平等的地方。</p><p>　　考慮到這些可能性的分析結(jié)果，筆者建議將研究的重點從移民登記系統(tǒng)上轉(zhuǎn)至人口流動形態(tài)上。&l

7、t;/p><p>　　移民登記中的數(shù)據(jù)僅包括總體人口的流動性很小的一部分，而且這些數(shù)據(jù)反映出更多的被支配的痕跡。要克服這些限制，需要人口遷移方面更加全面的數(shù)據(jù)，需要涵蓋長期或臨時的運動，且需要師經(jīng)過國家或省級的特別設(shè)計的調(diào)查。同時也迫切需要人口運動和政策方面專業(yè)學(xué)術(shù)性的考量。</p><p>　　Foreign original one:</p><p>　　Origi

8、nate from：International Migration Review, Autumn, 1990</p><p>　　Migrant workers in Zhejiang Province, China: The Impact of Government Policies</p><p>　　Xiushi Yang</p><p>　　China

9、9;s attempts simultaneously to achieve rural development and to strictly control permanent migration, especially to big cities, provide a striking contrast to other developing countries. Such movement allows and stimulat

10、es growing numbers of peasants to seek the benefits of urban employment through migration. With permanent change in residence, especially to big and medium cities, still largely impossible, temporary movement provides a

11、viable alternative for many.</p><p>　　It may well be, too, that the Chinese government may also be allowing such increased mobility as an experiment to assess its value for coping with the surplus rural labo

12、r, with the labor force and service needs of cities, and with rural needs for greater resources for development. From a government point of view, the attractiveness of temporary mobility is enhanced by the ability to rel

13、ax or tighten control over such movement as conditions in urban and rural places change. Temporary migration ma</p><p>　　Given the considerable differentials in quality oflife between urban and rural places

14、and among different types of urban residence, analysis of the data for Zhejiang suggests strongly that the volume of permanent migration is undoubtedly less than it would have been if there were no intervention of govern

15、ment policies and regulations. </p><p>　　Within the political and economic system in China, these temporary residents will not burden the cities' educational facilities, employment and subsidized or rati

16、oned food supplies because they do not change their household registration and hence are not entitled to government assistance in these areas, as official city residents are. In reality, however, many of them are living,

17、 working and studying in the urban destinations for prolonged periods. Therefore, a substantial proportion are de fact</p><p>　　While temporary residents provide cities with services that are needed by both

18、the urban economy and the urban residents, they also utilize nearly all aspects of the urban infrastructure-housing, transportation, power, sani-tation and general supplies of daily food and consumer goods and amenities.

19、 Therefore, in considering the impact of migration on the overall social economic development in urban places, these de facto residents must be taken into account. Failure to do so could lead to seriou</p><p&g

20、t;　　The greater flexibility that China has allowed in its rural and urban economic systems creates pressures for more flexibility in its migration policies, (Chapman and Prothero 1983), teaches us that many people in the

21、se countries are, in fact, neither exclusively rural nor exclusively urban; The interests of these individual movers as well as of the rural and urban communities of which they are a part and to which they make important

22、 contributions can best be served by policies that take account </p><p>　　Temporary movement may well provide an important mechanism for coping with problems of big cities and overurbanization and concurrend

23、y with efforts to achieve rural development and to reduce inequalities between rural and urban places.</p><p>　　Given these possibilities, the results of this analysis strongly suggest the need for a shift o

24、f research priorities to population mobility forms other than those documented by the migration registration system. </p><p>　　The data provided by the migration registration system encompass only a small pa

25、rt of overall population mobility. Moreover, these data reflect more government planned involuntary migration and the differences in the ability to get permission to move, rather than individual behavior in response to o

26、pportunities. To overcome these limitations, more comprehensive data on population movement, covering both permanent and temporary movement and collected by specially designed national orprovincial s</p><p>

27、;<b>　　外文翻譯二：</b></p><p>　　亞洲經(jīng)濟期刊，2005.4</p><p>　　民營部門和農(nóng)民工進城——中國專題研究</p><p><b>　　孟昕</b></p><p>　　20世紀(jì)80年代后期以來，90年代初，大量農(nóng)村人口向城市遷移并“淹沒”了大多數(shù)中國城市。許多研究

28、開始已經(jīng)聚焦這種“螞蟻式”的遷移運動，但較少研究關(guān)注城市的民營部門在本次活動中起的作用。</p><p>　　多數(shù)古典遷移模型認(rèn)為民營部門為移民提供了臨時就業(yè)的機會，雖然一些經(jīng)驗主義的研究質(zhì)詢這個假定，并且建議民營部門在經(jīng)濟發(fā)展中應(yīng)該扮演一個重要角色。 本研究在以中國1504個農(nóng)村為勘測數(shù)據(jù)，審查農(nóng)村都市遷移的這個專題的各個方面。 </p><p><b>　　導(dǎo)言 </b

29、></p><p>　　20世紀(jì)80年代后期以來，90年代初，大量農(nóng)村人口向城市遷移并“淹沒”了大多數(shù)中國城市。這種趨勢已經(jīng)如此強大，它吸引了政策制定者和學(xué)者們大量的注意力。然而，移民文學(xué)的重要辯論點在于農(nóng)村向城市的遷移進程中民營部門的作用。城市民營部門在農(nóng)村向城市的遷移的過程中未有較多基于中國基礎(chǔ)上的研究，本文以填補這一空白。</p><p>　　在移民文學(xué)中，民營部門的作用是一個

30、有爭議的問題?？赡苡袃蓚€導(dǎo)致爭議的重要原因。一個是概念上的混亂，而定義民營部門活動的范圍從“賣報”到“自我小型企業(yè)的就業(yè)人數(shù)”，這是可能的，因為不同的活動中在城鄉(xiāng)運移過程中發(fā)揮著不同的作用。另一個原因可能是民營部門發(fā)揮的作用，因為其在很大程度上取決于經(jīng)濟發(fā)展階段和經(jīng)濟體制的設(shè)置。</p><p><b>　　2、背景</b></p><p>　　民營部門所扮演的“吸納

31、城鄉(xiāng)移民”這一角色引起經(jīng)濟學(xué)家的極大興趣。在幾十年來，辯論雙方的經(jīng)濟學(xué)家們一直試圖證明他們的論點。</p><p>　　這場爭論可能是由兩個因素造成。首先是概念混亂，民營部門在發(fā)展中是常用的經(jīng)濟學(xué)術(shù)語，民營部門的基本特征被描述為“低工資”、“家庭型”、“員工易于自由進入”和“缺乏穩(wěn)定的雇傭關(guān)系”等。</p><p>　　國際勞工組織（1972年）定義民營部門的特點：（一）易于進入；（二

32、）對本地資源的依賴；（三）企業(yè)家族所有權(quán)；（四）企業(yè)的經(jīng)營規(guī)模較小；（五）勞動密集，使用適應(yīng)技術(shù)；（六）在正規(guī)學(xué)校系統(tǒng)中獲得技能；（七）較少管制及競爭性的市場； 第二個可能會引致辯論的因素是有關(guān)民營部門的作用，每個國家都有自己的經(jīng)濟發(fā)展方式和獨特的機構(gòu)設(shè)置，這些差異使得這一問題涉及到非正規(guī)部門是否在農(nóng)村向城市移民中發(fā)揮了重要作用。</p><p><b>　　3、結(jié)語</b>

33、;</p><p>　　首先，一部分優(yōu)秀的人才傾向于在民營部門從事個體經(jīng)營的工作，而不是在正規(guī)部門工作；另一方面，正規(guī)部門就業(yè)品質(zhì)與民營部門部分相當(dāng)。</p><p>　　第二，在城市，移民工作的時間越長，就越有可能將從工薪一族轉(zhuǎn)移到正規(guī)部門，進而轉(zhuǎn)向民營部門從事個體經(jīng)營。這可能表明，在民營部門，就業(yè)的工資收入充當(dāng)了農(nóng)村向城市移民的重要因素。另外，個體經(jīng)營的方式可能是最具吸引的因素，一般充

34、當(dāng)了吸引移民長期就業(yè)的因素。 </p><p>　　第三，在所有移民工作組中，個體經(jīng)營者感到最滿意自己目前的情況，而正規(guī)部門的打工仔卻往往感到不太滿意。</p><p>　　最后，正規(guī)部門的員工在工作中收獲了最少。民營部門和正規(guī)部門之間的工資差別在主要是他們在市場評價方面的差異，而不是二人稟賦不同。</p><p>　　Foreign original two:&l

35、t;/p><p>　　Originate from: ASIAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL，May，2005</p><p>　　The Informal Sector and Rural-Urban Migration</p><p>　　A Chinese Case Study</p><p><b>　　Xin Meng&

36、lt;/b></p><p>　　Since the late 1980s and early 1990s, massive rural-urban migration has ?ooded most Chinese cities. Many studies have examined various aspects of this important movement, but none has inve

37、stigated the role the urban informal sector plays in this movement. In the literature, this issue is controversial. </p><p>　　Most classical migration models treat the informal sector as a temporary employme

38、nt opportunity for migrants, though some empirical studies challenge this assumption and suggest that the informal sector may play an important role in economic development. This study uses a survey data set of 1504 rura

39、l-urban migrants in one Chinese city to examine this interesting aspect of rural-urban migration. </p><p>　　I. Introduction </p><p>　　Since the late 1980s and early 1990s, massive rural-urban mi

40、gration has ?ooded most Chinese cities. The trend has been so strong that it attracted a great deal of attention from both policy makers and academics alike. Many recent studies have investigated various aspects of such

41、an important issue.</p><p>　　Nevertheless, an important debate in the rural-urban migration literature the role of the informal sector in the process of rural-urban migration has not been examined in the con

42、text of the Chinese experience. This paper intends to ?ll in this gap. There may be two important reasons which have led to the controversy. One is the conceptual confusion. While the de?nition of ‘informal’ activities r

43、anges from ‘selling newspapers’ to ‘self-employment in small business’, it is possible that different </p><p>　　II.Background</p><p>　　The controversial issue of the role played by the informal

44、sector in absorbing rural-urban migrants has attracted great interest from economists. Over the decades, economists from both sides of the debate have been trying to prove their arguments both theoretically and empirical

45、ly.</p><p>　　This controversy is probably caused by two factors. The ?rst is conceptual confusion. Although ‘informal sector’ is a commonly used term in development economics, the basic characteristics of th

46、is sector are described as ‘low wage’, ‘small and family-based’, ‘freedom of entry’, ‘lack of a stable employer-employee relationship’ and ‘being ignored by the authorities’ .</p><p>　　The ILO (1972) de?ned

47、the informal sector as being characterized by:</p><p>　　(a) ease of entry;</p><p>　　(b) reliance on indigenous resources;</p><p>　　(c) family ownership of enterprises;</p>&l

48、t;p>　　(d) small scale of operation;</p><p>　　(e) labour-intensive, using adapted technology;</p><p>　　(f ) skills acquired outside the formal school system; </p><p>　　(g) unregul

49、ated and competitive markets.</p><p>　　The second factor which may cause added debate regarding the role of the informal sector is that each country has its own pattern of economic development and unique ins

50、titutional settings. These differences make the issue of whether the informal sector plays an important role in employing rural-urban migrants very much an empirical question.</p><p>　　III.Concluding Remark

51、s</p><p>　　First, it seems that higher quality individuals, in terms of human capital, are more likely to take a job in the self-employed group in the informal sector than to take a job in the other groups.

52、On the other hand, those who are employed in the formal sector are of similar quality to those employed in the wage-earner group in the informal sector.</p><p>　　Second, the longer migrants work in the city

53、the more likely they will move from the wage-earner group to the formal sector, and then to the self-employed group in the informal sector. This may suggest that the wage-earning jobs in the informal sector have acted as

54、 a temporary employment opportunity for rural-urban migrants, but self-employment has attracted individuals with the highest quality and has generally acted as a long-term employment opportunity for migrants.</p>

55、<p>　　Third, among all migrants those who worked in the self-employed group are the ones who felt the most satis?ed with their current situation while the wage earners in the informal sector and migrants who worked

56、in the formal sector felt less satis?ed than the self-employed.</p><p>　　Finally, those who worked in the formal sector earned the least. The wage differentials between the formal sector and the other two gr