• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

科学学研究 ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (1): 162-177.

• 创新探索 • 上一篇    下一篇

人才政策如何影响人才流动? ———基于2002 - 2021 年3308 项政策文本的量化分析

叶杨1,陈强远2,赵浩云1,3,李晓萍3   

  1. 1. 中南大学商学院
    2. 中国人民大学国家发展与战略研究院
    3.
  • 收稿日期:2023-11-03 修回日期:2024-02-09 出版日期:2025-01-15 发布日期:2025-01-15
  • 通讯作者: 叶杨
  • 基金资助:
    迈向高质量的中国城市技术创新:测度、机理与效应

How Does Talent Policy Affect Talents Mobility?—Based on Quantitative Analysis of 3308 Policy Texts from 2002 to 2021

  • Received:2023-11-03 Revised:2024-02-09 Online:2025-01-15 Published:2025-01-15

摘要: 基于“人才争夺战”的背景和区域人才政策的视角,利用自然语言分析(NLP)、文本挖掘等方法整理出2002-2021年中国3308项地方性人才政策的量化数据,设计得到“多地区-多政策”维度下的人才政策量化标准、流程与评价体系,在此基础上结合个体微观数据,考察了城市人才政策对人才流动决策的影响。研究发现:1.城市人才政策综合得分的提高能够显著增加该城市被人才选择的概率。从城市视角来看,较小规模城市、非省会城市人才政策的作用更为明显。从个体特征来看,高学历、高收入以及25-54岁中、青年人才群体对人才政策综合得分的变动更为敏感。2.具体到引育留用四类政策环节上,不同地理区域城市所出台的人才政策在各政策环节的实际效果上存在显著差异。东部沿海城市、南方城市的引才、留才和用才环节政策均能显著影响人才流入,而内陆地区育才、用才环节政策作用不明显,北方地区仅留才环节政策能够产生效果。3.具体到奖励型、保障型、发展型三类政策工具上,不同年龄阶段、不同类型人才群体对各类政策工具的偏好也有所不同。就年龄而言,35岁以下人才群体对生活补贴、薪酬待遇等短期性、补贴型的内容变动较为敏感,而35岁及以上人才群体则相对更关心子女入学与个人职业发展等保障型与发展型政策。就不同类型人才而言,创新创业人才对金融支持、创新载体建设等发展型政策的变化十分关注,而企业经管人才更关心生活补贴与个人所得税税收优惠等奖励型政策。农村实用人才则更看重保障型政策,如户籍政策等。

Abstract: Based on the background of "talent competition" and the perspective of regional talent policies, this paper uses natural language parsing (NLP), text mining to collate the quantitative data of 3308 local talent policies in China from 2002 to 2021, designs the quantitative standard, process and evaluation system of talent policy under the dimension of "multi region-multi policy", on this basis, combined with individual micro data, investigates the influence of urban talent policy on talent migration decision. The findings are as follows: 1. The improvement of the comprehensive score of urban talent policy can significantly increase the probability of the city being selected by talents. From the perspective of cities, the effect of talent policy is more obvious in smaller and non-capital cities. In terms of individual characteristics, the group of highly-educated, high-income and the young and middle-aged talents aged 25-54 are more sensitive to the change of the comprehensive score of talent policy. 2. Specific to the four types of policy links, There are significant differences in the actual effect of talent policies issued by cities of different geographical regions. The policies of introducing, retaining and employing talents in eastern coastal cities and southern cities can significantly affect the inflow of talents, while in inland areas, the effect of the policy of cultivating and employing talents is not obvious, in northern areas, only the policy of retaining talents can make a difference. 3. From the perspective of the three types of policy tools, different age groups and different types of talent groups also have different preferences. From the perspective of age, the talent group under 35 years old is more sensitive to short-term and subsidized content changes such as subsistence allowance and salary benefits, while the talent group over 35 years old is relatively more concerned about children admission and personal career development and other safeguard and development policies. In terms of different types of talents, the innovative and entrepreneurial talents are very concerned about changes in development policies such as financial support and innovation carrier construction, the enterprise management talents are more concerned about incentive policies such as subsistence allowance and personal income tax incentives. Rural practical talents pay more attention to safeguard policys, such as household policies.