Exports and left‐behind children: Empirical evidence from the China Migrants Dynamic Survey

• Author: Bing Li,Zexing Chen,Tao Li
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• Date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12416

Rev Int Econ. 2019;27:1081–1107. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/roie

|

1081

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Received: 6 May 2019

|

Revised: 3 May 2019

|

Accepted: 6 May 2019

DOI: 10.1111/roie.12416

SPECIAL ISSUE PAPER

Exports and left‐behind children: Empirical evidence

from the China Migrants Dynamic Survey

ZexingChen1

|

BingLi1

|

TaoLi2

1School of International Trade and

Economics,Central University of Finance

and Economics, Beijing, China

2School of Economics, Central University

of Finance and Economics, Beijing, China

Correspondence

Tao Li, School of Economics, Central

University of Finance and Economics,

Beijing, China.

Email: econlitao@vip.sina.com

Abstract

The opportunity for jobs and high wages induced by ex-

ports have attracted rural laborers in China to work in the

cities temporarily, and some parents must leave behind their

children in rural areas, called left‐behind children (LBC).

Notably, the cause of LBC has not been investigated care-

fully. In this study, we combine the 2010 to 2015 Chinese

trade data with the data from the 2010 to 2015 China

Migrants Dynamic Survey(CMDS) to identify LBC based

on the young children of migrants not living with their par-

ents in the cities, and empirically test the effects of exports

on LBC. The results show that under the same income level

and other circumstances, the increase in export dependency

significantly increases the probability of the migrants’ young

children becoming LBC. We construct an instrumental vari-

able to manage the potential endogeneity problems and con-

duct many other robustness checks, and all the results are

consistent. We also examine the heterogeneous effects of

exports on LBC and observe that migrants with low income,

low education, rural hukou (area of origin) status, and in

manufacturing sectors are more vulnerable to exports.Key

Words: Exports; Internal Migration; Left‐behind children

KEYWORDS

Exports, Internal Migration, Left‐behind children

JEL CLASSIFICATION

F16; J13; J61

1082

|

CHEN Et al.

1

|

INTRODUCTION

Trade has contributed to China’s rapid economic growth and massive rural–urban internal migration

(Tombe & Zhu, 2015; Zi, 2016). Trade has also triggered a social phenomenon that cannot be ignored,

the left‐behind children (LBC), that is, children whose parents have migrated to and work in the cities

while their children remain at home in the countryside (Duan & Zhou, 2005). In 2012, there were

approximately 61 million LBC, accounting for 37.7% of all rural children and 21.88% of children

in China (ACWF, 2013). This number is approximately equivalent to the total population of Italy or

combined population of Canada and Australia. Hence, the LBC have attracted extensive attention

from the academic community, policy makers, and the public. Studies have focused on the education,

health, and safety of LBC, but few have studied the causes of LBC. This paper empirically tests the

relationship between trade and LBC for the first time and observes that exports are one critical factor

causing LBC.

A large body of literature has demonstrated that trade increases the overall welfare of a country.

To pursue a better life, laborers migrate to areas with more trade and higher wages (Wang, Huang,

Zhang, & Rozelle, 2011), that is, trade openness leads to a reallocation of the labor force in the

spatial space (Zi, 2016). Thanks to trade and many migrants, China’s productivity has increased dra-

matically (Tombe & Zhu, 2015). Trade liberalization has also caused negative effects. Many studies

have focused on adjustments to trade liberalization on the industry and regional levels (Attanasio,

Goldberg, & Pavcnik, 2004; Dix‐Carneiro & Kovak, 2015, 2017, 2019; Goldberg & Pavcnik, 2005;

Hakobyan & McLaren, 2016; Kovak, 2013; Revenga, 1997; Topalova, 2010) and adjustments to labor

market shocks at the household level, such as family labor supply, living arrangement and saving

(Blundell, Pistaferri, & Preston, 2008; Dai, Huang, & Zhang, 2018; Hyslop, 2001; Kaplan, 2012;

Lundberg, 1985). Notably, among the studies that have focused on adjustments to labor market shocks

at the household level, few are concerned with the fact that trade also causes another negative effect,

that is, the problem of LBC.

While several papers in the literature have discussed how migrants benefit LBC and the problems

LBC have, and most provide a rich description of the LBC’s status, few examples in the literature have

explored the causes of LBC.

This article aims to undertake exploration of the causes of LBC from the perspective of trade.

In China, it is common for the young and middle‐aged labor force in rural areas to work outside the

hometown. In 2016, the number of rural migrants increased to 169 million and total migrants in China

increased to 245 million (NBSC, 2017a, 2017b). Additionally, 99.6% of rural migrants worked in the

secondary and tertiary industries, and at least 45 million rural migrants worked in China’s eastern

region (NBSC, 2017a).

The majority of provinces and cities in the eastern region is proximal to coastal areas, where trade

is the most active. Many migrants work in companies that engage in trade in these regions. Trade has

created employment, increased GDP, and attracted many migrants. Notably, because trade is closely

linked to external demand, it is naturally volatile and uncertain, making the position and income of

migrants unstable. Migrants must manage the risks of losing their income and jobs, transiting between

industries, fluctuating prices and living costs, and so forth. Therefore, under the same level of income

and other circumstances, the higher the dependency on exports, the greater the risk for migrants, while

their children are more likely to remain in their hometowns and become LBC. Therefore, trade should

be a critical reason for the emergence of LBC. Notably, no systematic empirical study has examined

this effect.

This article uses the China Migrants Dynamic Survey Data from 2010 to 2015 and matches the

corresponding trade data at the city level. We observed that under the same level of income and other