Rural–Urban Educational Inequalities and Their Spatial Variations in China

• Published in: Applied spatial analysis and policy Vol. 16; no. 2; pp. 873 - 896
• Main Authors: Xiang, L., Stillwell, J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.06.2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Academic achievement; Attainment; Central government; Education; Educational inequality; Educational research; Human Geography; Investments; Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning; Policy implementation; Regional/Spatial Science; Rural areas; Rural schools; Schools; Secondary schools; Social Sciences; Teaching; Urban areas; Urban schools; Conversion factors; Capability approach; Education policy; Education inequalities; Rural–urban
• ISSN: 1874-463X; 1874-4621
• DOI: 10.1007/s12061-023-09506-1

Existing discussions of rural–urban education inequality focus primarily on education investment and/or attainment, with little attention being paid to the opportunities or potential that an area has to achieve better educational outcomes. This study presents a new analytical framework based on Amartya Sen’s capability approach for a better understanding of rural–urban education disparity. In addition, the rural–urban definitions for educational research are clarified and the effects of a wide range of Central Government policies aimed at reducing the rural–urban educational gap are assessed. The results suggest: inadequate investment (e.g., funding and high-quality teaching resources) in rural education in some regions, especially middle and high schools; inappropriate partitioning of the national territory by the Government for policy implementation; and negative effects resulting from the school consolidation policy. The latter will influence the ability of some rural areas to match the educational achievements of their urban counterparts. This research also reveals that the existing rural–urban gap will be unlikely to narrow under the current policy regime. A conventional approach based on investment and outcomes alone in rural–urban disparity research and policy may overlook the important interactions and conversion processes that are important for mitigating rural–urban disparities.