IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/asagre/53477.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regional differences evaluation on the capacities of rural basic public services based on topsis method - Demonstration from 31 Cities and Provinces

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Jin-song

Abstract

Capacities of rural basic public services in 31 cities and provinces are evaluated and sorted based on the method of Topsis according to the data of rural education, medical treatment, health and so on during 2006 in China. The empirical results show that there are great differences among the capacities of rural basic public services in most cities and provinces, and their equalization is relatively low. The financial non-equalization is still the biggest obstacle in the process of realizing the equalization of rural basic public services. Finally, this paper put forward some countermeasures and proposals on how to bridge the gap of the equalization of rural basic public services.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Jin-song, 2009. "Regional differences evaluation on the capacities of rural basic public services based on topsis method - Demonstration from 31 Cities and Provinces," Asian Agricultural Research, USA-China Science and Culture Media Corporation, vol. 1(02), pages 1-4, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:asagre:53477
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.53477
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/53477/files/Regional%20differences%20evaluation%20on%20the%20capacities%20of%20rural%20basic%20public%20services%20based%20on%20topsis%20method.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.53477?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:asagre:53477. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.