保障性住房建设解决了大量城市低收入家庭的住房问题,但大多区位偏远、交通不便,远离城市就业中心,导致低收入人群的通勤成本上升,进而对其就业和收入产生影响。本研究以昆明市为样本城市,选取廉租房、公租房和经适房3类保障性住区,利用通勤距离、通勤时间、通勤方式、工作地点等指标,从居住-就业空间匹配角度,揭示保障性住区居民就业空间特征;并通过建立包含空间虚拟变量的多元回归方程,揭示了保障性住区居民就业空间特征对其收入的影响。

The construction of affordable housing is very helpful to solve the housing difficulties of a large number of low-income families in cities.According to the spatial mismatch hypothesis, neighbourhoods were far away from the employment center, it could cause spatial mismatch between residence and workplace, and would result in high unemployment, low-income and other problems. A few researches about spatial (mis) match in Chinese urban poor neighbourhoods had been done in recent years:the case studies of Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Nanjing showed that most of residents living in the affordable housing neighbourhoods were employed at a distance, and the long commuting distance increased their living burdens. Compared with Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai, Kunming is a smaller, less-developed inland city and be used as study sample in this paper. This study aims to answer two major research questions:first, could spatial match or mismatch be found in Kunming affordable housing communities; second, what impacts of spatial (mis)match on residents' income? This study selected low rent housing, public rental housing and economical housing communities, 3 kinds of affordable housing, totally 7 affordable housing communities as study samples. Using the indexes of commuting distance, commuting duration, commuting mode, location of the workplace, this study analyzed the jobs-housing relationship in affordable housing neighborhoods, revealed that spatial match or mismatch could be found in Kunming. Then, through the establishment of multiple regression equation, this study revealed the impacts of spatial match or mismatch on resident's income level. The results of this paper supported the spatial mismatch hypothesis. The residents living in affordable housing communities has very limited capabilities to make trade-off between jobs and housing location. They could neither burden a high housing cost, nor could they increase their income level through choosing employment at a distance.