就业是最大的民生工程，高校毕业生等青年群体就业是就业工作的重中之重，其就业保障工作对于国家、社会和个人都具有极其重要的意义。当前高校毕业生就业形势严峻，其在就业初期往往首先面临着就业城市选择，需要各地方政府提供一定的就业保障。与此同时，随着我国人口结构老龄化趋势的加剧和劳动年龄人口的减少，城市发展需要高校毕业生等人才的加入。为此，吸引并留住高校毕业生等人才成为城市发展中的重要课题，众多城市整理紧缺人才目录、颁布人才政策，以寻求人才来助力城市的繁荣发展。人才政策进一步为当地的高校毕业生织密了就业保障网，促使高校毕业生选择其作为就业城市。针对高校所在地的人才政策及高校毕业生属地就业选择展开研究，分析城市实施的人才政策是否会对高校毕业生属地就业发挥作用？主要是人才政策的哪些内容产生显著影响及其影响程度多大？对高校毕业生选择属地就业影响较大的人才政策组合是什么？这些问题对于促进高校毕业生就业、强化高校毕业生就业保障以及优化人才政策具有重要的理论和现实意义。

本研究聚焦于探讨城市针对高校毕业生的人才政策实施成效，通过评估人才政策对当地的高校毕业生属地就业率的影响进行研究。在梳理部分城市人才政策及高校毕业生属地就业率的基础上，结合城市的统计数据，采用模糊集定性比较分析（fsQCA）方法，系统剖析了影响高校毕业生属地就业的组态。在此基础上，本文对南京市高校毕业生进行了问卷调查，依据个体层面的数据，使用二元Logit回归进一步探讨了人才政策对高校毕业生属地就业的影响。主要研究结论如下：

第一，各城市的人才政策涵盖范围广，为高校毕业生实现高质量就业构建了较为完善的就业保障体系，但政策同质化现象严重，政策补贴额度也存在较大差异；不同城市类型与地区的高校毕业生属地就业率存在差异，传统一线城市和新一线城市的高校毕业生属地就业率相对较高，东部地区与中部地区的高校毕业生属地就业率相对较高。第二，当城市经济水平领先但人才政策支持程度相对较弱、城市经济水平中等偏上但拥有宽松的落户政策和有力的就业政策支持、城市经济水平较差但具备完善且支持力度较强的人才政策时，高校毕业生属地就业率会较高；当城市经济水平较差、城市经济水平较好但人才政策普遍缺乏或支持力度较弱、城市经济水平较差且缺乏人才政策支持时，导致高校毕业生属地就业率偏低。第三，问卷调查数据显示，南京市高校毕业生留宁就业率处于中等水平，仍有提升空间；南京市的人才政策内容丰富，但高校毕业生对相关政策的知晓度较低。第四，人才政策的吸引力对高校毕业生留宁就业具有显著影响，其中就业创业政策和城市归属政策的吸引力尤为显著；性别、籍贯地、独生子女身份、高校类型、实习经历、生活成本以及职业发展等因素也对高校毕业生留宁就业的意愿产生显著影响。

结合以上研究结论，本文提出相关的政策启示：各地方政府应因地制宜出台人才政策，找准自身发展定位与人才需求，破解人才政策同质化问题；加大人才政策有效宣传，对人才政策进行解读，及时、广泛地通过线上线下渠道向高校毕业生宣传；以需求为导向优化人才政策，结合高校毕业生的需求反馈对人才政策进行调整，保证政策内容全面覆盖高校毕业生的就业保障；注重当地高校毕业生人才培养，鼓励大学生将个人成长与国家发展战略、城市发展战略的需要相结合，增加毕业前实习岗位数量。

Employment is the largest livelihood project, and the employment of young groups such as college graduates is very important. Its employment security work is of great significance to the country, society and college graduates. At present, the employment situation of college graduates is severe. At the beginning of employment, they are often faced with the choice of employment cities, which requires local governments to provide certain employment security. At the same time, with the aggravation of population structure aging trend and the decrease of working-age population, the urban development needs talents such as college graduates to join. To this end, attracting and retaining talents such as college graduates has become an important issue in urban development. Many cities have compiled catalogs of scarce talents and issued talent policiy to seek talents to help the prosperity and development of cities. The talent policy further weaves an employment security network for local college graduates, which encourages them to choose it as their employment city. So, does the talent policy implemented by cities play a role in the choice of territorial employment for college graduates? What are the contents of talent policies that have a significant impact and how much is the impact? What is the talent policy combination that has a significant impact on the choice of territorial employment for college graduates? These issues have important theoretical and practical significance for promoting the employment of college graduates, improving the employment security and optimizing the talent policy.

This study focuses on exploring the effectiveness of the talent policy implemented by cities for college graduates, and analyzes the impact of the talent policy on the territorial employment rate of college graduates. On the basis of sorting out some urban talent policies and the territorial employment rate of college graduates, combined with urban statistical data, the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis method was used to systematically analyze the configuration that affects the territorial employment of college graduates. In addition, this paper conducted a questionnaire survey on college graduates in Nanjing, and based on individual level data, further explored the impact of the talent policy on territorial employment for college graduates using binary logistic regression. The main research conclusions are as follows:

Firstly, the talent policy in various cities cover a wide range, and a relatively perfect employment security system has been built for college graduates to achieve high-quality employment. But there is a serious phenomenon of policy homogenization, and there are also significant differences in policy subsidy amounts. The territorial employment rate of university graduates in different cities and regions is different. The territorial employment rate of college graduates in traditional first-tier cities and new first-tier cities is relatively high, and the territorial employment rate of college graduates in the eastern and central regions is relatively high. Secondly, when the urban economic level is leading but the talent policy support is relatively weak, the urban economic level is above average but has loose household registration policies and strong employment policy support, or the urban economic level is poor but has a sound and strong talent policy support, the territorial employment rate of college graduates will be higher; When the urban economic level is poor, the urban economic level is good but there is a general lack of the talent policy or weak support, or the urban economic level is poor and lacks talent policy support, it leads to a low rate of territorial employment. Thirdly, the survey data indicates that the territorial employment rate of university graduates in Nanjing is moderately positioned and there is still room for improvement. The talent policy in Nanjing are rich in content, but the awareness of relevant talent policy among college graduates is relatively low. Fourthly, the attractiveness of talent policy plays a crucial role in influencing the territorial employment rate of college graduates in Nanjing, with employment and entrepreneurship policies and urban ownership policies being particularly attractive. Factors such as gender, place of origin, one-child status, type of university, internship experience, cost of living, and career development also have a considerable influence on the decision of college graduates to remain in Nanjing for their career pursuits.

Based on the above research conclusions, this paper puts forward relevant policy implications: cities should formulate the talent policy according to on-site conditions, identify their own development positioning and talent needs, and solve the problem of homogenization of the talent policy; Strengthen effective promotion of the talent policy, interpret the talent policy, and timely and widely promote them to college graduates through online and offline channels; Optimize the talent policy based on the demand, adjust the talent policy according to the demand feedback of college graduates, and ensure that the content of the policy covers the employment security of college graduates; Pay attention to the talent cultivation of on-site college graduates, encourage college students to combine their personal growth with the needs of national and urban development strategies, and increase the number of internship positions before graduation.

[1] 蔡宜旦.浙东地区高学历青年人才区际流动行为及其影响因素分析——基于浙江宁波镇海区的实证调查[J].中国青年研究,2015(06):58-65.

[2] 柴天姿.大学生就业区域流向:是外力推动还是内力驱动?[J].高等工程教育研究,2014(05):124-129+167.

[3] 陈春潮,齐婉宁.大学生就业地域选择影响因素调查——以南京高校学生为例[J].劳动保障世界,2018(18):14-15.

[4] 陈家和,吴一平,李鹏飞.城市品牌与流动人口就业选址决策[J].财经研究,2022,48(05):140-154.

[5] 陈南希,孙涵彦,周凌寒等.“抢人大战”背景下高校毕业生的就业地选择——基于上海市大学生的实证研究[J].现代城市研究,2023(09):1-7.

[6] 邓峰,郭建如.人才竞争、跨省流动与高校毕业生就业——毕业生跨省流动的路径、空间分布与就业状况分析[J].国家教育行政学院学报,2020(07):24-33.

[7] 杜运周,贾良定.组态视角与定性比较分析(QCA):管理学研究的一条新道路[J].管理世界,2017,(06):155-167.

[8] 杜运周,李佳馨,刘秋辰等.复杂动态视角下的组态理论与QCA方法：研究进展与未来方向[J].管理世界,2021,37(03):180-197+12-13.

[9] 段智慧,孟雪,郝文强.人才生态环境视角下青年友好型城市建设路径研究:基于模糊集定性比较分析[J].中国人力资源开发,2023,40(04):107-122.

[10] 顾承卫.新时期我国地方引进海外科技人才政策分析[J].科研管理,2015,36(S1):272-278.

[11] 郭洪林,甄峰,王帆.我国高等教育人才流动及其影响因素研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2016,37(01):69-77.

[12] 何仲禹,翟国方.我国大学生就业城市选择意愿及其影响因素分析[J].人文地理,2015,30(02):37-42+102.DOI:10.13959/j.issn.1003-2398.2015.02.006.

[13] 黄怡淳.北上广深四市人才政策对比分析及广州市人才政策建议[J].科技管理研究,2017,37(20):49-54.

[14] 劳昕,张逸秀,崔璨.高校毕业生城市间就业流动特征及影响因素研究[J].黑龙江高教研究,2023,41(06):125-133.

[15] 李和章,戚也,林松月,等.我国博士研究生就业地域特征分析——基于97134条大学教师简历的实证分析[J].学位与研究生教育,2022,(12):39-46.

[16] 李蛟,杨雪,魏洪英.高学历流动人口城市居留意愿分析[J].青海社会科学,2020(04):114-122.

[17] 李兰冰,刘泽宇.政府治理与劳动力空间流动：基于劳动力就业选址视角[J].广东财经大学学报,2023,38(04):51-63.

[18] 李燕萍,刘金璐,洪江鹏,等.我国改革开放40年来科技人才政策演变、趋势与展望——基于共词分析法[J].科技进步与对策,2019,36(10):108-117.

[19] 李永刚.中国博士毕业生的就业选择与流动趋向研究——以教育部直属高校为例[J].中国高教研究,2019,(09):87-93.

[20] 李枝霖,王华.人口流动视角下辽宁省大学生就业问题研究[J].辽宁工程技术大学学报(社会科学版),2022,24(01):70-75.

[21] 李作学,张蒙.人才生态环境促进城市科技人才集聚的实现路径——基于必要条件分析（NCA）和模糊集定性比较分析（fsQCA）方法的研究[J].科技管理研究,2023,43(12):183-193.

[22] 林静霞,何金廖,黄贤金.城市舒适性视角下科研人才流动的城市偏好研究[J].地域研究与开发,2020,39(01):59-64+88.

[23] 楼文高,胡纬华.基于投影寻踪分类技术的各地区吸纳就业能力综合评价[J].社会保障研究,2013(05):89-97.

[24] 刘晓光，黄惬.我国东西部高层次人才引进政策文本比较——以四川省和江苏省为例[J].科技管理研究,2018,38(24):51-56.

[25] 马莉萍,潘昆峰.留还是流?——高校毕业生就业地选择与生源地、院校地关系的实证研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2013,34(05):118-124.

[26] 申鹏,朱林.返乡农民工就近就业现状调查及对策分析——基于897名贵州返乡农民工的问卷调查[J].调研世界,2014,(09):31-35.

[27] 宋利敏.基于社会排斥理论下我国大学生就业保障体系研究[J].改革与战略,2016,32(09):133-136.

[28] 宋月萍,王若霖.城市吸引高校应届毕业生的政策组合及效果——基于模糊集定性比较分析[J].西北人口,2023,44(03):27-37.

[29] 苏立宁,廖求宁.“长三角”经济区地方政府人才政策:差异与共性——基于2006-2017年的政策文本[J].华东经济管理,2019,33(07):27-33.

[30] 孙鲲鹏,罗婷,肖星.人才政策、研发人员招聘与企业创新[J].经济研究,2021,56(08):143-159.

[31] 孙荣山,范小燕.高校毕业生就业流向特点的实证分析——以南京农业大学工学院为例[J].高等农业教育,2016(02):77-80.

[32] 孙伟增,张晓楠,郑思齐.空气污染与劳动力的空间流动——基于流动人口就业选址行为的研究[J].经济研究,2019,54(11):102-117.

[33] 汤兆云.人口社会学（第二版）[M].武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2023:123-126.

[34] 王高峰,杨浩东.区域居民购房能力与科技人才集聚关系研究[J].科学学研究,2022,40(06):1001-1013.

[35] 王强,崔璨,劳昕.基于空间计量交互模型的人才流动影响因素研究——以中国“双一流”高校毕业生为例[J].地理学报,2023,78(06):1392-1407.

[36] 王霆,李洋.农民工就业政策如何促进就业?——基于组态视角的定性比较分析(fsQCA)[J].人口与经济,2021(04):37-50.

[37] 王阳,王伶鑫,赵一凡.中长期促进高校毕业生就业的思路与对策[J].宏观经济研究,2023(06):113-127.

[38] 王一凡,崔璨,王强等.“人才争夺战”背景下人才流动的空间特征及影响因素——以中国“一流大学”毕业生为例[J].地理研究,2021,40(03):743-761.

[39] 王贞琼.基于社会保障视角审视大学生就业现状与对策[J].当代经济,2019(12):158-161.

[40] 温光耀,陈浩,于涛.基于计划行为理论的大学生就业城市选择特征与影响机制研究——以南京为例[J].现代城市研究,2020(06):64-71.

[41] 吴明亮,刘金枝,朱广兵.以属地就业为导向的职业院校地方文化认同教育路径探析[J].太原城市职业技术学院学报,2025,(01):69-72.

[42] 夏怡然,陆铭.城市间的“孟母三迁”——公共服务影响劳动力流向的经验研究[J].管理世界,2015(10):78-90.

[43] 萧鸣政,韩溪.改革开放30年中国人才政策回顾与分析[J].中国人才,2009,(01):12-15.

[44] 肖新成.基于推拉理论的高校毕业生就业地域选择的实证分析[J].高等农业教育,2015(07):71-75.

[45] 谢玲红.“十四五”时期农村劳动力就业：形势展望、结构预测和对策思路[J].农业经济问题,2021,(03):28-39.

[46] 谢圆圆,李锦昊,马凌.青年知识移民就业城市选择及其影响因素——以广州市高校大学生为例[J].热带地理,2022,42(03):385-395.

[47] 徐向东.高校毕业生就业流向的特点及分析[J].黑龙江高教研究,2010(06):79-82.

[48] 徐志平,沈红.我国“双一流”大学博士毕业生就业特征分析[J].现代教育管理,2019,(03):106-111.

[49] 杨迪,周谨平,郑鹏婕.透视新一线城市“抢人大战”现象——以武汉市人才回流政策为例[J].现代商贸工业,2019,40(30):14-16.

[50] 杨雪,樊洺均.新生代高学历流动人口的流向选择及影响机制[J].人口学刊,2019,41(06):64-77.

[51] 原新,刘旭阳,赵玮.青年流动人才城市选择的影响因素——基于不同规模城市的比较研究[J].人口学刊,2021,43(02):48-60.

[52] 叶睿琳,洪莹,沈雯婷,等.基于内容分析法的城市人才政策比较——以宁汉镐三地为例[J].人才资源开发,2020,(14):26-30.

[53] 易高峰,王洋.高校科技创新绩效提升的关键路径研究——基于31个省份的模糊集定性比较分析[J].中国高校科技,2023,(05):40-46.

[54] 于海波.京津冀一体化战略背景下秦皇岛市大学生就地就业政策支持研究[D].新疆农业大学,2022.

[55] 岳昌君,周俊波.高校毕业生为何跨省就业[J].清华大学教育研究,2005(02):34-41.

[56] 张彬斌,陆万军.宏观环境和劳动力供给变化下就业新态势与应对措施[J].经济纵横,2023,(10):66-74.

[57] 张波.国内高端人才研究:理论视角与最新进展[J].科学学研究,2018,36(08):1414-1420.

[58] 张抗私,周晓蒙.大学毕业生就业的省际流动特征及其影响因素[J].人口与经济,2018(01):69-78.

[59] 张理政,王洁晶.教育程度使流动人口社会融入路径呈现差异?——基于多群组结构方程模型的实证分析[J].公共管理与政策评论,2023,12(04):97-112.

[60] 张再生,杨庆.海外高端人才政策评估及优化对策研究[J].天津大学学报(社会科学版),2016,18(02):123-128.

[61] 赵文学.研究生就业空间流动与我国研究生教育区域布局[J].高教探索,2023,(01):67-73.

[62] 郑代良,钟书华.中国高层次人才政策现状、问题与对策[J].科研管理,2012,33(09):130-137.

[63] 钟腾,罗吉罡,汪昌云.地方政府人才引进政策促进了区域创新吗?——来自准自然实验的证据[J].金融研究,2021,(05):135-152.

[64] 周明,雷雁淘.迈向共同富裕的就业保障制度：逻辑、困境和路径[J].西北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2023,53(04):27-36.

[65] 周三多,陈传明,刘子馨,贾良定.管理学——原理与方法(第七版)[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2018:53-54.

[66] 朱仁显,李佩姿.跨区流域生态补偿如何实现横向协同?——基于13个流域生态补偿案例的定性比较分析[J].公共行政评论,2021,14(01):170-190+224-225.

[67] 朱文晶.城市待遇与留城意愿及创业行为——基于杭州市的实证考察[J].公共管理学报,2017,14(02):110-121+157-158.

[68] 左晶晶,段鑫星.“留”还是“流”:高校毕业生流动的空间布局与影响因素分析——以“双一流”建设高校博士毕业生为例[J].江苏高教,2022(07):50-59.

[69] Albert C , Davia M A. University-supported job search methods and educational mismatch in bachelor's and master's graduates[J]. Education + Training, 2023, 65(10): 29-45.

[70] Alm J , Winters J V . Distance and intrastate college student migration[J]. Economics of Education Review, 2009, 28(6): 728-738.

[71] Assemgul A. Moldаzhanova; Gulzhanar K. Dzhumazhanova; Aray K. Amanova; Aizhus K. Kokoraeva. Improving the mechanism of youth employment in the commonwealth of independent states in the global context[J]. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 2019, 22(01): 1-13.

[72] E. G. Ravenstein. The Laws of Migration[J]. Journal of the Statistical Society of London, 1885, 48(2): 167-235.

[73] Everett S. Lee. A Theory of Migration[J]. Demography, 1966,3(1): 47-57.

[74] Groen J A . The effect of college location on migration of college-educated labor[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2004, 121(1–2): 125-142.

[75] Harvey W S . Winning the global talent war: A policy perspective[J]. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, 2014,5(1): 62-74.

[76] Holland, Peter; Sheehan, Cathy; De Cieri, Helen. Attracting and retaining talent: exploring human resources development trends in Australia[J]. Human Resource Development International, 2007, 10(3): 247–262.

[77] King R , Lulle A ,Francesca Conti. Eurocity London: a qualitative comparison of graduate migration from Germany, Italy and Latvia[J]. Comparative Migration Studies, 2016, 4(1): 1-22.

[78] Kvist J. Diversity, Ideal Types and Fuzzy Sets in Comparative Welfare State Research [C]// Innovative Comparative Meth‐ods for Policy Analysis, Springer US, 2006: 167-184.

[79] Patrick Rérat. The selective migration of young graduates: Which of them return to their rural home region and which do not[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2014, 35: 123-132.