How can land better increase the well-being of farmers?

Land is not only the basic element of economic development, but also the lifeblood of farmers. How to make the farmers who guard the land "golden rice bowl" better enjoy the well-being brought by the land in the process of modernization is a very realistic and important issue. This needs to distinguish which farmers are being expropriated and which farmers benefit from land expropriation; how to share the income of land appreciation and how to better benefit farmers in the process of land expropriation need rational analysis and careful study.

What are the farmers fighting for? Land requisition and relocation has become an important factor in farmers' petitions and frequently triggered group incidents, the core of which is the game of benefit distribution. If analyzed carefully, because the compensation for land expropriation is clearly stipulated in the current law, the focus of farmers' resistance to land expropriation is the compensation of objects attached to the ground, and its value evaluation is more flexible and involves more interests of farmers. it is often related to the quality of life in the future. Therefore, the difficulty of land expropriation does not lie in the land expropriation itself, but in the compensation for land attachments accompanied by land expropriation, the so-called vicious incidents of land expropriation are mostly vicious incidents of demolition. Eager to get the land, the government dumped the "gross land" that did not meet the consolidation standards to the developers, who directly confronted the farmers violently, even at the expense of underworld means.

As the key to the interest game of requisition and relocation lies here, farmers in different positions because of their geographical location show varying degrees of struggle: for villages in the city, it is not a matter of survival, but the fight for more distribution rights of the huge value-added part of the land. the outcome of the struggle is often hundreds of thousands of millions of compensation, farmers have to fight hard, so nail households emerge one after another. For suburban farmers, it is related to their livelihood after requisition and relocation, so we must strive to raise the standard on the issue of compensation and ensure the follow-up conditions of housing, employment and social security, but this area is often located in the new development area of urban development. the demolition time is tight and the task is heavy, which finally leads to the violent demolition of the government after the transfer of enterprises and the extreme resistance of farmers. For farmers in the outer suburbs, the problem is that they will be forced to integrate into industrialization and urbanization, and face a fundamental change in their way of life, so they must strive to lay a solid foundation for a new life in the future. its struggle can not hide their inner expectations for land expropriation. For farmers in rural areas, the compensation for young seedlings on the ground also has room to fight for, which can increase the amount of one-time compensation and improve their livelihood, but due to the overall small amount of compensation, the degree of resistance is obviously weaker than that of farmers in urban villages and suburbs.

How to compensate for the requisition and relocation of land? We can only adhere to the legal basis and make compensation in accordance with local conditions and local conditions. And land value-added is not only a matter for farmers, but also a common matter for the government, society and citizens. As for the fantasy of "the same place, the same power and the same price" imagined by some study scholars, I am afraid it is not possible to realize it at all, since it is impossible to achieve a uniform price in different regions together with a commodity of one value, nor can the price be unified online and offline. why should land, a resource with strong natural attributes, be priced uniformly in different regions?

First of all, it is not realistic to raise the price of land requisition by a large margin. According to the current land management law, the sum of land compensation fees and resettlement subsidies shall not exceed 30 times the average annual output value of the three years before the land is expropriated, which is generally 20,000 to 30,000 yuan, and the compensation for the expropriation of one mu of land shall not exceed 60,000 yuan. If the compensation standards are raised substantially regardless of use or region, the state may not be able to afford it, enterprises cannot afford to use it, and public welfare facilities may not be able to afford it. For example, if the compensation for land expropriation is increased by ten times, who can afford the industrial land expropriation cost of 600000 yuan per mu? Therefore, the draft amendment to the Land Management Law discussed and adopted by the executive meeting of the State Council only deletes the content in the existing law that the sum of land compensation fees and resettlement subsidies shall not exceed 30 times the average annual output value of the three years before the land is expropriated, stipulating that there should be fair compensation, but there is no legendary ten-fold increase.

Secondly, the improvement of compensation standards should be different by region. The development level of different regions is different, and the compensation standard of land expropriation should be adjusted accordingly. For example, the current level in the central and western regions is still low and really needs to be improved, while the compensation standards in the eastern and big cities are not low and need to be controlled within a reasonable range.

Thirdly, the compensation of farmers in different locations in the same city should be treated differently. For the farmers in the villages in the city, they have become very rich in the process of urbanization, and their game with the government on the issue of land expropriation is only to obtain more benefits and consolidate the position of the land rentier class; for the farmers in the suburban villages, it may be because they have become a new land rentier class because they have been incorporated into the city, or because the land is used for industry, they are facing the danger of poverty and unemployment, so they must increase compensation and solve the long-term livelihood. For farmers far away from cities, especially farmers in rural areas, land expropriation may bring a large amount of income, but the follow-up employment and agricultural production need to be fully considered.

Thirdly, the land operating cost of the government should not be ignored. The government should make income from the land management, or at least recover the cost, otherwise the government can not continue to operate the city and attract investment; if the government cannot manage the land, it will be difficult for farmers to benefit from the change of land use. On the issue of land interests, the government and farmers are closely linked. If farmers want to get more compensation, the government may also want to sell more money, but in the final analysis, it is up to the land market to decide.

Finally, the method of compensation for land expropriation should also be discussed. Who should belong to the geographical location? Is it fair to other farmers that the land is collectively owned by all farmers and only belongs to the peasants whose land has been expropriated? Is it fair to the government and the industrial and commercial sector which have caused the increase in land prices? Is it fair to urban residents who are about to use expropriated land? According to the current law, the value-added of land expropriation belongs to the collective, and farmers can only get partial compensation. How to determine the proportion between them? How to ensure the survival of farmers after land expropriation for a long time needs to be well studied, and the practice of sharing the light and eating will have endless consequences. But from a practical point of view, farmers are often willing to divide the money equally, think less about long-term things, or do not trust the government, worried that they will not get it in the future, and more targeted measures are needed.

How to make the land better improve the well-being of farmers? Judging from the general trend of China's economic and social development in the next two or three decades, China's urbanization still needs to increase a large amount of construction land, even if industrial construction land is no longer greatly expanded in the future, or even should be shrunk on the whole, but some areas will increase. More importantly, there are not only the construction land needed by about 200 million rural floating population and their family members to settle in cities, but also the living land needed by about 10 million new urban population each year in the future. and relevant urban public transport, electricity, communications, water supply and drainage and other municipal public facilities and schools, hospitals, cultural facilities, sports venues and other public service facilities to further improve the level of construction land. All these require sustained and stable investment in urban construction land as a basic guarantee. In this context, land expropriation also needs transformation and innovation.

The diversity of land development methods should be promoted. The government is more concerned with planning and overall planning, reducing direct expropriation, expanding the market-oriented operation of land, allowing suitable rural construction land to enter the land market, and so on. At the same time, it is necessary to integrate urban and rural areas to promote land development and reduce the serious waste of land resources (for example, the land idle rate of rural enterprises left over by some migrant workers is as high as 55%, which is bound to face transfer and integration in the future). Make good use of the policy of linking the increase and decrease of urban and rural land.

Efforts should be made to realize the diversification of the protection of farmers' land rights and interests. Do you want the present or the long term? What if we take the money and run out of money? what about the future of our children and grandchildren? Both the government and the landless peasants themselves need to consider long-term plans, such as employment, social security, pension, medical care, and education for their children, and so on. How to make farmers trust the government is a key issue, not only a reasonable current compensation, but also a bright future, the land game between farmers and the government will achieve a win-win situation.

The overall principle is to allow farmers to have adequate living security, but not to become a complete land rentier class, especially to let a small number of farmers become land rentiers, while the majority of farmers do not benefit better. As the author pointed out when commenting on the land reform in Shenzhen, when a society speaks for the already strong land-rentier class with the discourse of vulnerable farmers, when the economic surplus of a society is mainly divided by the land-rentier class, when a society has formed a rigid and huge land-rentier class, the economy of this society will have no vitality and no hope for development. I hope this is not the alarmism of the author, and I also hope that the society will pay more attention to the real vulnerable farmers, that is, the land-expropriated farmers in the central and western regions and the land-expropriated farmers in pure rural areas.