The institutional background of the "separation of powers" of agricultural land in China

The background of the system of "separation of powers" of agricultural land in China: land is a means of insurance for farmers, not a tool to get rich.

(1)

Recently, 17 experts have submitted a proposal on "land reform" proposed by the Central Committee. It is said that there are 13000 words in the full text. I can only get a glimpse of the full text of the proposal from the media reports; its core point is probably "to thoroughly reform the planning and land use control system." we will launch reforms such as the entry of collective land into the market, the reform of the land requisition system, and the construction of a unified construction land market in urban and rural areas. " Because only agricultural land is owned by collectives, the proposal is (1) to weaken the planning power and give way to market choice; (2) to relax the control on agricultural land and allow capital to enter the agricultural land market. Then carry out the free transfer of land, merger and conversion of use.

There is a unanimous voice of opening up the flow of the right to the use of agricultural land and letting capital into agriculture. With the decline in economic growth and the slump in the capital markets, such voices are getting stronger and stronger. The main reasons put forward by these people are: (1) to prevent abandonment and improve productivity, (2) to reduce resistance to land expropriation, (3) to raise land expropriation prices, to reduce the impulse of real estate development (4) to realize farmers' right to use, and so on. Capital into agricultural land, the experience of countries around the world shows that its ultimate goal is to look forward to the premium of agricultural land into non-agricultural land.

In fact, the capital market has begun to layout, many large capital companies have begun to invest in agriculture, such as Evergrande began to dabble in animal husbandry. I don't like the conspiracy theory, but there is no coveted expectation of possible land system reform and the excess profits of land use conversion.

All the developed countries in the world (including China, Japan and Germany, etc.) have very strict land use planning systems and strictly restrict the conversion of land use. That is, the so-called "planning right" is higher than "ownership". Strict land planning system is also an important means to protect land ownership. Imagine that if there is no strict land planning system and a chemical plant is built in a residential area, the consequences will cause great losses to the rights and interests of all landowners.

Originally, agricultural land and non-agricultural land are not the same market, which is basically established in all countries. I do not understand how to establish a unified urban and rural land market according to the words of 17 experts. If agricultural land can be easily converted to non-agricultural use, it will not only have a significant impact on China's food security, but also have a great impact on the non-agricultural and agricultural land market.

(2)

The problem of agricultural land in China has been the focus of social economy for thousands of years. The land system is not only an economic issue, but also a political issue, which is closely related to the foundation of political power.

After the third Plenary session of Communist Party of China's 18th CPC Central Committee, the reform direction of the agricultural land system put forward by the central government is to "encourage the separation of collective land ownership, contracting rights and management rights, stabilize the contracting rights and invigorate the management rights." Standardize the transfer of land contractual management rights. " I think this kind of system design is suitable for the optimal design of China's farmland system.

Many people do not understand why China has to design a land system so complicated. The right of contract and the right of management should be derived from ownership. I think this is determined by the reality of China and is an inevitable choice in history.

Such a land system, in addition to ensuring agricultural production and ensuring China's food security, is more important to ensure the political stability of the whole society.

China is a country with a large population and little land, which is the fundamental reason that determines the existing farmland system in China. According to the latest statistics, the total area of cultivated land is 2.003 billion mu, China's total population is 1.37 billion, and the rural registered population is about 800 million. The per capita cultivated land in rural areas is only 2.5 mu. In the eastern coastal areas, the per capita arable land in rural areas is less than 1 mu. Such a small per capita cultivated land, from an economic point of view, can only make ends meet, not enough to get rich; therefore, land can not become a means for farmers to get rich.

From a commercial point of view, planting land on a house is bound to yield more than growing crops. This is also the background economic driver of the above arguments.

However, China's rural residents have not yet established a good social security and old-age insurance system. The implementation of equal distribution of land in China's rural areas has played a role in social security and old-age insurance for rural residents. When the urban economy is in the doldrums and a large number of migrant workers are unemployed, it can play a social buffer role. This is the crux of the problem. If we change the land system and let farmers lose their land completely, this economic buffer will be gone. When an economic crisis occurs in cities, hundreds of millions of migrant workers without land and social security will be the first to lose their jobs. What can they do? If you study the history before 1949, you will know the answer.

In 2013, China's urbanization rate reached 53.7%; that is, 53.7% of the population lived in cities and towns. But the number of people with urban hukou is less than 35%. About 20 per cent of the urban population are migrant workers without an urban hukou, a total of about 270 million. If such a large population has a crisis, no land, no job and no social security, the result will be social unrest. If they have a piece of land in their hands, at least they will not cause social unrest because of hunger.

Therefore, the existing land system emphasizes the "stable contract right"; its purpose is to allow farmers to have the contract right compulsorily, without isolation from the land. In times of economic crisis, these farmers can still get their land back and maintain social stability.

It is true that there has been no major economic crisis in China's 35 years of reform and opening up, but the market economy is bound to produce an economic crisis. Heightening vigilance is necessary for the long-term and stable development of a country.

(III)

From a historical point of view, the current communist regime was successfully obtained by relying on the agrarian revolution and agrarian reform and attracting the support of a large number of farmers. During the agrarian revolution from 1927 to 1937, the Communist Party divided the land among the local tyrants in the base areas to meet the land needs of the peasants, and the millions of Chiang Kai-shek's army represented by the urban bourgeoisie could not destroy the Communist Party's army.

After the founding of the people's Republic of China in 1949, the Communist Party allocated the land of unreceived landlords to landless peasants, which laid a solid foundation for the Communist Party to stabilize its political power and later industrialization.

In 1978, the reform and opening up also began with the rural land reform, the implementation of the distribution of land to households, and the household contract responsibility system.

Even though 35 years have passed and time and space have changed, land is still closely linked to the foundation of political power.

The existing land system is a historical choice. Although it may not be the best design economically, it is a system that is most suitable for China in order to ensure food security and maintain social stability.

(4)

It is not impossible to implement the capitalization of agricultural land or the free flow of agricultural land, but we must establish the same social security system for farmers as urban residents. According to the current decline in the financial strength of local governments, there are a lot of debts, and the tension of local old-age insurance, it is difficult to achieve in a short time! If there is no good social security system for farmers, the capitalization of agricultural land should not be discussed.

At the same time, it must be pointed out that, according to the latest research, the non-agricultural income of rural residents has accounted for more than 60% of the total income, and it is true that agricultural income no longer accounts for the main position of farmers' income. The purpose of maintaining the existing land system is not to imprison farmers on the land, but to give them an insurance policy. In the absence of social security, in the macroeconomic downturn, farmers have a minimum living security. This will not lead to social chaos. If farmers are not given a good social security system, the hasty capitalization of agricultural land is tantamount to planting an indefinite time bomb for the stability of the existing regime!