There is no need to be too nervous about "anti-urbanization".

The phenomenon of "farmers do not want to settle in the city" and "the household registration in the city is in the village" is more common in the reform practice of improving the urbanization rate of household registration in some places. In view of these problems, we should comply with the wishes of farmers in attitude and create good conditions for farmers to voluntarily give up their "native nationality." what we should do in terms of measures is not to force farmers to settle in cities and towns, but to better safeguard their interests. As for the phenomenon of "anti-urbanization" in which urban people settle down in the countryside, it is a normal concomitant phenomenon to promote urbanization.

According to the investigation of some institutions and media, the phenomenon of "farmers do not want to settle in the city" and "the household registration in the city is in the village" is more common in the reform practice of improving the urbanization rate of household registration in some places. This phenomenon has aroused concern, some views that it is a "reverse urbanization" phenomenon, there are great hidden worries, the need to take measures to curb, so as not to delay the ongoing process of urbanization.

So, how to understand this phenomenon and viewpoint of "anti-urbanization"? If measures are taken, what aspects should we start with?

Judging from the current phenomenon of so-called "reverse urbanization", it is mainly concentrated in two aspects: one is that people have entered cities and towns or bought houses in cities and towns, but their household registration is still in rural areas; some people and household registration have even entered cities and towns, but the "three rights" in the village, such as the right to land contract, the right to the use of homestead and the right to income from collective shares, have not been given up. Second, people who were originally registered in cities and towns "retrograde" settled in the countryside, or went to the village to "buy land and buy houses", hoping to lead an idyllic life of dawn accompanied by chicken crowing and nostalgia in the twilight.

These two situations, after a little analysis, can not be attributed to "anti-urbanization". The phenomenon of household registration in the village to buy a house in the city is the result of urbanization. The fact that farmers buy houses in cities and towns shows that they have taken a step forward on the road of urbanization, because the "house closure" is the first "iron gate" for farmers to enter the city. After passing this barrier, the next step is the problem of complete citizenization. As for the household registration is still in the village, and even the household registration has entered the city, but the "three rights" of the village are still retained, which is also the result of the active promotion of urbanization with Chinese characteristics and the progress of urbanization. This phenomenon can be defined as "semi-urbanization" or incomplete urbanization, which is fundamentally different from "counter-urbanization".

From the practice of urbanization, it can be regarded as a phenomenon of "anti-urbanization" for urban people to settle in the countryside. However, due to the restrictions of China's laws and policies, urbanites are still unable to buy houses and land in rural areas, and under the general trend of new urbanization, all localities have adopted strict and stringent policies on urbanites settling in rural areas. Therefore, at present, it is very difficult for people with this will and ability to really become "villagers", most of them can only live in the village by means of "renting land", and in practice this part of the population is still very few.

If we have a clear understanding of these two phenomena, we will have a clear idea of the so-called "counter-urbanization" and the measures taken will be targeted. In the final analysis, the phenomenon of "semi-urbanization" is a matter of interests. Why are farmers unwilling to leave their household registration in cities and towns? they simply cannot afford to enter, because the costs of living in cities and towns are too high; they cannot get in, because the income from employment and employment in cities and towns is unstable; and it is not cost-effective, because the benefits that cities and towns can give are not as good as those in the countryside. The "three rights" in the village is not only the last barrier and guarantee for farmers, but also the psychological support of generations.

Therefore, there is no need to worry about the attitude towards "semi-urbanization". It is necessary to comply with the wishes of the peasants and create good conditions for them to voluntarily give up their "native nationality." do not think that this is "anti-urbanization" and stop it. What should be done in terms of measures is not to force farmers to settle in cities and towns, but to better safeguard the interests of farmers. Isn't the main problem now that farmers are reluctant to give up the "three powers"? The "three rights" are the rights given to farmers by laws and policies, and whether to withdraw depends on the wishes of farmers. In some places, when settling in cities and towns, they have to return their land and houses, or let farmers give up the "three rights" as a condition for entering cities, which is not only contrary to the spirit of the central policy, but also counterproductive, making farmers even more afraid to go to cities and cities.

In fact, the current rural reform experiment is actively experimenting with how to deal with the "three rights" of farmers after settling in cities, with a variety of methods, but its basic direction is to safeguard farmers' interests, respect voluntariness, and implement paid withdrawal. When farmers settle in cities, the cost is much higher than that of rural life, which requires capital. Where does the capital come from? The "three powers" account for part of it. The implementation of the "three rights" to withdraw for a fee, or retain the right to go to the city, is not only a certain guarantee for farmers to enter the city, but also effectively resolve a major difficulty on the road of urbanization.

As for the phenomenon of "anti-urbanization" in which urban people settle down in rural areas, it is a normal concomitant phenomenon to promote urbanization. At present, when there are no conditions for these people to "retrograde" to settle in the countryside, it is just possible to attract some people with "strong homesickness" by building a beautiful new countryside, developing rural tourism, folk housing, and so on. so that "reverse urbanization" has become a positive energy to promote urbanization. Therefore, the phenomenon of "anti-urbanization" is not terrible, and there is no need to worry too much. what we need to do is to find the right cause and resolve it in a positive way.