财政资源配置制度视野里的新农村建设主体研究

【作者】 郑宝华；

【导师】 纳麒；

【作者基本信息】 云南大学 ， 科学社会主义与国际共产主义运动， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 党的十六届五中全会提出的新农村建设,不仅是我党建设农村、发展农村,进而从根本上解决“三农”问题,实现农业和农村现代化的具体措施,而且是实现国家整合,全面建设小康社会和构建和谐社会的重大举措。就如何建设新农村的制度安排,多数官员和学者都赞同“政府主导、农民主体、社会参与”。但在中国国情下,如果不对政府主导作出准确界定,不仅会造成政府越位与错位的诸多不良后果,而且会使新农村建设的主体虚位缺位,从而使新农村建设难以达到预期目标。笔者选择这个主题的理由之一就是试图通过厘清政府在新农村建设中的职责和作用,还广大农民新农村建设的主体地位。其基本假设是,合理有效的财政资源配置制度,不仅可以规范政府的行为,充分发挥其主导作用,而且可以提升广大农民的主体地位,有效发挥其主体作用,最终形成一种良性互动的“合作”关系。对于新农村建设来讲,就是要让广大农民群众在成为受益主体的同时,最大限度地成为决策主体和行动主体。基于对人的社会发展主体的基本理解,笔者首先回顾了主体理论的一般观点,得出如下基本结论：中国古代先哲和统治者都十分强调人的主体地位和作用,核心是民本思想。她首先要求统治者必须亲民、爱民,尊重和保护广大人民的利益,尤其是维持其基本的生存权利；其次要求广大人民必须以“国家利益”为重,尊崇统治者的意愿,尽量做到公民的仁和忠。“仁、义、礼、智、信”被当成了人的基本伦理。西方社会也认同人作为社会发展和进步的主体,但强调的是：第一,有思维和有理性是人区别于其它动物的本质特征；第二,人本身具有多样性,且不同人的思想和意识是有差别的；第三,不同人群之间的权力和利益存在差异性和对抗性,政府的政策因此要尽量保护弱势群体的利益；第四,不同的人群在社会和权力博弈中表现出一种常态,实现动态的平衡是政府政策的重要目标。马克思主义主体思想首先将人看作是具体的、客观的、现实社会中的人,强调要从具体的、现实的、实践的角度去理解人作为社会发展主体的具体内容,核心是一切依靠人、一切为了人,在社会历史发展过程中要尊重人的主体地位、发挥人的主体作用、促进人的全面发展。当代中国共产党人所倡导的主体观立足于中国传统文化的精髓,既充分吸取了西方主体思想的精华,又把马克思主义的主体观置于核心地位,逐步形成了以人为本基础上的发展主体观。其核心是：人是社会发展的主体,社会发展必须做到一切依靠人,一切为了人,并把人的全面发展作为基本目标贯穿于整个发展过程之中。在以上分析的基础上,笔者通过问卷调查资料的分析,阐明了当前新农村建设中存在的不利于发挥广大农民主体性的诸多问题和具体表现,认为必须努力建构一种新的新农村建设主体观。这种主体观的核心是要让广大村民成为决策的主体,行动的主体和受益的主体。这意味着：第一,广大农民必须有真正的权利自主支配自己的资源,自主进行决策；第二,广大农民必须成为新农村建设的行动主体,能动地参与到新农村建设的全过程中去；第三,广大农民必须公平地从新农村建设中得到实惠。由此可以说,新农村建设的主体构建需要在“民有权、民担责、民泽福”几个方面得到具体体现。为了充分发挥广大农民的新农村建设主体作用,笔者从制度需求与供给的视角出发,提出了需求响应型制度变迁的观点。其逻辑前提是：任何制度变迁或新制度安排都既需要考虑社会发展对新制度的需求,更需要考虑其供给所受到的制约因素,要在供给与需求之间找到一个均衡点。这种处于均衡状态的制度安排也因此具有了需求响应特性。其变迁主体是国家,但国家必须尊重民意,路径不是绝对的从上到下或者自下而上；变迁的动因是为了得到在现存制度下所得不到的利益,但不完全是经济利益,还包括了政治权利、社会地位等,而其核心是基本权利的平等实现和基本需求的公平满足。基于需求响应型制度变迁的基本观点,笔者认为：只有建构一种农民需求响应型的财政资源配置制度,才能更有效地发挥广大农民新农村建设的主体作用。这种配置制度是由资源的来源、整合、输出等环节构成的一整套规范,涉及供给决策、出资主体建构、需求表达、组织运行和监督完善等多个方面,具体包括财政资源的动员与配置和有效使用两个环节。动员与配置环节充分体现政府的主导作用,基本原则是“三个代表”重要思想、科学发展观和统筹城乡发展,基本手段是公共产品均等化、公共财政和财政资源向农业和农村倾斜；有效使用环节充分体现广大农民的主体作用,基本原则是社区主导、需求满足和效率优先,基本手段是需求响应、社区组织建设和能力提升。其核心是以广大农民的基本需求为出发点,建立起能够回应人民需求的、各层级政府权责对等但又重心向下的财政资源配置机制,从而使新农村建设真正成为国家的中心工作。以上理论构想不仅有制度经济学等学科的理论支持,而且当前我国各级政府的许多改革实践也支持了笔者的观点。从宏观层面看,在倡导建立公共财政的同时,已经尝试“民办公助”、“以奖代补”、“一事一议”等新型财政分配体制。从微观层面看,许多地方也开始了在城乡一体化思路上的新农村建设实践。笔者引用的云南省开远市就是一个典型。尽管该市财政资源并不富裕,但不仅能够使财政资源向农村倾斜,而且在财政资源的使用上让广大农民“当主人、唱主角、做主体”,通过财政资源“以奖代补”和村民自治制度的“一事一议”的有机结合,在坚持“整市推进、全面突破”和同一项目“一次性”到位的原则基础上,让所有村庄有平等的机会参与项目实施。这不仅有效利用了政府有限的财政资源,而且撬动了广大农民的资源和其它社会资源,使广大农民作为新农村建设的主体地位得到突显。有鉴于需求响应型制度变迁思路和国内外的宝贵经验,笔者认为,首要任务是落实国家有关政策,使财政支农资金在总量上持续快速增长,以切实增加新农村建设的财政资源投入来源。首先是按照《农业法》及中央有关政策的要求,使财政支农支出的增长速度切实快于经常性预算收入的增长速度。其次要认真落实土地出让金收益、耕地占用税新增收入、耕地占用税税率提高后的收入用于农业和农村建设的比例。再次是借助国家乡镇体制改革有关政策措施的实施,减少财政支农支出中用于农林水等农口事业单位的支出比例,使更多的财政支农资金能够真正用于农业生产和农村发展。在此基础上,要把构建各级政府事权和财权对等的财政资源配置机制作为中心工作。核心是根据新农村建设所产出的公共产品的属性,将农村公共产品分为资本密集型、技术密集型和劳动密集型等类型。在此基础上明确各自的出资主体：资本密集型产品的供给主要由中央财政负担；技术密集型产品的供给主要由包括省级政府在内的地方财政负担；而劳动密集型产品的供给则主要由社区组织自己承担。在此基础上建立社区响应机制和需求显真机制,一方面克服集体非理性的公共选择困境,另一方面通过制订合理的成本分摊机制,培育广大农民的主人翁意识和责任。更多还原

【Abstract】 The idea of the New Socialist Construction of the Chinese Countryside, which was proposed at the fifth session of the Sixteenth National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in 2005, does not offer very important approaches through which the Chinese Communist Party can construct and develop rural areas; resolve issues related to farmers’ capacity building, agriculture growth and rural development; and realize agricultural and rural modernization, but also provides key strategies to realize national integration, construct a comprehensive economically more advanced society, as well as build a harmonious society. Regarding to the concrete approach for the new countryside construction, many governmental officials and scholars consider the saying "government orientation, villagers’ position as subjects, and social participation" as action principles. However,’government orientation’ in the Chinese context has, does not only result in many negative influences related to the government’s failing to assume its proper role, but also results in grass-root farmers losing their position, followed by "the government busy in construction and the farmers with nothing to do but watching". This implies that the new countryside construction is losing its specified and appropriated direction. One of the reasons I have chosen this topic is to make clear the government’s role in the new countryside construction and to return farmers to their position as subjects. The assumption is that rational and effective fiscal resource allocation approach may not only regulate government’s behavior and motivate its orientation role to the full, but also promotes farmers’ position as subject and take their role as subject, finally to formulate a "cooperative" relationship among different stakeholders.Moreover, within the cooperative relationship, the farmers’ position and roles as subject is located in the basic and fundamental place. The reasons are that theoretically farmers as majority of Chinese citizen must become the subject for social development process, and in the reality, the goal of the new countryside construction is to benefit rural people and let them become the primary beneficiaries. The theoretical base is that society consists of people and people are social entities, therefore people must be the subject of any social development. People as the subject of social development are conscious and dynamic stakeholders. This is the social characteristic of people as the subject of social development, which can be interpreted from two viewpoints:one is that ’people’ is a kind of social group distinguished by different social classes, layers, and other social properties; the second is that ’people’ as the subject of social development are not only practitioners and actors, but also primary beneficiaries. Based upon this understanding, the author highlights some key elements of people as subject related to different thinking as follows.Great Chinese thinkers and rulers of the past all paid great attention to the people’s position and role as subject. At the center was an ideology that took’the people’ as its foundation. The most important thing was to be close to the people, to love them as citizens, to respect and protect the people’s benefit, especially their basic right to survive. At the same time, it asked of the people that they put the country’s welfare first, that they obey the ruler’s willpower, and that they be benevolent and loyal citizens. "Benevolence, righteousness, civilization, wisdom and trust" were the basic moral standards for all people.People as subject in social development and progress in Western society emphasizes the following points:in the first place, consciousness and rationality are fundamental characteristics distinguishing between human beings and other animals; secondly, among human beings there is diversity and differences in thinking and consciousness; thirdly, there are differences and antagonisms between various social groups regarding power and benefits, so that government policy must protect the rights and benefits of vulnerable groups; and fourthly, the interplay regarding power and benefit among different social groups tends to be a formal situation, hence keeping a dynamic balance among these different social groups is one of the most important objectives in issuing and implementing government policy.Marxism’s thinking regarding people as subject in social development considers human beings as concrete, objective and practical rather than abstract and natural. It asks us to use a concrete, practical and real approach to analyze and understand human beings as subject in social development. Social development and progress must rely on and serve human beings. It is necessary to respect human beings’ position as subject, to activate people’s subject role, and to foster people’s comprehensive development in all social development initiatives.The Chinese Communist Party has taken the essence of western social thought (for example, in emphasizing the fundamental role of human beings), while putting Marxist thinking at the centre (for example, in emphasizing people’s comprehensive development). To do this, it takes Chinese traditional culture as the foundation, and formulates new thinking with regard to the subject in social development. This is people-oriented development thinking enhancing the role of the subject in social development. Its core is:(1) the human being is the subject in social development, (2) social development must rely on and serve human development, and (3) comprehensive human development is the basic and key objective, which must be integrated into the whole social development process.In this dissertation, the author suggests that we build new thinking about the subject to support the construction of the new countryside. This new thinking will be based upon the theoretical analysis discussed above, as well as upon observations on farmers’ practical roles in the new countryside construction initiative. At the heart of this new thinking about the subject is to allow farmers to become the main body for decision-making, action and benefit sharing. It implies that:(1) farmers must possess real rights to control their own resources, to make decisions by and for themselves; (2) farmers must become the action subject for the new countryside construction program planning and implementation; and (3) farmers must receive the benefit from the construction programs, equally and fairly distributed. In sum, new thinking about the subject, supporting the new construction of the countryside, must cover at least three major aspects:farmers have rights to own their resources and to make decisions; they should take social responsibility as citizens; they should receive most of the benefit divided among them equally and fairly.In order to fully take farmers’ roles as subject to support the new construction of the countryside, the author proposes a demand-responsive institutional innovation model from the point of view of institutional supply and demand. Its premise is that any institutional innovation or arrangement must not only consider demand, but also needs to consider key constraints from the supply side, to achieve an equilibrium point. The demand-responsive feature at this equilibrium point may characterize the institution. In the Chinese context, the instigator of innovation is government; however, the government must respect the people’s willingness. The relationship is neither top-down nor bottom-up. The key reason for institutional innovation is to pursue benefit that the current institutional arrangements may not be producing. The benefit may include political rights, social position, and economic profit. The fundamental issue is the equal realization of basic rights and the fair satisfaction of basic needs.Based upon the crucial concept of demand-responsive institutional innovation, the author suggests that it is necessary to formulate a new institution for fiscal resource allocation reflecting farmers’ demand responses and fully taking into consideration farmers’ roles in supporting the new construction of the countryside. This institution would consist of components related to resource inputs, integration, and outputs, as well as a set of institutional arrangements covering supply decision-making; resource mobilization; demand expression; resource allocation; implementation, monitoring and evaluation. This new institution for fiscal resource allocation consists of two parts. One is resource mobilization and allocation, taking on a leading role of the government. Another is the effective utilization of resources, taking on a subject role of farmers. The principles of the first are scientific development theory and integrated urban-rural development. The major approaches might be the equalization of public goods, a public fiscal system, and priority allocation of fiscal resources to the agricultural sector and rural areas. Principles for the latter would be community-driven, basic needs’satisfaction, with priority given to efficiency; the approaches would be demand-responsive, organizational construction and capacity building. The central concern for the latter is to take farmers’basic needs as the most important orientation, to build a kind of fiscal resource allocation institution responsive to farmers’ needs, implying equality between rights to control fiscal resources and responsibility among different layers of government. In the current situation, it would also need to allocate more resources to local government, especially at the county and township levels.The theoretical framework outlined above not only receives theoretical support from institutional economics, etc., it is also supported by many reform practices currently taking place in China also support the author’s viewpoint. At the national level, the central government is in the process of building a public fiscal system, while many places are practicing new approaches improving current fiscal system-such as government-implemented programs with support from the people; local community-invested programs with fiscal support from government; giving prizes instead of allowances, etc. At the local level, many local governments are pursuing new practices to promote the new countryside construction initiative by introducing a coordinated development approach between urban and rural areas. Kaiyuan municipal government, Yunnan Province, is a typical case that the author describes. The municipal government is not rich in terms of fiscal revenue, however it not only prioritizes fiscal allocation to rural areas, it is also trying to improve the institutional allocation of fiscal resources to allow the major farmers to act as hosts, to take a leading role, and to become subjects who control and utilize fiscal resources. The primary intention is to put farmers’ development rights to the fore. The municipal government is trying to link the fiscal allocation policy of "giving prizes instead of allowances" to the villagers’ self-governance policy embodied in "One Villagers’ Affair Decided by One Villagers’ Negotiation". It hopes to allow all villages to have equal rights to apply and implement the same program or project, taking a voluntary participation approach. This approach not only mobilizes farmers’ enthusiasm and participation, it also improves the efficiency of investment from both government and local communities. More important, it promotes farmers’ ownership over programs and projects.Based on the concept of demand-responsive institutional innovation and lessons learned from both international and domestic practices, the author holds that the urgent imperative is to implement national policy fully so that fiscal inputs for the rural area may increase faster, possibly contributing to the growth of fiscal investment in new countryside construction. Firstly, in accordance with the requirements of the Agricultural Law and other central government policies, it is necessary to keep the growth rate of fiscal investment in rural areas faster than the growth of total fiscal revenue and to formulate feasible policies to ensure that a suitable proportion of monies from land auction profits, land appropriation taxes, and so on, is really used for rural construction. Secondly, policies should explore effective ways to reduce budgets of local governments by strengthening township administrative reform.It is necessary to formulate a new fiscal allocation institution reflecting equal financial rights and responsibilities among different layers of government. The key is to divide rural public goods into different categories-such as capital-intensive products, technique-intensive products, and labor-intensive ones-by considering the characteristics of public goods produced from new countryside construction, then to determine clear buyers for each category. The author suggests that the central government take the lead for capital-intensive products with support from provincial government; that the local government (county and township) take the lead for technique-intensive products; and that local communities and villagers take the lead for labor-intensive products. Based upon this arrangement, it is necessary to establish a new fiscal system, which may downstream resources to local government by drawing on the experiences of the Kaiyuan municipal government. It is important to conduct detailed studies to understand villagers’ needs, and to build demand-responsive mechanisms that reflect farmers’ needs.更多还原