【作者】 王珊；

【导师】 张安录；

【作者基本信息】 华中农业大学 ， 土地资源管理， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 农地城市流转一方面为社会经济发展和城市化发展提供土地支持,另一方面带来粮食安全隐患,威胁社会稳定,造成生态环境压力。对于农民而言,农地城市流转为其提供了享受城市发展部分成果,改善居住地周围基础设施状况的机会,但同时也使其失去了稳定的经济来源、就业岗位和养老保障,尤其对于年老者来说他们必须改变习惯已久的生活方式、面临社会保障问题。土地自然供给的不变性和经济供给的有限性决定了农地城市流转的必然性。农民作为农地流转过程中的弱势群体,其福利状况需要给予特别的关注,农民庞大的数量也使得其福利问题成为社会关注的重大问题。福利的衡量标准经历了“基数效用论”和“序数效用论”的争论、“经济福利”和“非经济福利”孰轻孰重的讨论以及福利是否在人际间可比的讨论。农地对农民而言除了经济来源以外,其社会保障功能也逐渐被大家所认识。那么如何测度农地流转对农户的综合福利效应?目前对于农地流转前后农地经济产出功能和社会保障功能的变化研究较多,征地后的土地用途对农民福利的影响探讨较少。实际上,征地后的土地用途在客观上会影响农民的居住环境,从而影响农民的健康状况,而主观上由于流转后土地的不同用途造成土地在流转前后的比较利益的差距从而影响农民对于补偿公平的判断。那么,公益性和非公益性农地流转的农户福利效应究竟如何?本文分为四大部分进行了研究。(1)第一部分,即本文的前两章。首先对全文的选题背景、研究目的与意义、研究思路与方法进行了介绍,理清了后文的写作思路。其次对国内外关于农地流转中的福利问题和福利测度方法的研究进展进行了梳理,并对本文的理论基础—福利经济学、新制度经济学、外部性及家庭功能理论进行了回顾。(2)第二部分,即本文的第三章。从农地城市流转与福利效应的内涵着手,从理论上分析了农地城市流转的正负福利效应。选择根据森的可行能力理论对不同类型农地城市流转的农户福利效应进行测度。考虑到中国农村的实际情况以农户为基本研究单位。可行能力理论认为福利具有模糊性,并与目标特征密切相关,因此并不提倡千篇一律的功能性活动列表。本文通过总结国内外运用可行能力测算福利选用的功能性活动列表,结合中国农户家庭特征,以及对农地流转的福利效应的理论分析,立足于家庭功能构建包括8项可行能力及其19个评价指标的农地城市流转中农户家庭的可行能力框架。此外,可行能力理论还强调商品和服务不是福利,商品和服务转换为可行能力才是福利,影响转换效率的就是转换因素。本文参考森对转换因素的分类以及高进云等国内学者对转换因素的选择,结合研究对象和研究目的,从家庭特征、地区社会经济环境和征地用途三大类选择转换因素。并在此基础上构建基于可行能力理论的福利效应测度理论框架。(3)第三部分,即本文的第四、五、六章是实证部分。选取社会经济发展情况相近的武汉市江夏区和成宁市咸安区为样本区域,采用入户访谈的调查方式并最终获取398份有效问卷。采用灰色模糊综合评判方法：①以层次分析法的结果作为主观赋权法的测度结果,以灰色关联分析方法的结果作为客观赋权法的测度结果,取二者的平均值作为模糊评判方法的权重值；②通过设定农户福利的模糊函数和隶属函数,从有效问卷中提取福利测度指标数据,计算各农户各指标的隶属值；③利用前面计算的权重和隶属值进行单个农户和农户总体的隶属度加总。第四章、第五章和第六章分别从农地流转的农户福利效应、公益性和非公益性农地流转的福利效应以及其他转换因素下的农地城市流转的福利效应三个方面进行实证研究。(4)第四部分,即第七章为本文的研究结论和讨论部分。本文研究表明：①农地城市流转使得农户家庭的总福利隶属度从农地流转前的0.423下降到农地流转后的0.363。而农地流转对农户不同功能性活动影响方向和程度各异,农地流转使得农户的组织生产、社会保障、居住条件与环境和社会公平功能水平下降,使得农户的经济收入、健康与休闲、社会参与和子女教育功能水平上升。②虽然农地城市流转在不同转换因素下对农户福利的影响方向一致,但是不同转换因素下农地流转对农户家庭福利的影响程度各异,对农户家庭各功能性活动的影响也各不相同。③公益性和非公益性农地流转对农户家庭福利的影响存在差异。非公益性农地流转对农户总福利的影响更大。非公益性农地流转对农户家庭的组织生产功能、居住条件和环境状况的负向影响大于公益性农地流转；对农户家庭的社会保障功能和对社会公平的评价的负向影响小于公益性农地流转。非公益性征地对农户家庭的经济收入功能、健康与休闲功能的正向影响大于公益性征地；对农户家庭子女教育功能正向影响小于公益性征地。唯一公益性和非公益性农地流转使其变化方向相反的家庭功能是社会参与功能,公益性流转使农户该功能的隶属度提高了66.67%,而非公益性流转使农户的该功能隶属度降低了9.09%。可见,农地流转不仅影响农户的客观福利,而且影响农户的主观福利；不仅影响农户的经济福利,还影响农户的非经济福利。要想改善农户失地后的福利状况,需要区别对待公益性和非公益性征地及其补偿,建立货币、社会保障、心理辅导等全方位的补偿模式。具体而言,首先要分别做好公益性和非公益性征地的宣传工作并保证征地程序的透明公正；然后需做好新旧补偿标准和相邻区域补偿标准的衔接并尽量做到补偿标准的细致化和人性化；最后要保证补偿的持续性并对失地农户进行跟踪管理。在本文的最后,指出本研究在理论方法、资料获取和实证测度等方面的不足之处,以期在未来的研究中探讨与改进。更多还原

【Abstract】 On the one hand rural-urban land conversion provides land support for social and economic development and the development of urbanization, on the other hand decreased cultivated land bring food safety problems, land expropriation conflicts threaten social stability, reduced agricultural land area poses the ecological environment pressure. For farmers, farmland conversion offers farmers the opportunity to enjoy a part of urban development achievements, improves infrastructure status near the residence. At the same time, it deprives farmers of the stable financial resources, jobs, and old-age security, especially for the elderly, they must change the way of life habit and fear that the social security problem. The invariance of the natural supply and the limitation of economic supply of land determine the necessity of rural-urban land conversion. Farmers as the vulnerable groups in the process of land conversion, the welfare state needs to pay special attention. The huge number of farmers also makes its welfare become the core issue to ease the land requisition conflict. Welfare measure Criteria experience the dispute about "cardinal utility theory" and "ordinal utility theory", the discussion on the importance of "economic welfare" and "Non-economic welfare", and also the game of whether it can be compared in interpersonal. Besides the economic source functions, the social security functions of farmland for farmers are known by people gradually. Then how to measure the comprehensive welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for peasant household? At present, the research about the change of economic output function and the social security function of farmland before and after rural-urban land conversion are more, the impact of land use after land requisition on farmers’ welfare is less discussed. In fact, the land use after land requisition not only affect the farmers’ living environment that affect farmers’ health objectively, but also cause the difference of comparative advantage before and after land conversion that affect farmers’ fair judgment for compensation subjectively. So, how is the household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for the public purpose or non public purpose? This article is divided into four parts to study.(1)The first two chapters of this article, first of all to introduce the selected topic background, research purpose and significance, research ideas and methods of the full text, and also to sort out the train of thought for later writing. Second to generalize the research progress of welfare issues in rural-urban land conversion and welfare measurement methods at home and abroad, and then review the theoretical basis of this article which include welfare economics, new institutional economics, externality theory and family function theory.(2)In the third chapter of this paper, we analyzed the positive and negative welfare effects of rural-urban land conversion theoretically from the connotation of rural-urban land conversion and welfare effect. We try to measure peasant household welfare of rural-urban land conversion for different object based on Sen’s capability theory. Considering the situation of China’s rural, peasant household was taken as the basic research unit. In capability theory we think that welfare is fuzzy, and is closely related with the target features, therefore non fixed functional activities list was advocated. Functional activity list in welfare measure using capability method at home and abroad is summed up, combined with the feature of Chinese peasant household, as well as the theoretical analysis of the welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion, based on the function of family, the framework of peasant households’capability in rural-urban land conversion including8capabilities and19evaluation indexes was built. Capability theory also emphasizes that goods and services are welfare only if they transfer into capability, the conversion factors are which influence the transformation efficiency. Considered classification to conversion factors by Sen and choice to influence factors by domestic scholars such as Gao Jinyun, combined with the special object of study, we choose the influence factors from the family characteristics, regional social and economic environment and land use.(3) The fourth, fifth and sixth chapters of this paper is the empirical part. Jiangxia district in Wuhan and Xianan district in Xianning are selected as the sample area because their similar social and economic development situation. By interview survey method we finally obtain398valid questionnaires. Grey fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is used:1) With the results of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as the results of subjective values measure method, with the results of grey correlation analysis method as the results of objective values measure method, take the average weights of two as the values results of fuzzy evaluation method;2) By setting the fuzzy function and membership function of farmers’welfare, extracting welfare measure data from valid questionnaires, calculate the membership values of each index of the farmers;3) Using the calculation of weight and the membership value to aggregate overall membership degree of individual and the overall farmers. The fourth chapter has carried on the empirical research in peasant household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion; Household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for the public purpose and non public purpose were measured empirically in Chapter5; Household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion under the other conversion factors were measured empirically in Chapter6.(4) The seventh chapter is conclusions and discussion part of this research. We concluded that:1) Rural-urban land conversion makes the total welfare membership of peasant household flow from0.423before the conversion down to0.363after the conversion. The effect direction and degree of rural-urban land conversion to different functional activities of household is different. Land conversion makes the level of peasant households’functional activities of production organization, social security, living conditions and the environment, and social equity decline. It makes the level of functional activities of income, health and leisure, social participation, and children’s education rise.2) Although the effect direction of household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion under different conversion factors is consistent, the degree of welfare effect is different. The impact on each functional activities of peasant household is also not identical.3) Peasant households’welfare effects of public purpose and non public purpose land conversion vary. The public purpose land conversion influence farmer total welfare more. The negative effects of non public purpose land conversion on peasant households’functional activities of production organization, living conditions and the environment are greater than the public purpose one; the negative effects on social security and social equity are less. The positive influence of non public purpose land conversion on peasant households’functional activities of income, health and leisure is greater than the public purpose one; The positive influence on children’s education is less. Only on the functional activities of social participation of peasant household, the influence direction of land conversion for public purpose and non pubic welfare is opposite. Land conversion for public purpose make the membership degree of peasant households’functional activities of social participation increased by66.67%, land conversion for non public purpose make it reduced by9.09%. To improve the welfare of land-lost farmers, need to be targeted to enhance the practical capacity of peasant households. Specifically, first of all, do propaganda work of public purpose and non public purpose land acquisition respectively and make sure the land acquisition process is transparent and fair; Then link up the new compensation standard with old and adjacent area’s compensation standard, and try to be detailed and humanization; finally ensure the continuity of compensation and track management to land-lost farmers. In the end of this article, pointed out the deficiency in aspect of theory method, data acquisition and empirical measure, in order to discuss and improve in future research.更多还原