【作者】 李爱勇；

【导师】 姜进；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 中国近现代史， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 目前,学术界只有极少数历史学者和法律学者研究上海私有住房,且其研究内容主要限于私房改造及其遗留的经租房问题。1950～1980年的上海私有住房在相关主体的作用下经历了复杂的历史过程,它主要包括以下四个阶段：从建国初期至1960年代初自住性私有住房的建设,从1956年初至文化大革命前出租性私有住房的改造,文化大革命时期私有住房受到的大规模冲击,从1978年拨乱反正至今对私有住房遗留问题的落实等。为了挖掘普通民众的经济潜力,上海市政府在一定时期内和程度上支持或规范自住性私有住房的建设。但是自建公助和零星自建等自住性私有住房的建设,都反映出上海正试图建立公有住房体系,而非发展私有住房。因为自建公助挤占了公有住房的资源,零星自建影响了社会主义的城市规划,上海市政府将自建公助住房分配成了公房,并严格限制零星自建。为了伸张私房所有权或居住权,些职工和居民,与上海市政府产生了一定冲突。它反映了工人阶级领导地位在理论和现实间的差距,以及居民自主解决住房困难和政府规划建设城市的分歧。对于出租性私有住房,上海市政府无论是保护私有房屋还是限制私房租金,都是为了保障民众租住而非私房产权本身。在1956年开始的公私合营、国家经租和补改造中,上海市政府和普通民众进行或支持私房改造分别是从意识形态和实际权利出发的。私房房主试图通过各种方式维护既有的私房权利,但仍逐渐失去了对房屋的处分权、部分收益权。上海市政府也曾试图处理好租赁关系与权能利益,合理利润与投机剥削,以及群众动员与房主自愿等矛盾。但是,普通民众的盲目合营和私房房主的逃避改造使私房政策逐步倾向于快速改造。从历史发展看,私房改造存在一定的失误和不足；从法律角度看,它忽视了私房的权能利益。但从政治角度看,私房改造存在一种必然要解决的合法性问题,因而也具有了相应的合理性。文革时期,少量的出租性私有住房和面积较大的自住性私有住房都受到了冲击。以学生为主的红卫兵、私房房主所在的机关单位和房地局的造反派先后成为三次抢房风的主力。普通民众和私房房主对这种改变私房所有权的强烈冲击进行了一定的抵制,但私有住房还是失去了曾经对上海住房的影响力。三支两军、住房分配和归还财物,在维持住房秩序并重建新形象等方面起到了一定的积极作用,也进一步造成了私有住房的复杂问题。公有住房在1979年达到了顶峰,拥有在上海住房中的绝对优势,是以冲击私有住房所造成的深刻影响为代价的。文革产、私改房、经租房等历史遗留问题都是其直接或间接的后果。从1978年拨乱反正至今,文革产、私改房、经租房等问题的落实是为了重建社会主义法制、恢复党和政府的信誉,而非通过法律解决私房权属这一核心问题。在1992年文革产、错改房都得到了基本落实后,关乎私房改造重大问题的经租房仍然存在巨大分歧。因为私房落实要与总的政治原则相一致,上海市政府始终坚持维护私房改造成果,认为符合政策并纳入改造的私房“一律属于国家所有”；经租房房主则坚持,私房改造终止于文革取消定租,没有补领定租的经租房,其私有权并没有完成转变。经济发展和落政房源等客观条件影响了私房落政的时间,各方的认识分歧等主观因素则关乎落政私房的重塑及相关法治建设等问题。经租房是政府与民众共同参与的产物,其解决也需要各方的共同努力。总而言之,1950～1980年上海私有住房的历史,既是以前历史的延伸,又是以后历史发展的基础。期间,上海私有住房的所有权发生了复杂而深刻的变化。私有住房的权利是相关各方面临的中心问题,也是各方参与历史活动的根本。作为最主要、最切身的感受体,私有住房让普通民众和私房房主产生了持久而深刻的体验。坚持社会主义和维护私房改造成果等意识形态需要,对上海市政府的政策制定有着重要影响。新中国的成立不是上海私有住房新旧历史的分水岭,文革结束也不是原有私房的春天。政府与私房房主仍需就经租房的落实达成一种契约关系,在尊重政策的情况下,按照《物权法》解决商品住房问题的模式,通过法律途径解决私房遗留问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 Currently, only a handful of historians and legal scholars have studied Shanghai private housing, and whose research mainly confined to private housing transformation and its problem of commissioned rental housing. From1950to1980, the private housing of Shanghai experienced a complex historical process in the role of relevant subjects, which mainly consists of the following four stages: the construction of occupied private housing that from the early new China to the early1960s, the transformation of rental private housing that from early1956until the Cultural Revolution eve, massive shock that private housing suffered during the Cultural Revolution, the implementation of private housing remained issues from1978until now.In order to excavate the economic potential of ordinary people, the Shanghai Municipal Government supported or restricted the construction of occupied private housing in a certain period and extent. But the construction of occupied private housing which including the public assisted and sporadic self-build reflected that Shanghai is trying to build public housing system, rather than to develop private housing. Because the public assisted crowded out public housing resources, and the sporadic self-builded affected socialist urban planning, the SMG turned the public assisted into public housing in allocation, and strictly limited the sporadic self-builded. To assert private ownership or residency, a number of workers and residents clashed with the SMG. The clash reflects a gap between the theory and practice of the working class leadership, as well as the divisions that existed in residents independently resolve the housing difficulties and Government plans to build the city.Whether to protect the private housing or torestrict private housing rent, the policy of SMG is to protect the public leasehold rather than private housing property itself. In the public-private partnerships, the state commissioned rental and the complement transformation that began in1956One after another, the SMG and the ordinary people were respectively starting from the ideological or practical right when they conducted or supported the private housing transformation. The homeowners tried to safeguard the existing private rights through a variety of ways, but still gradually lost the right to dispose and part Income rights of/from the house. The SMG have tried to deal with the conflicts between power interests and lease relationship, reasonable profit and speculative exploitation and mass mobilization and homeowners’wish. However, the ordinary people’s blind joint and homeowners’ escape prompted a rapid transform policy. From a historical perspective, there are some mistakes and shortcomings belong to transformation; from a legal perspective, the transformation ignored the power interests of private housing. But from a political perspective, the transformation had the legality that some problem was inevitable to solve, and thus have the corresponding reasonable.During the Cultural Revolution, a small number of private rental housing and larger private owner-occupied housing have been shocked. Red Guard student-centered, units where the homeowners work in and the Rebels real estate bureau premises became the main of three rob-room wind. Ordinary people and homeowners made some boycott to the strong impact on the change of private housing ownership, but private housing had lost the influence to housing of Shanghai. The armies’ coercion, the allocation of housing and the restitution of property, had played a positive role in order to maintain housing order and rebuild new image, but also further complicated problems caused by private housing. Public housing reached its peak in1979, with absolute advantage in Shanghai housing, which the profound impact is caused by assaulting private housing for the price. The historical private housing issues that produced during the Cultural Revolution, Private Transformation, and Commissioned Rental were the direct or indirect consequences.From1978to Set Things Right so far, the implementation of private housing issues that produced during the Cultural Revolution, Private Transformation, and Commissioned Rental in order to rebuild the socialist legal system, to restore the credibility of the party and the government, rather than to resolve the core issue of private ownership by law. The issues that produced during the Cultural Revolution, Private Transformation had been largely implemented in1992, this one during Commissioned Rental whice related to the major issues of transformation were still exist a huge difference. Because the implementation of private housing should be consistent with the general political principles, the SMG always adhered to maintain the results of transformation, and accounted that the private housing complied with the policy "all owned by the state"; the owners of Commissioned Rental insisted that the Private housing transformation had broke off by the Cultural Revolution, the housing private ownership of Commissioned Rental which not receive filled fixed-rent had not completed its transformation. The objective conditions, such as economic development and houses for implementation, affected the time of private housing carry out, the differences of understanding between the parties are related to private housing’s remodeling and law rule’s building. The issues of Commissioned Rental were a product of government and the public to participate, its solution also requires joint efforts.In short, the private housing history of Shanghai from1950to1980, extended the previous history, and will be the basis for the future development. During this period, the private housing ownership of Shanghai had occurred complex and profound changes. The rights of private housing were central issues facing the related parties, but also fundamental of the parties participate in history activities. As the most important and personal experiential body, the private housing gave the ordinary people and homeowners a lasting and profound experience. The ideological needs, e.g. Adhere to the socialist and Maintain the results of transformation, had an important impact to the SMG’s policy. The founding of new China was not the watershed between new and old histories of Shanghai private housing, nor is it the spring of private housing to end the Cultural Revolution. Government and homeowners still would reach a contractual relationship through the implementation of Commissioned Rental, solve problems left by private housing, respecting the policy, according to patterns which "Property Law" solves commodity housing problems, and passing through legal channels.更多还原