【作者】 马立珍；

【导师】 宋涛；

【作者基本信息】 中国人民大学 ， 政治经济学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 改革开放以来,我国的经济建设成就举世瞩目。然而作为世界上最大的发展中国家,我们并没有解决好农业问题,“三农”问题突出。从根本上解决“三农”问题成为推动中国经济持续、协调发展和建设和谐社会的关键环节。实现农业发展、农村繁荣和农民富裕,需要多方面的支持,金融支撑至关重要。金融支持不力是制约我国农业发展的主要瓶颈之一。与长期实行重城轻乡政策导致二元经济结构相对应,我国的金融领域亦呈现出明显的二元性特征:发达的、现代的城市金融和传统的、落后的农村金融同时并存。落后的农村金融无法满足农民基本的生产和生活信贷需求。国有商业银行从农村撤出,只剩下农村信用社独力支撑局面;广大的农村几乎享受不到政策性金融服务的恩泽;信贷供求严重失衡,只有少数农户能享受到正规金融部门提供的信贷服务;信贷资源稀缺,农村信贷服务寻租现象普遍。贷款农户除了要支付贷款利息,还要额外支付一笔获得贷款的人情费、好处费。较低收益率的农业,无力承担高成本的信贷服务。正规金融服务供给不足,农民只能求贷于利率较高的民间金融,间接刺激了农村民间金融的活跃,从而导致在农村金融内部出现正规金融组织与民间金融并存的二元结构,即我国农村金融存在着“双重二元性”特征。金融约束严重地束缚着农民增收、农村繁荣和农业发展。中国的改革始于农村,但农村金融体制改革的步伐却远远滞后于整个经济体制改革的进程,农村金融的改革与发展出现多次反复,城乡金融的二元性加剧。自1979年开始陆续恢复和建立农村金融机构,并进行了农村信用社和农业保险改革。农村信用社改革基本上是无果而终,而且积累了大量的不良贷款,经营亏损,难以为继。农业保险机构的商业化改革,导致我国农业保险发展出现萎缩局面。二十世纪九十年代中期,在国有银行商业化改革的浪潮中,尤其是亚洲金融危机发生后,防控金融风险成为整个金融改革的目标,致使1996年提出的深化农村金融体制改革的目标再次被偏离。国有4大商业银行纷纷撤出农村,农村信用社独力支撑着农村金融局面,农村金融发展陷入困境。党的十六大以来,随着一些重大的思想误区的突破,建设新农村目标的提出,尤其是日渐显现的农村金融约束问题,使得国家在农村金融改革方面步伐加快、力度加大。2003年,农村信用社改革全面展开;各地围绕新一轮金融改革的要求积极探索、创新;2006年12月,银监会印发了《关于扩大调整放宽农村地区银行业金融机构准入政策,更好支持社会主义新农村建设的若干意见》的通知,之后,涌现出村镇银行、小额贷款公司和农村资金互助社等一批新型的农村金融机构。这些新型农村金融机构的出现,打破了农村金融市场由农村信用社独家垄断的局面,农村金融初现多元化的竞争迹象。但是,农村金融供求失衡的局面依然存在。从各地反馈出的信息看,新型农村金融机构运行状态欠佳,存在着许多问题。村镇银行吸收存款难,小额贷款公司因不能吸收存款存在发展的持续性问题,农民参与资金互助社积极性不高。这些新型的农村金融组织还很稚嫩,无力与农村信用社及大型的商业银行抗争。另外,新型的农村金融组织除了资金互助社,都是商业性的机构,提供信贷服务的收费较高,低收益的农业难以承受。受利润驱使,这些金融机构信贷投向的非农化意识强烈。农村金融改革并非是一个单纯的市场化问题,并不是靠市场化推进,就能解决农村金融的根本问题。农业生产的弱质性决定了农村金融比城市金融具有“高成本”、“高风险”的致命弱点。只有采取有力措施化解了农村金融的“高成本”、“高风险”难题,才能从根本上解决农村金融面临的发展困境。目前从国外的基本经验看,建立完善的农业政策金融服务和发达的合作金融是发达国家成功解决农村金融支持问题的主要作法。农业发展的金融支持问题是个世界性的问题。就像“二元”经济结构是每个国家发展的必经阶段一样,金融的二元性也普遍的存在于各个国家的一定时期。经济的“二元”性必将导致金融的“二元”性,资金的逐利性驱使资本从低收益的传统部门流向高收益的现代产业。如果没有国家的必要政策干预和介入,这种金融的“二元”性不会减弱,只能增强,其结果会导致城乡发展差距进一步拉大,强化经济结构的“二元”性。金融支持是发达国家支持本国农业的重要手段。农业生产的天然弱质性和农业作为国民经济的战略基础产业地位,使各国都对本国的农业进行支持和保护。发达国家以其雄厚的经济实力具有了更强的协调发展能力。他们通过对农业提供有力的金融支持及健全的社会化服务体系,增强本国农业的竞争力,成功解决了农业、农村、农民问题。发展中国家或因财力所限,或因政策不当,没有对农业提供有力的金融支持,农业发展问题突出。借鉴发达国家金融支持农业的成功经验,总结一些发展中国家在“三农”问题上的重大教训,对完善我国的金融支农体系,深化农村金融改革,从根本上解决“三农”问题极为必要。二十世纪九十年代以来,随着“三农”问题的突显以及农村金融改革的推进,国内外学者对我国农村金融空前关注,相关的研究著述甚多。国外学者关注中国的农村金融改革,并根据中国的实践素材,丰富他们的金融发展理论。国内学者跟踪金融发展理论的演变动态,即时评说,并与中国农村金融的实际相比较,介绍发达国家成功解决“三农”问题、农村金融问题的著述较多。遗憾的是以西方经典理论为指导的发展中国家的农村金融改革并不成功,西方一些著名学者为发展中国家开出的良方妙计并不灵验,一些国际上公认的成功经验在我国却难以奏效。如发展农民合作经济组织以及农村合作金融,是国际公认的解决“三农”问题的成功经验,但不知为什么,中国的合作金融及农村合作经济组织就是发展不起来,已经建立的,多是有名无实,难以发挥为农民服务的效力。建立完善的农业政策性金融是发达国家解决农业问题的成功经验。但是,我国的农业政策性金融服务效果却难如人意。在梳理了西方经典的金融理论以及广泛涉猎了众多学者的著述后,这些困惑依然没有找到满意的答案。借鉴国外经验需要坚持系统性原理,要为某些政策措施的推行创造系统性的环境条件。当前,中国农村金融发展最急需的系统环境就是建立政策金融与合作金融的有机配合关系。当前,我国总体上已进入对农村“多予、少取”,“工业反哺农业、城市支持农村”的经济发展时期。如何“多予”、“反哺”和“支持”?建立完善的农业发展的金融支持体系是切入点。深化农村金融改革,建立完善的农业金融支持体系的对策思路是:㈠坚持正确的改革目标及原则。农村金融改革应以建立合作金融为基础、政策金融为重要保障、商业金融为补充、充分发挥民间金融重要作用的多层次、不留服务空白的完善的农村金融服务体系为目标。注重法律手段、鼓励金融创新、加强信用体系建设是农村金融改革应坚持的重要原则。㈡加大政策金融支农力度,完善农业政策性金融制度。㈢扶持农村合作金融组织发展,建立多层次的合作金融体系。㈣出台相应的激励与约束政策,促使商业金融参与农村金融服务。商业金融与政策金融应有明确的界限分工,不应让商业金融承担政策金融职能。㈤规范、发展民间金融,充分发挥民间金融支农的重要作用。对民间金融的规范发展,应坚持分类治理原则。本论文在系统地梳理了农村金融经典理论、广泛涉猎和继承前人研究成果的基础上,全面分析了主要发达国家和个别发展中国家的成功经验,系统回顾了我国农村金融改革历程,深入分析了当前我国农村金融领域存在的主要问题,以及农村金融改革中存在的不足,提出了完善金融支农体系的对策建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the reform and opening up, China has received remarkable achievements in economic construction. However, as the biggest developing nation in the world, China didn’t solve agricultural problems well, so as to make“Three Rural”issues severe. Therefore, to solve“Three Rural”issues fundamentally becomes the key to promote China’s sustained and coordinated development and build a harmonious society. In order to realize agricultural development, rural prosperity and farmers’richness, we need the support of all aspects, of which financial support is essential.Inadequate financial support is one of the main bottlenecks in restricting agricultural development in China. Corresponding to the dual economic structure led by long-term implementation of focusing on cities but ignoring countries, China’s financial sector has shown significant features of duality, that is, well-developed and modern city finance and traditional and backward rural finance co-exist. Backward rural finance cannot meet farmers’basic production and life credit. For example, state-owned commercial banks have withdrawn from the rural areas, leaving rural credit cooperatives; most countries cannot obtain policy-oriented financial services; the serious imbalance between supply and demand of credit comes up, only few farmers can enjoy credit services supported by formal financial sector; the scarcity of credit resources makes rural credit rent-seeking phenomenon popular. Farmers who want to make loans have to pay an additional sum of human costs and commissions in addition to payment of interest on loans. If agriculture has a lower rate of return, it cannot afford high-cost credit services. Because of inadequate supply of formal financial services, farmers can only seek a higher interest rate loan——civil finance, which indirectly stimulates rural folk finance, resulting in the emergence of dual structure in which formal financial organization and folk finance co-exist, namely, China’s rural finance has the feature of“double duality”. Financial constraints bind up seriously farmers’income, rural prosperity and agricultural development. China’s reform started in rural areas, but the pace of rural financial system reform has lagged far behind that of the whole economic system reform. Rural financial reform and development has shown repeats over and over again. And the duality of urban and rural finance aggravated. Since 1979, China began to resume and establish rural financial institutions in succession and carried out the reform of rural credit cooperatives and agricultural insurance. However, the reform of rural credit cooperatives was fruitless largely and accumulated a huge number of non-performing loans and operating losses, making them difficult to sustain. The commercialization of agricultural insurance sector leads to its shrink. In the mid-90s, prevention and control of financial risks became the key target of the whole financial reform in the wave of commercialized reform of state-owned banks, especially after the Asian financial crisis, which resulted in the target of deepening rural financial system reform put forward in 1996 was deviated once again. Four major commercial state-owned commercial banks have withdrawn the countryside, leaving rural credit cooperatives supporting solely the rural finance. The development of rural finance was caught in trouble. Since the 16th Congress of Communist Party of China, with major breakthroughs in some erroneous concepts, target-raising of building new rural areas, in particular the increasingly obvious rural financial constraint, all of these allowed China to accelerate the pace of rural financial reform. In 2003, the reform of rural credit cooperatives was in full swing; every region carried on active exploration and innovation around the requirements of new round of financial reform; In December 2006, the CBRC issued the“Some Opinions on Adjustment to Extend Access Policy of Banking Institutions in Rural Areas to Better Support for the Construction of New Socialist Countryside”. Later, a number of new rural financial institutions sprung up such as village banks, small loan companies, rural financial credit union and so on. The emergence of these new-type rural financial institutions broke the monopolistic situation of rural credit cooperatives and rural finance showed a sign of a wide range of competition. However, the imbalance between supply and demand of rural finance remains. Based on feedback information from various places, new-type rural financial institutions are in poor operation and present many problems. On the one hand, Village banks have difficulties in drawing deposits, small loan companies also show continued development issues due to the same problem. Peasants are not enthusiastic in participating in financial credit union. Such new rural financial institutions are still immature and incapable of competing with rural credit cooperatives and large commercial banks. On the other hand, new-type rural financial organizations, apart from financial credit union, are commercial institutions, providing credit services with higher charges which low-income agriculture cannot bear. Driven by profit, these financial institutions preferred to loan to non-agricultural sectors. The rural financial reform is not a pure market-oriented issue, which cannot solve the fundamental problem of rural finance only by market-based promotion. The weak nature of agricultural production demonstrates that rural finance has higher cost and bigger risk than urban finance. Only by taking effective measures to defuse these hard problems, can the dilemma be solved fundamentally rural finance is faced with.Financial support for agricultural development issue is a global problem. Just like every country will have to go through the“dual structure”phrase, the financial duality also generally exists in some certain period of each country. Economic duality is bound to lead to financial duality. The profit-driven nature of capital renders it flowing into high-return modern industry from low-return traditional sectors. If there is no necessary policy intervention by central government, the financial duality will not diminish and will increase instead, which leads to further widening the gap between urban and rural development and strengthening the duality of economic structure.Financial support is the key means for developed countries to supporting native agriculture. All countries are prone to support and protect native agriculture because agricultural production owns natural weakness and agriculture lies on the strategic foundation for national economy. Developed countries, with their abundant economic strength, possess stronger capability of coordinated development. Through providing agriculture with solid financial support and sound social service system, they enhance the competitiveness of domestic agriculture, successfully resolving the issues of agriculture, rural areas and farmers. On the contrary, developing countries, or because of resource constraints, or because of inappropriate policies, don’t provide strong financial support for agriculture, resulting in serious agricultural development problems. Thus, learning successful experience from developed countries and some major lessons from developing countries, we can better advance the reform of China’s rural financial deepening and fundamentally solve the“three rural”issue.In recent years, as the“three rural”issue highlighted, as well as rural financial reform deepening, domestic and foreign scholars pay unprecedented attention on China’s rural finance and many related research and writings come out. Foreign scholars focus on such issues and enrich their financial development theory in accordance with China’s financial practice. Domestic scholars trace the dynamic evolution of financial development theory, making real-time comments, comparing it with the practice of China’s rural finance, and introducing some advanced experiences and writings of developed nations.Unfortunately, rural financial reform in developing countries is not successful guided by western classical theory. Some prescriptions for developing nations made by some prominent western economists do not come into effect. And numbers of internationally recognized successful experience do not also work well in China. For example, establishing rural cooperative economic organizations and rural cooperative finance is internationally recognized as the means of solving the“three rural”issue. But nobody knows why such organizations cannot be built well. Even if some have been set up, they are mostly nominal, and difficult in serving peasants. Establishing comprehensive rural policy finance is the successful method for developed countries to solve agricultural problems. However, China’s agricultural policy-oriented finance is unsatisfactory. After sorting out western classical financial theory as well as a broad range of writings, these puzzles do not still get a satisfactory answer.At present, China has entered economic development period of“giving more to rural areas, taking less”and“industry nurturing agriculture and cities supporting rural”. Then, how to do that? In my opinion, building a sound financial support system for agricultural development is the entry point. In this paper, based on sorting out rural financial classical theory and a sum of research results of previous studies systematically, we analyze successful experiences of the major developed nations and some developing nations comprehensively, review the history of China’s rural financial reform and in-depth analyze the current main problems of China’s rural financial sector, as well as some shortcomings in the rural financial reform. At last, some measures and proposals about how to deepen the rural financial reform are put forward.更多还原