中国城市化进程中农地保护法律制度研究

【作者】 李凤梅；

【导师】 宋才发；

【作者基本信息】 中央民族大学 ， 中国少数民族经济， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 “城市化”是社会生产力变革所引起的人类生产和生活方式由农村型向城市型转化的历史过程,主要表现为农村人口向城市人口的转化及城市数量增加和城市面积的扩张。“农地”是指农民集体所有的农用地,包括耕地、林地、草地、园地以及其他农业生产用地。城市化一方面有利于土地的集约利用、有利于土地的规模经营,另一方面导致建设用地需求增加、加剧居住用地需求膨胀、加重农地质量下降和生态环境恶化。“农地保护”是指为了协调经济发展对农地需求矛盾、满足人类长期生存与发展的需要而采取的保持和提高农地资源数量、质量和生态环境的各种措施和行动。“农地保护法律制度”是指调整在农地保护过程中所产生的社会关系的法律规范的组合,是农地开发、利用、保护、管理工作的法律制度化,由农地所有权法律制度、农地使用权法律制度和农地管理法律制度构成。国外农地保护法律制度带给我们如下启示：(1)农地所有权要清晰,农地使用权要充分。农地公有还是私有与农地保护效果无必然联系,清晰的农地所有权是农地保护的前提,充分而有保障的土地使用权是农地保护的关键。(2)土地规划要完善,土地管制要严格。依靠法律开展规划的编制和实施,构建系统的土地利用规划体系,利用规划限制城市用地规模的扩张,强调规划编制和实施中公众的广泛参与,重视运用科学方法编制和管理规划,依据规划对土地进行分区、分类、许可管制。(3)征地目的明确、补偿充分。包括充分的法律依据,明确的征用目的,市场化的补偿标准,完善的征用程序。我国农地保护法律体系由宪法、法律、行政法规、地方性法规和行政规章这五类不同效力层次的法律规范所构成。目前我国城市化进程中的农地保护法律体系存在缺陷,具体表现为：(1)农地保护法律体系的框架存在缺陷。缺乏统领全局的《土地法》,法律规范之间冲突严重。(2)农地保护立法的价值选择存在偏差。农地保护立法强调宜稳不宜快,农地保护立法主张宜粗不宜细,农地保护立法重公法轻私法,农地保护立法重实体轻程序。城市化进程中农地保护法律体系的完善对策是：(1)完善农地保护法律体系的框架。加快制订《土地法》的进度,理顺法律规范之间的关系。(2)改革农地保护立法的价值选择。重视农地保护立法的及时性,增强农地保护立法的可操作性,加强农地保护立法的私法性,完善农地保护立法的程序性。我国农地保护法律体系确立了我国城市化进程中农地保护基本制度。其中,集体所有制度是农地保护的前提,承包经营制度是农地保护的基础,耕地保护制度是农地保护的重点,用途管制制度是农地保护的核心,土地征收制度是农地保护的关键。城市化进程中农地保护法律制度的实施,取得的成效有耕地数量减少的速度与幅度变缓、土地开发复垦整理提高了部分耕地质量、退耕还林还草一定程度上改善了农地生态环境；存在的问题表现为城市化建设导致耕地总量持续减少、城市化建设加剧了农地质量的下降、城市化建设造成农地生态环境恶化。我国城市化进程中农地保护法律制度存在缺失,主要表现为：(1)农地所有权法律规定不明确。一是农地所有权性质不清,存在单独所有权说、共有权说和新型总有说等不同的学说；二是农地所有权主体不明。“农民集体”的概念内涵不明确,各层次集体之间关系不清楚,“代理人”与“被代理人”关系不正确；三是农地所有权内容模糊。农地集体所有权的占有权能不清晰,农地集体所有权的收益权能无保障,农地集体所有权的处分权能受限制。(2)农地使用权法律规定不完备。一是农地使用权的非永久性。法律对农地使用权期限的规定具有临时性,法律有关农地调整的规定不完备,法律没有对农地使用权的继承权做出明确规定；二是农地使用权收益权能残缺。在征地补偿中未对农地使用权设立独立的补偿项目,在征地补偿中缺乏对农地使用权人预期收益和间接收益损失的补偿,对流转权利的不合理限制妨碍了农地使用权流转收益的实现；三是农地使用权处分权能受限。农地使用权流转范围受限,农地使用权流转前提受限,农地使用权流转方式受限。(3)农地管理法律制度不健全。一是耕地保护制度难以落实。基本农田保护区比例过高,耕地占补平衡制度僵化；二是土地用途管制难以严格执行。土地用途管制的规划权威性不够,土地用途管制的体制不顺,土地用途管制的机制不合理；三是征地程序缺乏透明度和有效监督。必须有针对性地完善我国城市化进程中农地保护法律制度。具体对策建议如下：(1)城市化进程中农地所有权法律制度的完善。一是澄清农地所有权性质。农地所有权的国有化和私有化改革方案缺乏现实基础,农地所有权的改革必须坚持农地的集体所有方向。农地集体所有权性质的单独所有权说和共有权说不符合中国立法和现实,应将农地集体所有权性质定性为新型总有；二是明晰农地所有权主体。农地所有权的主体应为一定范围内的农民成员的集体,农地所有权行使的权力机构应为全体成员大会或成员代表大会,农地所有权行使的执行机构应为集体财产管理委员会,农地所有权行使的监督机构应为乡(镇)农民集体财产监督委员会、村民委员会或村民小组；三是明确农地所有权内容。明晰农地所有权的占有权能,保障农地所有权的收益权能,完善农地所有权的处分权能。(2)城市化进程中农地使用权法律制度的完善。一是保障农民永久的农地使用权。赋予农民无期限的农地使用权,彻底取消农地调整制度,明确农地使用权的继承权；二是实现农民充分的农地使用收益权。在农地征收中设立农地使用权单独补偿项目,在农地征收补偿中要包括对农地使用权预期收益和间接收益损失的补偿；三是赋予农民完整的农地使用处分权。取消对农地流转范围的不合理限制,取消对农地使用权流转前提的不合理规定,赋予农民农地使用权的抵押权。(3)城市化进程中农地管理法律制度的完善。一是健全耕地保护制度。合理确定基本农田的保护比例,完善耕地占补平衡措施；二是严格土地用途管制制度。增强土地利用总体规划的权威性,深化土地管理体制改革,健全土地管理机制；三是完善土地征收程序。重视提高征地过程的透明度,加强对地方政府征地权的监督。更多还原

【Abstract】 "Urbanization" is a historical process of human production and way of life transforming from rural to urban-type model caused by the changes of social productive forces, which mainly manifested in the transformation of the rural population to urban population and the increasing number of cities and urban area expansion. "Agricultural land" means the farmers collectively owned agricultural land, including farmland, woodland, grassland, orchard and other land for agricultural production. The one hand, urbanization is conducive to intensive use of land and conducive to the size of land management, on the other hand led to increased demand for construction land, increasing demand for residential land expansion, increasing decline in the quality of agricultural land and the ecological deterioration of the environment. "Agricultural land protection" refers to various measures and actions taken to maintain and improve the agricultural land resource’s quantity, quality and ecological environment, in order to coordinate the contradiction between the economic development and the demand of agricultural land, and to meet the long-term survival and development of human needs. "Legal institutions of agricultural land protection" refers to a combination of legal norms of social relations resulting from the adjustment in the agricultural land protection, is the legal institutionalization of agricultural land development, utilization, protection and management, composed of legal institutions of agricultural land ownership, legal institutions of agricultural land use rights and legal institutions of agricultural land managment。Legal institutions of agricultural land protection of other country give us the following revelation: (1) agricultural land ownership should be clear, agricultural land-use rights must fully.There is no necessary connection between public or private agricultural land and agricultural land protection effect, clear agricultural land ownership is the premise of protection of agricultural land, sufficient and secure land-use rights are the key to the protection of agricultural land. (2) Land-use planning is necessary to be perfect; land-use control must be strictly. Depend on the law to carry out the preparation and implementation of the planning, construct the system of land-use planning, use the planning to restrict the expansion of the size of urban area, emphasis on planning preparation and implementation of extensive public participation, emphasis on the use of scientific methods to prepare and manage the planning, and judge by the planning to carry on the partition, classification and licensing control of the land. (3) The purpose of land acquisition must be clear; the compensation of land acquisition should be adequate. It requests a sufficient legal basis, a clear purpose of expropriation, market-based compensation standard and complete expropriation procedures.China’s legal system of agricultural land protection is composed of the Constitution, laws, administrative regulations, local laws and administrative rules and regulations. At present in the urbanization process, China’s legal system of agricultural land protection is a flawed legal system, specifically manifested as follows: (1) Framework of the legal system of agricultural protection is flawed. There is the lack of the overall "Land Law" and a serious conflict between legal norms. (2) The value selection of agricultural land protection legislation exist bias. Agricultural land protection legislation emphasizes stability rather than fast, claims rough rather than detailed, emphasizes public law but underestimates private law, emphasizes substance but underestimates procedure. Measures to improve the legal system of agricultural protection are: (1) Improve the framework of the legal system of agricultural protection. Expedite the formulation of "Land Law" in progress and straighten out the relationship between legal norms. (2) Reform the value choice of agricultural land protection legislation. It needs to emphasize the timeliness, enhance the operability, strengthen private law nature and improve the procedure.China’s legal system of agricultural land protection establishes the basic legal institutions of agricultural land protection in the urbanization process. Among them, collective ownership institutions are the prerequisite of agricultural land protection , contract management institutions are the basis of agricultural land protection, farmland protection institutions are the focus of agricultural land protection, land-use control institutions are the core of agricultural land protection, land acquisition are the key to the protection of agricultural land. The implementation of legal institutions of agricultural land protection has achieved some results, including slowed the speed and magnitude of the reduction in the number of cultivated land; land development, reclamation and arrangement improved the quality of some of arable land; grain for green improved the ecological environment of agricultural land to a certain extent. At the same time, there are still many problems, such as urbanization led to sustained reduction in the total arable land; urbanization intensified the decline in the quality of agricultural land; urbanization caused the deterioration of ecological environment of agricultural land.There are deficiencies in China’s legal institutions of agricultural land protection, mainly as follows: (1) Institutions of agricultural land ownership are not clear. First, the nature of agricultural land ownership is unclear, existing different theories such as individual ownership theory, joint ownership theory and new total ownership theory etc. Second, the subject of agricultural land ownership is unknown. The meaning of the concept of "peasant collective" is not clear; the relationship between the various levels of collective unclear; the relationship between "agent" and "principal" is not correct. Third, the content of agricultural land ownership is ambiguity. Right of possession of collective ownership is not clear; right of income of collective ownership is insecurity; right of disposing of collective ownership is limited. (2)Institutions of agricultural land use rights are not complete. First, the right to use agricultural land is non-permanent. Law provides a temporary period of agricultural land use rights; law with respect to the adjustment of agricultural land is not complete; inheritance rights to use agricultural land is not clearly defined in the law. Second, right of income of agricultural land use rights is not empowered completely. Independent compensation item of agricultural land use rights is not established in the land acquisition; compensation of loss of people expected and indirect benefits lacks in the land acquisition; unreasonable restrictions on the right of transition impedes the achievement of the transition benefits of agricultural land use rights. Third, right of disposing of agricultural land use rights is limited. The scope of transition of agricultural land use rights is limited; the premise of transition of agricultural land use rights is limited; the mode of transition of agricultural land use rights is limited. (3) Legal institutions of agricultural land management are not sound. First, farmland protection institutions are not implemented. Proportion of basic farmland protection areas is excessively high and the institutions of the balance between the farmland occupancy and indemnity are "rigid". Second, land-use control institution is difficult to strictly be carried out. The authority of planning of land use control is not enough; land use control system that is not harmonious; land use control mechanisms is not reasonable. Third, land acquisition procedures are confused and lack of effective monitoring.Must well targeted improve China’s legal institutions of agricultural land protection in the process of urbanization. Specific policy proposals are as follows:(1) Improvement of legal institutions of agricultural land ownership. First, clarify the nature of agricultural land ownership. Nationalization or privatization reform program is lack of realistic basis; reform of agricultural land ownership must adhere to the collective ownership direction. Individual ownership theory or joint ownership theory is not in conformity with China’s legislation and reality; the nature of collective ownership of agricultural land should be classified as a new total. Second, clear the subject of agricultural land ownership. The subject of agricultural land ownership should be the collective of farmer members within a certain range; ownership of agricultural land in the exercise of authority should be for all members of the General Assembly or a member of Congress; ownership of agricultural land in the exercise of the implementing agencies should be collective property management committee; ownership of agricultural land in the exercise of supervisory authority should be the township (town) farmers collective property oversight committee, the village committee or village groups. Third, clear the content of agricultural land ownership. Clarify the right of possession of collective ownership; protect the right of income of collective ownership; perfect the right of disposing of collective ownership. (2)Improvement of legal institutions of agricultural land use rights. First, protect the permanent rights of the farmers to use agricultural land. Give farmers no-time-limit right to use agricultural land; totally eliminate the adjustment institution of agricultural land; clear inheritance right of agricultural land use rights. Second, realize the full right of income of agricultural land use rights. Establish independent compensation item of agricultural land use rights in the land acquisition; compensate the loss of people expected and indirect benefits in the land acquisition. Third, give farmers a complete right of disposing of agricultural land use rights. Abolish unreasonable restrictions on the scope of transition of agricultural land use rights; cancel the unreasonable provisions of the premise of transition of agricultural land use rights; give farmers the right of hypothec of agricultural land use rights. (3)Improvement of legal institutions of agricultural land management. First, improve farmland protection institutions. Reasonably determine the proportion of basic farmland protection and improve measures of the balance between the farmland occupancy and indemnity. Second, make strict land-use control institutions. Enhance the authority of the overall land-use planning; deepen the reform of land management system; perfect land management mechanisms. Third, improve the land acquisition process. Attach importance to the improving of the transparency of the process of land acquisition; strengthen the supervision of local government’s right of land acquisition.更多还原