征地补偿标准问题研究

【作者】 盛春雨；

【导师】 谭志惠；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 农业经济管理， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 随着我国经济的发展、城市化进程的加快，农村集体土地被大量征用，在农地被征用的过程中产生了大量的失地农民。如何解决好日益增多的失地农民的征地补偿问题，已经成为能否保持社会稳定，实现社会和谐发展、人民安居乐业的重要社会问题。我国目前实行的征地补偿标准，沿用了计划经济时期以农地产值的倍数来确定征地补偿费的做法，这种补偿标准已经不能适应我国现有经济发展要求，损害了农民的利益、引起了很多社会矛盾和土地纠纷。因此，研究征地补偿问题，探求更加科学合理的征地补偿标准显得非常迫切。本文在对我国现行征地补偿标准进行系统、深入研究的基础上，试图探索一种公平有效的征地补偿测算方法，以达到为政府相关部门完善征地补偿标准提供参考和维护被征地农民利益的目的。本文在查阅大量文献资料和实际调查的基础上，以马克思地租地价理论、产权理论、外部性理论和可持续发展理论为基础，从研究我国现行的征地补偿标准入手，回顾了我国土地征用制度的发展历程，剖析了现行征地补偿标准中存在的主要问题，并运用相关理论分析和揭示了征地补偿标准不合理的主要原因，在此基础上提出了征地合理补偿的构想。本研究认为合理的征地补偿，应由农地收益补偿、土地社会保障价值及土地转用增值收益三部分构成。本文以收益还原法计算了农地收益补偿，并特别对工农业产品“剪刀差”造成的价格偏差进行了修正；以商业保险模式计算了农地社会保障价值补偿；以成本逼近法计算了农地转用增值收益，并提出了以集体、农民、用地者相互协商的形式来确定分配比例的分配原则。为了验证本文构建的征地补偿标准的科学性，本文以重庆市为例，对重构的征地补偿标准进行了测算。重新构建的征地补偿标准与原征地补偿标准相比，提高了失地农民的征地补偿费，较客观地反映了农地生产性收益的价值，并且维护了农民享有农地社会保障价值和农地发展权的权益。本研究表明：第一，我国现有的征地补偿标准是沿用计划经济时代的制度与规定，虽然几经调整，但都未能改变其原有的计算方式，即以农地产值的倍数来估算征地补偿费。运用这种方法估算出的征地补偿费明显偏低，不能有效补偿农民因失去土地而失去的各种权益，影响了社会的稳定，已经不适应目前我国经济社会的发展形势。第二，现有的征地补偿标准弹性空间大、忽视了公平性的原则，没有考虑到农产品价格的扭曲，没有将土地的社会保障功能价值和土地增值收益纳入补偿范围，使失地农民的权益难以得到有效的保障，是现有征地补偿标准低、测算不合理的主要原因。第三，由于现有征地补偿标准显现出的诸多弊端，不能有效维护失地农民的利益，不能很好平衡社会各阶层的利益关系，不利于社会主义和谐社会的构建，因此现有征地补偿标准亟待完善。合理的征地补偿应包括，农地收益补偿、农地社会保障价值补偿和土地转用增值收益。更多还原

【Abstract】 Along with the economic development and the speeding-up process of urbanization in China, the rural collective land is requisitioned largely, and at the same time a lot of losing-land peasants generate. How to solve the problem compensating the losing-land peasants for land-requisition correctly has become connecting closely with the social stability, the harmonious development of society and the people’s happiness. China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition, which follows the planning-economy-period method of setting the land-requisition compensation according to the value of certain lands’ annual harvest in multiples, has not already met the requirements of economic development at present, harmed the interests of peasants and brought a lot of social conflicts and land disputes. Therefore, concerning the study of land-compensation issues, it is very urgent to search certain much more scientific and reasonable land-compensation standard. Based on in-depth study of the current land-compensation standards, this thesis is trying to find a fair and efficient method of land-compensation calculation, in order to help the government to improve the compensation-standard of land-requisition and safeguard the interests of peasants whose land has been requisitioned.After referring to extensive literatures and practical survey, based on Marxism land-rent theory, property rights theory, externals theory and sustaining development theory; beginning with searching China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition, this thesis looks back on the history of China’s land-requisition; analyses the main problems about China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition; finds and analyses ,with related theories, the main reasons why China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition is not reasonable, then gives the idea of reasonable compensation for land-requisition. This research thinks that reasonable compensation for land-requisition should consist of three parts: the compensation for the incomes of agricultural land, land’s value of social security and extra proceeds of land using in other not-agricultural purpose. This thesis calculates, by proceeds-reversion method, the compensation for the incomes of agricultural land, especially amending the deviation resulting from price-"scissors" of industrial and agricultural products; calculates, in commercial-insurance mode, the compensation for land’s value of social security; calculates, by cost- approach method, extra proceed of land using in other not-agricultural purpose; and gives the principle that the collective, peasant and land-user should determine the allocation-ratio by consulting with each other. In order to check whether the compensation-standard setting in this thesis for land-requisition is scientific, this thesis, taking the city of Chongqing as an example, has calculated the re-formed compensation-standard for land-requisition. Comparing with the original compensation-standard for land-requisition, the re-formed one increases the compensation for losing-land peasants, reflects more objectively the value of agricultural land’s incomes, and safeguards peasants’ rights of enjoying land’s value of social security and development interests of agricultural land.This study shows: firstly, although after being adjusted several times, China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition, which originates from the System-requirement in the planning-economy-period, has not change its original formula according to which the land-requisition compensation is estimated by the value of certain land’s harvest per year in multiples. The land-compensation from the formula above, is low obviously, can not compensate effectively the peasants who lose their rights only because of land-requisition, affects the social stability, and has not been suitable for the current economic and social developments of China. Secondly, China’s current compensation-standard for land-requisition is low and the formula is not reasonable, mainly because the standard is flexible very much, neglects the principles of fairness and the distortion of agricultural products’ price, has not made land’s value of social security and the increasing value of the land one part of the compensation, can not safeguard effectively the rights of the peasants who lost their lands. Finally, China’s current compensation- standard for land-requisition is very urgent to be improved, because the current standard has many shortcomings, can not safeguard effectively the rights of the peasants who lost their lands, can not keep a good balance among the interests of different social classes, is not good for the construction of socialist harmony-society. The reasonable compensation for land-requisition should consist of three parts: the compensation for the proceeds of agricultural land, land’s value of social security and extra proceed of land using in other not-agricultural purpose.更多还原