【作者】 祁冰；

【导师】 韩毅；

【作者基本信息】 辽宁大学 ， 经济史， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 制度变迁决定着时间进程中社会演变的方式,从而它是理解历史变迁的关键。20世纪上半期中国共产党主导的中国农村土地制度的变迁,不仅改变了中国共产党的历史命运,而且深刻影响了中国的社会变迁,因而成为理解该时期中国社会变迁的钥匙。运用新制度经济学理论对于20世纪下半期直至现在中国共产党主导的农村土地制度演变的研究,成果比较显著。但是,学术界尚没有运用新制度经济学理论对20世纪前半期中国共产党土地政策演变及实施过程进行系统分析的论著,而这一分析对象在中国共产党党史学、历史学领域一直被高度关注。因此,本研究是促进制度经济学与中国经济史研究融合的创新尝试。本研究运用了以诺思为代表的新制度经济学的最新理论成果,将中国共产党土地政策的演变理解为学习过程,对中国共产党推行的强制性土地制度变迁过程及其结果进行实证分析;在政策的结果分析中,通过建立土地政策激励模型说明政策机理。通过新理论与新视角的结合,实现了研究方法的创新。20世纪上半期中国共产党土地政策的演变,是一个“可感知的现实→信念→政策→改变了的可感知的现实”如此循环往复的故事。理解这一故事的关键在于:一个给定(外来或送来)的信念体系——马克思主义,在中国共产党领导人心智模型中重新塑造的方式,即来自因政策实施而改变了的可感知现实的反馈修正信念的方式,这既包括对马克思主义内容的学习,也包括对复杂的社会生活的认识,更主要是初始的信念体系经过试错而导致的学习方式的改变。20世纪上半期中国共产党土地政策的演变,从根本上讲是中国共产党学习方式演变的函数。这是本研究的总体结论。本文的具体结论和创新点如下:第一,运用自己的信念体系对可感知的现实进行解读,参照前期实践——试错的经验,提出符合政党利益最大化原则的土地政策,这是中国共产党决策的方程式。土地政策是中国共产党革命目标的函数。第二,学习方式及其变化,对于政策的决定及其后果的影响是至关重要的。中国共产党的学习方式在试错中经历了“仅从师教”、“样板至上”到“实事求是”的转变,这决定了政策的选择及其后果。第三,决策结构和意识形态刚性制约了对可感知的失灵的矫正。主导信念至上的决策结构,对公有制信念的强烈坚持,使得农民土地所有制在整个土地革命时期都没有真正确立起来。同样,解放战争时期土地政策执行中的失误与纠正,都与中国共产党的决策结构有关。第四,革命性制度变迁中“暴力悖论”的出现,源自于竞争性的制度供给者的信念及其经验。在竞争者经验严重不足的情况下,信念体系中的阶级倾向就会引发他们的信念义愤,从而使之采取过激的手段,其结果并不合意,土地革命时期的暴力运用就是证明;即便是在有了试错经验的情况下,为了实现政党利益最大化,由主导信念和具体政策构成的政策框架的导向,也会使参与者采取极端的暴力手段,解放战争时期就是如此。第五,文化传统等非正式制度对制度变迁的约束,体现在对主导者和参与者的双重制约上。中国共产党土地政策的演变过程中,中国的文化传统对于制度变迁的最主要参与者——农民的影响,证明了,任何时候,文化遗产都严格限制了人类实现变迁的能力。同样,中国共产党在四个时期意识形态投资中对中国文化传统的利用,也佐证了这一结论。第六,制度变迁的被动参与者——农民的选择,既有经济的动因,也有意识形态的因素;既有理性的因素,也有非理性的因素;特别是当追求财富的动机被启动之后,行动中所形成的改变了的可感知的现实及其可预知的后果,对他们下一步行动的决策,起了至关重要的作用。这反映出人们决策的复杂性。特别是农民集体行动背后,更是说明在社会中相互联系的人们,彼此选择的相互关系。第七,土地政策的经济绩效,是由政策本身、政策实施手段构成的政策矩阵决定的。土地革命时期公有制的实践和解放战争时期的平均地权,都没有取得“合意”的经济绩效,而抗日战争时期陕甘宁地区农业的发展——尽管是低水平的历史,证明了本文的结论。确切的讲,政策的内容和意识形态对私有产权的态度、对个人人身权利的态度、对经济规律的认识、以及政策的稳定性成为问题的关键。归根结底,取决于制度供给者能否对非各态历经的世界有“正确理解”。对于本文而言,“正确理解”是指中国共产党正确理解了中国农村土地制度乃至更广阔意义上的中国社会,将这些理解融入到自己的信念体系中,进而改变政策。唯此,才能实现结果和意愿的一致性。概言之,本研究通过新理论与新视角的结合、逻辑与历史的结合,为20世纪上半期中国共产党土地政策的历史演变过程提供了一个一般性的经济学分析,又为理解20世纪上半期中国农村土地制度的变迁乃至中国社会的变迁开启了新的视窗。更多还原

【Abstract】 Patterns of social evolution overtime depend on institutional changes, which played the key role on understanding the history evolving process. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) led institutional changes of Chinese rural land system in the first half of 20th century, which not only converted their own historical fate, but also produced significant influence on the social evolution of China. Therefore, it became the key point to understanding this historical process.There are plenty of research works focused on the institution changes of Chinese rural land system in the second half of 20th century led by CCP, which applied theoretical contributions of Neo-Institutional Economics (NIEs). However, there are few research works for the one in the period of the first half of 20th century, which received close attentions within the fields both of history and of CCP research. Hence, our study is the innovative effort to integrating institutional economics and economic historical reseach of China.In our study, recent researches from NIEs such as North’s works are applied to consider the evolving process of CCP land policies as a learning process, and conducted empirical analyses on the compulsive institutional changes of Chinese land system carried by CCP and their performance. During the analyses on these policy performances, we built the incentive model of land policies to explain their mechanism. Based on the integration of these new theories and viewpoints, we conduct related innovations on research methods.The evolving process of CCP land policies in the first half of 20th century could be explained as a cycling story of“Perceived reality→Belief→Policy→Altered perceived reality”. The key point to read this story well is of the following contents: The reconstruction process of the given (alien) belief systems, Marxism, within the CCP leaders’mental models, that is, the belief revising process based on the feedback from altered perceived reality caused by former policy implements, which includes the learning process to Marxism contents and complicated social reality, and the more important part, the revision of learning pattern caused by trail and error process to the initial belief system. Fundamentally, the evolution of CCP land policy in the first half of 20th century supposed to be treated as the function of the evolving process of the CCP learning pattern. This is the overall conclusion of our study.The specific conclusions and innovations of this dissertation are as follows:First, the decision-making procedure of CCP is composed of following steps: applying their own belief system to read the perceived reality, drawing the land policy based on the premier trail and error experiences to match maximum principle of their party interests. And the land policy is the function of CCP revolution goals.Second, such learning pattern and its changes conducted the vital influences on policy-making and its performances. Within the evolving process of the CCP learning pattern, they experienced the series conversions from“Only followed what be taught by Communism International”, to“Sample Paramountcy”, and then to“Followed a realistic and pragmatic approach”driven by the recycling trial and error process, which ruled policy selections and their consequences.Third, adjustments on perceived policy failures were highly constrained by decision-making structures and the rigidity of ideology. Because there existed decision-making structure of dominant belief paramountcy and strong persistence on public ownership, the peasant land ownership could not ever be established during the whole period of Agrarian Revolution. Similarly, the errors and their revision of land policies were closely related to CCP decision-making structures during War of Liberation period as well.Fourth, there existed the“Violence Paradox”within the process of revolutionary institutional changes, which originated from believes and experiences of competitive institutions suppliers. As if these competitors were seriously lack of related experiences, the class tendency under the belief system would motivate their indignation of belief, and cause extreme activities, which received undesirable performances and was well proved by consequences of violent activities from the period of Agrarian Revolution; even equipped with the trial and error experiences, the guide of policy frameworks composed of dominant believes and specific policies would also impelled their participators to commit extreme violent methods, in order to maximize the benefit of CCP, which emerged in the War of Liberation period.Fifth, informal institutions such as cultural traditions could form certain constraints on institutional changes, which are well presented as the dual constraints both on their dominators and on participators. Within the evolving process of CCP land policies, Chinese cultural traditions could make very important influences on peasants, the major participators of such institutional changes, which became the sound proof that cultural inheritances supposed to build rigid constraints on our capability to conduct institutional changes in any time. Similarly, CCP widely applied Chinese cultural traditions for their ideological investments during all the four historic periods, which well proved the above conclusion though.Sixth, options holding by peasants, the passive participators of this institutional change, are composed various factors such as economic and ideological ones, rational and irrational ones etc; especially, after firing the motivation of wealth pursuing, it is vital for the next round decision-making that the perceived reality and their predictable consequences would be altered by their own activities, which exposed the complexity of agents’decision-makings. Particularly, under the collective behaviors of peasants, it clearly illustrated that interacted agents would conduct mutual selections and form the corresponding relationship as well.Seventh, the economic performance of land policies depends on the policy matrix composed by policies themselves and their implement methods. Both the public ownership operation in the Agrarian Revolution period and the equalization of land ownership in the War of Liberation period failed to reach the“satisfied”economic performance, however, the agricultural development of Shan-Gan-Ning Area in the Anti-Japanese War period provided the remarkable proof for our conclusion, even their developments were on the relatively lower level. Specifically, there are several key points for our issue such as the content of policies, their stability, ideological attitudes to the private property right and to personal rights of individuals, and ideological recognition to laws of economics etc. Ultimately, their economic performance depends on whether policy suppliers could provide the“correct understanding”on this non-ergodic world. In the context of our study, such“correct understanding”refers to CCP correctly understood rural land systems of China, even more general range such as China, integrated them into the CCP belief system, and then altered related policies. Only in this way, their aspirations could be consistent with corresponding consequences.In sum, based on the combinations of new theories & new viewpoints, and logics & history, our study provided a general economic analysis on the historic evolving process of CCP land policies in the first half of 20th century, and opened a new window to understand institutional changes of Chinese rural land system, even to read the changing process of Chinese society in the first half of 20th century.更多还原