【作者】 戴琳；

【导师】 傅鼎生；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 农村宅基地问题是物权法立法过程中争论最大的焦点之一。传统观念认为,农村宅基地是国家给予农民的福利,实现农民“居者有其屋”的功能。如果允许农村宅基地使用权流转,农民将宅基地出卖之后,不允许再次申请宅基地,又无力在城镇购买商品房,那么,农民将居无定所,影响社会稳定。而且,由于农村宅基地的取得具有明显的成员性特征,具有取得无偿、使用无期限的特点,因此禁止或限制农村宅基地使用权向符合身份性条件之外的人转让。基于上述理论,我国对农村宅基地的立足点一直处于保护宅基地的静态归属方面,处于行政管理之下,其作为财产性的权利却被忽视和限制。随着我国市场经济体制建设的深化,国有土地使用权已经得到开放,土地的价值日益得到体现。与之相比,农村宅基地使用权在整个土地体系中依然被忽视甚至封闭,不仅有违宅基地使用权的物权本质,而且不符合市场和效益的价值目标,这是不符合发展趋势的。本文从理论和实际出发,对一些错误的认识做出澄清,围绕农村宅基地使用权的概念和法律性质、对反对和支持两方面意见的分析、现状的必要性和法学理论的可能性、流转的障碍克服及流转模式设计等几个方面,逐一进行论证,并得出结论：农村宅基地使用权本质上是用益物权,允许自由流转,赋予其收益和处分权能,是还其本质属性应有之义。并且农村已经形成宅基地交易地下市场,禁止不如疏导,要加快研究和立法步伐,为农村宅基地使用权的流转提供法律体系和规范措施,才是解决问题之道。论文最后谈到,农村宅基地问题不能一蹴而就,并且要建立农村社会保障体系来保障农民的基本生存,才能解决宅基地流转的后顾之忧。文章除引言和结语外共分三章：第一章就农村宅基地使用权的概念进行整理,将本文的概念定义为农村集体组织的成员依法享有的在农村集体所有的土地上建设住宅的权利；对宅基地使用权法律性质几种代表性观点予以介绍和评析,将其法律性质定义为特殊的不动产用益物权。第二章分析了农村宅基地使用权流转的现状,以及法律的严格限制与现实需要之间的矛盾；从反对和支持理由两方面进行可行性分析,得出本文观点支持流转；为农村宅基地使用权流转提供理论基础支持,流转是物权发展的趋势,也是市场经济发展和法律制度发展大势所趋。第三章对农村宅基地流转面临的困难提出了解决办法。首先,城市房改经验表明宅基地的流转改革并不会导致社会紊乱；接着,为宅基地的流转设计了两个阶段模式,初期模式为引入法定租赁权,最终模式是实现自由流转；最后,从国家和集体两个方面来建立农村社会保障机制,保障农民基本生活。更多还原

【Abstract】 The countryside homestead question is in the reality of laws legislation process one of biggest argument focal points. The traditional ideas believed that, the countryside homestead gives farmer’s one kind of welfare, which has guaranteed the farmer’s occupies has its"institute"the survival function. If allowed freely to transfer countryside homestead right of use, farmers will not be allowed to apply for new homestead after sale of their homesteads and have no ability to buy apartment in town, which will lead to homeless of the farmers and affects the social stability. Also, because the acquirements of countryside homestead right of use has the certain status, free, does not have the deadline, therefore, advocated the prohibition or limits the countryside homestead right of use to transfer to others who have no certain status.Based on above theory, protection of country homestead has been in a static attribution, controlled by administration. However, it’s property rights have been ignored and restricted. With the deepening of institution building of China’s market economy, state-owned land right of use has been open, increasing the value of the land to be reflected. In contrast, countryside homestead right of use in the whole system is still being ignored or even closed. It is not only against the property nature of homestead right of use, but also is not in line with market value and efficiency goals. It is not in line with trends. This article from theory and practice embarks, for the purpose of clarifying some wrong understanding, centers on the concept and legal nature of countryside homestead right of use, analyzing two views of opposition and support, the necessity of status and the possibility of legal theory, overcoming obstacles to circulation and the pattern design to circulation, and so on. Then I demonstrate one by one, and concluded that, countryside homestead right of use is essentially usufructuary property right, allowing freely circulation and given its income and disposition are Also should be the essential attribute of its meaning. And now an underground market for homestead exchange has been formed. That is the way to solve the problem that we should ease the prohibition, accelerate the pace of research and legislation for the provision of legal system and regulatory measures for the circulation of countryside homestead right of use. Finally, on this paper, the issue of countryside homestead can not be achieved overnight. To solve the worries for circulation of homestead, it should establish a rural social security system to protect the basic survival of farmers.Besides the introduction and the conclusion, this article altogether divides three chapters:Chapter one clears on the concept of countryside homestead right of use, defining it as members of rural collective organizations in accordance with the law enjoy the rights of residential building on the land owned by rural collective organizations. It also introduce and analyze several representation views on the legal nature of homestead right of use, defining it as usufructuary of special real estate property.Chapter two analyzes the status of countryside homestead right of use, the contradictions between restrictions on law and the reality. Then we conduct a feasibility analysis of reasons for opposition and support from both sides to support the circulation of this paper’s point of view. It is used to provide a theoretical basis to support the circulation, which is a property development trends and is also market economy and legal system development trends of the times.Chapter three puts forward solutions on the obstacles of circulation. First, the experience of urban housing reform indicated that reform of homestead circulation will not lead to social disorder. Second, we design a two-stage model for homestead circulation. The initial model is introduction of a statutory right to lease, and the final model is free circulation. Finally, create a rural social security mechanism from both nation and collective, to protect the basic livelihood of farmers.更多还原