| The rural collective property rights distribution system is a system that regulates how rural collective economic organizations distribute collective property rights to their members.Based on the public ownership attribute of the collective ownership,the rural collective property rights distribution system generally takes Closed Distribution and Equal Distribution as its basic principles.At present,household contract system,rural residential land system(including alternative rural housing security systems)and rural collective shareholding system are all typical rural collective property rights distribution systems.Although the above-mentioned systems have different property rights to distribute and also have different institutional functions,they all take households as the distribution unit of relevant rights.In judicial practice and policy discourse,households are also recognized as the rights subjects of relevant rights.The arrangement in which households are both the distribution unit and the subject of collective property rights constitutes the Household Model of collective property rights distribution.From a private law perspective,the Household Model is fundamentally characterized by the household property rights structure.In this property rights structure,the subject of collective property rights is the household,rather than the individual members of the collective economic organization.In theory,members of a collective economic organization can only enjoy the collective property interests within the household by virtue of their family membership,and the increase or decrease of household members does not affect the household’s enjoyment of the collective property rights,which is totally different from the modern civil systems based on individual rights,and also goes against the dissipating trend of our country’s traditional family system since modern times.However,Household Model eventually evolved and had worked well for quite a while.Through research,it can be found that the existence of the household property rights structure has certain historical rationalities.First of all,there is a strong match between household organization and the production mode and lifestyle of traditional agricultural society.In the early stage of reform and opening-up,households were still the main production and living units in rural areas of our country,which provided an economic foundation for the formation of the household model.Secondly,in the period when the household model was formed,the traditional household culture was still deeply rooted in rural areas,which provided important culture support for the implementation of the household model.Thirdly,for a long period of time,the circulation of collective property rights has been restricted,which has led to a congenital shortage of the relevant trading market for rural collective property rights.In such circumstances,the price of collective property rights was generally much lower than its real value.Thus,the occurrence of household property rights disputes has been greatly suppressed,and the stability of the structure of household property rights has been maintained.Finally,the structure of household property rights is isomorphic to that of collective ownership.Under the premise that it was difficult for a collective economic organization to readjust the property rights for its all members,the household property rights structure can automatically readjust the rights within a smaller range,and thus to preserve the public nature of collective ownership.However,in recent years,the collective property rights conflicts among rural family members have become increasingly prominent.The data shows that the number of disputes over the collective property rights within rural households has increased year by year,and their distribution has a strong positive correlation with regional development.Through in-depth analysis,it can be seen that the agricultural and rural society is undergoing great changes,and household property rights structure has been unable to adapt to the actual needs of rural areas.From an economic point of view,the rural land transfer rate has increased significantly,and modern and intensive agricultural production have gradually replaced traditional smallholder production.Many rural households gradually lose their functions as production units,thus the economic foundation of the structure of household property rights is disappearing.From a social perspective,the growing awareness of individual rights within the family has made the phenomenon of "father-son communism" less and less common;the strengthening of women’s rights protection and the increasing instability of rural marriages have also made "women’s proletariat" unsustainable.The process of individualization of rural society is obvious,and thus the household property rights structure gradually loses its social foundation.From an institutional perspective,the circulation of rural collective property rights is more liberalized.Once the rural collective property rights are converted into currencies,the rights of vulnerable members in the household will be easily damaged,and some rules on the structure of household property rights will lose their meaning.Therefore,the distribution system of rural collective property rights urgently needs to be transformed in the direction of individualization.It needs to be clear that,in order to minimize the cost of institutional change,the individual transformation of the Household Model only means the change of the household property rights structure,without changing the current arrangement of taking households as distribution units.To realize the above transformation,it is necessary to think about how to confirm relevant collective property rights to individuals under the framework with taking households as the distribution unit,and to further think about how to coordinate the resulting system effects accordingly.For the individualization of household contract system,household members who participate in the distribution of contracted land should be identified as the subject of land contractual management right.The above-mentioned members constitute quasishared ownership of the land contractual management rights.During the term of contract,the land contract management right can be inherited and transferred.In order to avoid land fragmentation,the minimum farming unit system should be established with reference to the comparative law.At the same time,it is necessary to establish and improve the contracted land adjustment system,strictly restricting the adjustment of the contracting relationship and also providing a path for the adjustment of the contracting relationship,so as to simultaneously maintain the stability of the contracting relationship and the public nature of collective ownership.Confirming rural residential land use rights to individuals may also lead to unfair distribution of the rural residential land rights.This problem cannot be solved by direct land adjustment.One possible solution is to use currency to adjust the allocation of rural residential land equity.We can stipulate the area of rural residential land that each person can use for free,and supplement it with supporting measures of "over-occupying payment and under-occupying subsidies".Under these arrangements,the collective economic organization members should still apply for the rural residential land use rights,pay for the over-occupied land and to receive the housing subsidy for the surplus land on a household basis.The substantive right allocated by rural collective economic organizations to their members is transformed from the rural residential land use right into a certain amount of housing subsidy.The right to claim housing subsidies is determined by the membership of the collective economic organization and cannot be inherited or transferred.At the same time,rural residential land should be paid to use in the new system,thus the identity attribute of the rural residential land has been eliminated.The rural residential land use right has become pure property right and can be inherited and transferred now.To simplify the relationship between the house and the land and to make the arrangement more conform to the rural practice,the household members who apply for the residential land and contribute to the construction of the house should be identified as the subject of the rural residential land use right.When the collective asset shareholding system is conceived,the equity rights should be confirmed to the individual members of the collective economic organization.The collective economic organization members in the household who participated in the equity distribution constitute a common relationship with the household equity.In order to protect the collective rights and interests of newly added members of collective economic organizations,the original static management mode of equity should be transformed into a dynamic management mode.Based on the value differences behind different types of shares,a typed equity management system should be constructed:the population shares and welfare shares should be adjusted dynamically on a regular basis;the land shares and contribution shares should be statically managed.During the term of the equity,collective shares can be inherited and transferred.At the same time,a conversion mechanism for collective shares and individual shares should be established to minimize the impact on equity value caused by the dynamic adjustment of shares. |
