Agricultural Land Transfer Mode From The Perspective Of Agricultural Land Ownership

Achieving modest scale management through agricultural land transfer is a very common reality in the development of contemporary Chinese agriculture,and it is also a very clear guide to national policies.The question is how to understand this magnificent Chinese experience academically and to give appropriate advice to achieve the unification of theory,policy,experience and practice.The most popular mode of interpretation has always been the "property perspective" from economics or law,and the "social construction perspective of property rights" developed by Chinese sociologists.The former recognizes the current non-standardization and pre-modernity of Chinese agricultural land rights practice.It hopes that through the reform of the legal system,the practice of complicated agricultural land rights will be simplified,and the integration of local experience and theory with western experience will be realized.The latter hopes to respect Chinese reality and emphasizes that in the seemingly unclear agricultural land rights structure,there are actually rich and effective social construction mechanisms that can achieve functional agricultural land rights effectiveness.However,the reality of agricultural land rights practice and the orientation of national policies are different from those of these two perspectives,thus challenging the existing academics.In the practice of agricultural land transfer in various places,the separation of the three rights of ownership,contracting rights and management rights were formed.Then,in the national policy,the idea of "separation of three powers" was put forward,which required the implementation of ownership,stable contracting rights and the right to operate.The orientation of the state is an effort to promote the standardization of agricultural land rights practice under the existing legal framework.It does not allow complex social factors to construct agricultural land rights,and strives to promote the standardization of agricultural land rights practice.Therefore,it is different from the social construction perspective of property rights.Foresight;nor attempt to incorporate complex agricultural land rights relations into a single legal contract,but to proceed from the actual situation to the three-power separation model to achieve a balance between state,collective and individual.Then,how to understand this "three powers separation" of agricultural land rights practice,especially the agricultural land transfer model,from a sociological perspective has become a very important issue.On the basis of combing relevant research,this paper puts forward the "agricultural land rights perspective" from the perspective of experience to absorb the rationality of the perspective of property rights and the social construction perspective of property rights,and make up for their shortcomings.It is believed that the "right" in China cannot be equated with power or right.Therefore,the connotation of "agricultural land rights" is far richer than property rights,and it cannot be reduced into "property rights".In this case,we do not have to continue to modify the interpretation paradigm of the property rights perspective under the concept of property rights,and put all kinds of social factors into the concept of property rights,distorting the original meaning of the term "property rights".Under the premise of respecting the local semantic tradition and the practice of agricultural land rights,this paper proposes that the concept of "agricultural land rights" should include three levels of "rights",namely,power,identity and property rights.They have a corresponding relationship with the three "rights" of ownership,contracting rights and management rights in policy terminology,and also have a corresponding relationship with the three main categories of state,collective and individual.In addition to the existing "three powers" formulation,the concept of three new "rights" is proposed to complete the transition from practice to theory.In the actual agricultural land transfer practice,the three kinds of "rights" are usually present at the same time,but in different periods,different regions,different agricultural land types and specific situations,there will be rule of dominance,identity or property rights of different situations.We can not simply think that there will be a progressive evolution from the domination of governance to the dominance of identity and then to the dominance model of property rights.However,we do recognize that the stability of agricultural land rights is the necessary basis for the production relations of agricultural productivity.In the current practice of agriculture,rural areas and farmers,how to realize the stability of agricultural land rights and promote the development of agricultural productivity in the institutional framework of the separation of powers is a very important issue.This paper taken T village in Shanghai as a case study of the history of agricultural land transfer since the reform and opening up in Shanghai's outer suburbs.It was found that under the overall background of strong state power,there were still different types of agricultural land transfer patterns in different historical periods.These three rights in the agricultural land transfereed model work together,but at some point,there would be some kind of "rights" that were particularly eye-catching and formed the pattern at the time.In the suburbs of Shanghai,after the ownership-based model has developed,it has returned to the dominant model of governance,which reminds us of the repetitive nature of social transformation and the complexity of the construction of agricultural land rights.The really important issue is not only the clarity of property rights in agricultural land rights,but also the stability of agricultural land rights,i.e.,how to achieve the balance of power,identity and property rights.In this way,the expected stability of operators and stakeholders can be ensured to better play the role of agricultural land resources in the social economy.However,on the question of how to establish a "three-power balance" mechanism based on how to "separate the three powers",there are no ready-made answers in the case villages we investigated.