基于农民福利的宅基地流转模式比较与路径选择  

Comparison and Path Choice of Rural Residential Land Transfer from the Perspective of Farmers' Welfare

作　　者：陈利根[1,2] 成程[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京农业大学公共管理学院,江苏南京210095 [2]南京农业大学新农村发展研究院,江苏南京210095

出　　处：《中国土地科学》2012年第10期67-74,共8页China Land Science

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目(10YJA790022);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金-南京农业大学新农村发展研究专项(XNC2012004)

摘　　要：研究目的:揭示现有3种宅基地流转模式,即政府主导模式、集体推动模式与农民自发模式下的农民福利状况,并提供改善路径。研究方法:比较研究法与理论模型法。研究结果:(1)从短期来看,在无法改变城乡土地市场二元分割现实的情况下,集体推动宅基地流转模式最有利于增加农民福利,而其他两种模式由于存在政府垄断和隐形流转致使农民福利损失较多;(2)从长期来看,增加农民福利的有效途径在于实现政府主导、集体推动和农民自发三种模式向宅基地市场自由流转的转变。研究结论:有条件地区尝试推行集体推动宅基地流转模式,不具备条件地区需提高拆迁补偿标准或规范隐形流转,最终3种模式都需向市场自由流转转变。The purpose of this paper is to discuss farmers＇ welfare under three modes of rural residential land transfer and put forward solutions accordingly. The three modes can be divided as government-led, collectives-led and farmers-led. Comparative study and theoretical model method are adopted. The results indicate that 1 ） In the short term, under the situation that no changes made to the dual track of the urban-rural land markets, the mode driven by rural collectives is most beneficial for farmers＇ welfare increases, however, the other two modes result in higher losses of farmers＇ welfare due to the governmental monopolies and the illegal circulation. 2） In the long run, the most effective way to improve farmers＇ welfare level is to shift those three modes to the mode of free transfer of rural residential land. It is concluded that collectives-led mode can be implemented in the qualified regions, the other non-qualified regions have to improve demolition compensation norms and legalize the illegal circulation. Eventually, those three modes will shift towards the mode of free transfer of rural residential land.

关 键 词：土地管理 农民福利 宅基地 流转模式 流转路径 

分 类 号：F301.24[经济管理—产业经济]