矿藏“国家所有”不宜解释为“国家所有权”  

The"State-owned"of Mineral Deposits Should not be Interpreted as"State Ownership"

作　　者：康纪田[1] 严旭 Kang Jitian;Yan Xu

机构地区：[1]湖南娄底行政学院

出　　处：《中国不动产法研究》2022年第1期130-152,共23页Research on Real Estate Law of China

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“自然资源权利配置研究”(15ZDB176)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：宪法的规定表明,矿藏等自然资源“国家所有”不能解释为“国家所有权”。自然资源类的矿产资源,由若干不同的且不确定的矿种构成,整体结构庞大而且抽象,不可能设立需具体占有、使用的所有权。宪法的“国家所有”既不是“国家所有权”,也明确排除了“国家所有权”。专属于“国家所有”被专属于“国家所有权”替代后,其成本是阻碍矿业等自然资源产权制度的合理构建。必须改变选择性解释宪法关于“国家所有”的习惯,将宪法的“国家所有”与“合理利用”进行整体解释;建立产权状态“二元结构”理论模型,以此分析宪法关于“国家所有”与“合理利用”的逻辑关系。“国家所有”与“合理利用”之间是根据产权状态“二元结构”理论所构建的宪法性产权制度,与“所有权”没有直接关系。,so it is impossible to establish the ownership that needs to be occupied and used specifically.The"state-owned"of the Constitution is neither"state ownership"nor explicitly excludes"state ownership".After"state-owned"is replaced by"state ownership",its cost is to hinder the reasonable construction of natural resources such as mining.We must change the habit of selective interpretation on"state-owned",interpret the"state-owned"and"reasonable utilization"of the Constitution;establish the theoretical model of"dual structure"of property right status to analyze the logical relationship of the Constitution on"state-owned and reasonable utilization".Between the"state-owned"and the"reasonable utilization"is the constitutional property right system constructed according to the"dual structure"theory of the property right state,which has no direct relationship with the"ownership".

关 键 词：合宪性 自然资源 矿产资源 产权 国家所有权 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学] D922.62[政治法律—法学]