农业转移人口市民化进程中农地非农化增值收益分配研究

发布时间：2018-04-01 17:08

  本文选题：农业转移人口市民化　切入点：新型城镇化　出处：《南京航空航天大学》2016年博士论文

【摘要】：“十三五”规划纲要提出“加快农业转移人口市民化进程,统筹推进基本公共服务均等化”的目标。本文以此为背景,一方面探讨如何通过人、地、财的统筹,协调土地增值收益的多方利益之争,另一方面试图回答如何解决农业转移人口进城后的社会综合保障和地方经济发展的财政支撑基础之间的矛盾,促进农业转移人口的可持续市民化。本研究的主体内容包括以下六个方面:首先,围绕城镇化进程中的农村人口迁徙、农村土地流转、农地非农化增值收益分配等三个方面进行文献梳理;其次介绍了本文运用的相关理论和方法,具体包括劳动力迁徙理论、土地产权权能理论、地租理论、扎根理论方法、博弈论以及数据包络分析;第三运用相关理论解析农地非农化增值收益的形成,并运用统计数据解构征地环节、出让环节和二次开发环节的增值收益分配情况;第四,基于市民化成本分担探讨了农地非农化增值收益的合理分配;第五,采用数据包络分析方法,就农地非农化增值收益分配政策的相对有效性进行综合评价,并开展了相关影响因素分析;最后是提出促进农业转移人口可持续市民化的农地非农化增值收益分配政策的优化措施。本研究得出以下主要结论。农地非农化主要通过农地征用、土地出让、土地二次开发三个环节实现增值,增值收益在多主体之间形成不均衡分配。研究运用土地产权理论和地租地论,在中国现行土地制度框架内,构建了农地非农化增值收益分配的多主体关系模型。在此基础上,运用面板数据测算了农地征用环节、土地出让环节、土地二次开发环节的农地非农化增值收益的多主体分配关系。就土地增值收益分配而言,从大到小依次为土地开发商、地方政府、被征地农民、中央政府、支农惠农、其他主体,大体比例是62%:15%:12%:7%:2%:2%。当前,农地非农化开发利用带来的增值收益分配呈现以下几个方面的特点:一是由于制度的变迁,相关主体的权益赋予不同的时代特性;二是受社会经济发展影响,土地市场价格的变动造成不同年份间的增值收益分配出现较大的波动;三是非农化用地结构、土地出让方式等因素显著影响土地增值,进而影响相关主体的利益分配。农业转移人口市民化公共成本分担实质上是政府通过农地非农化获得增值收益后的反哺。通过农业转移人口市民化成本分担的多主体博弈,发现对进城农民提供综合福利保障的“安置”策略是地方政府的劣策略,中央政府运用转移支付政策进行“配合”是严格的劣策略。即使在“人的城镇化”诉求下,中央政府也仅是有限地选择“配合”地方政府推进城镇化的策略。无论是农业转移人口还是政府,均依据预期净收益选择市民化路径。宏观数据和微观案例均验证了被动市民化情境下,市民化成本公共成本分担实质上是政府获利后对失地农民的反哺行为。在土地增值收益与市民化成本分担的对应分析基础上,提出了以政府为主导,企业、进城农民共同分担的机制,并且保证地方政府在农地非农化开发利用中获得应有利益,强调地方政府事权与财权的匹配。农地非农化增值收益分配政策的执行效率整体偏低,土地资源粗放利用已经得到初步改善。研究认同现行收益分配政策具有积极意义,同时隐含了政府性债务危机的经济风险和农民土地权益群体性抗争的社会风险。经数据包络分析发现,农地非农化增值收益分配政策的整体效率偏低,2000-2013年的全国的平均效率值为0.597,改进空间为40.3%;但从时间维度看,分配政策的效率经历了由高到低、再由低到高的演化过程;分配政策效率值在省际之间存在较大的差异,绝对?收敛分析发现,从全国层面可以看出赶超式城镇化背景下的土地资源粗放利用已经得到初步改善。进一步采用Tobit回归模型分析了分配政策效率的可能影响因素,发现二三产业/GDP在5%水平上显著正向影响分配政策效率,城乡收入差距、地方财政支出占GDP比重、城市人口密度均与分配政策效率负相关。现行农地非农化增值收益分配政策对市民化进程产生深远影响,需要坚持四个政策优化方向。通过农业转移人口城乡流动的演进与城镇化进程的演进比较,发现常住人口城镇化率高于户籍人口城镇化率,且两者的差距从1994年的5.72%持续扩大至2013年的17.63%,而且当前出现了人口逆城市化流动的新现象,这一结论揭示国家新型城镇化规划提出的户籍人口45%的城镇化率很可能难以实现。农地非农化增值收益分配政策需要坚持四个优化方向,并通过系统性配套制度改革才能持续优化。本文创新地界定农业转移人口可持续市民化的内涵,认为收益分配政策需要坚持保障农民土地权益、避免掉入中等收入陷阱、促进可持续市民化和全民共享土地增值收益四个政策优化方向。在下一步改革中,一是要做实农村集体土地所有权;二是要深化征地制度改革;三是要深化土地有偿使用改革;四是要完善土地税费制度设计;五是要创新城镇化融资体系。但是,优化农地非农化增值收益分配政策还需要配套的户籍、社会保障等制度改革,零敲碎打的改善难以实现系统性优化,农地非农化增值收益合理分配一个长期的、渐进的过程。在新型城镇化背景下,政府一方面需要摆脱“以地生财”的粗放模式,另一方面面临提高公共福利水平带来的财政压力。如果进城农民的福利没有资源利用效率的提高作为前提,即使通过合理的土地权益分配调整,极有可能遭遇以过度福利为本质的中等收入陷阱。因此,单纯的“涨价归公”和“私权保护”之争无法解决农业转移人口可持续的市民化,只有统筹考虑“人的流动→地的流动→财的分配→效率提升”,才有可能实现“保发展、保资源、保权益、保环境”新型城镇化多维目标。
[Abstract]:"13th Five-Year" plan proposed to accelerate the process of transfer of agricultural population of people, and promote the equalization of basic public services ". In this paper, a discussion by people, property, the overall interests of the parties for the coordination of land value-added income, on the other hand, trying to answer how to solve the contradiction between agricultural the transfer of population into the city after the comprehensive social security and economic development of local financial support, promote sustainable public transfer of the agricultural population. The main contents of this study include the following six aspects: first, the process of urbanization in the rural population, rural land circulation, farmland three aspects of agricultural value-added income distribution combing the literature; secondly introduces the relevant theories and methods used in this paper, including the labor migration theory, land rent theory, property rights theory, tie Root theory, game theory and data envelopment analysis; form third theories analysis of farmland conversion value, and use the statistical data of land value-added income distribution link deconstruction, transferring links and two development areas; fourth, based on the sharing of citizens into rational allocation of farmland conversion value-added income; fifth, using data envelopment analysis method on the relative effectiveness of agricultural land value-added income distribution policy to conduct a comprehensive evaluation, and carried out related factors analysis; finally the optimization measures of non-agricultural value-added income distribution policy put forward to promote the transfer of population urbanization of agricultural land sustainable. This study draws the following conclusions. Framland mainly through land expropriation, land transfer, land two times the development of the three sectors to achieve value-added, value-added income in between the main form is not balanced Study on the land use distribution. The theory of property rights and land rent theory, in the current land system Chinese within the framework of the construction of farmland conversion value-added income distribution of multi subject relationship model. On this basis, using panel data to measure land expropriation process, part of the land, the land two times the development process of farmland multi subjects agricultural value-added distribution the relationship between income. Land value-added income distribution, in descending order of land developers, local government, central government, landless farmers, agriculture and other subjects, the general ratio is 62%: 15%: 12%: 7%: 2%: 2%. current, land development and utilization of non agriculturalization of value-added income distribution to bring presents the following several aspects: one is due to the change of system, related to the rights and interests of the subjects with different age characteristics; the two is affected by economic development, land market price changes caused by the different years. Value-added income distribution fluctuated; three is the structure of land use conversion, land transfer and other significant factors affecting land value, thereby affecting the distribution of interests of related subjects. The transfer of agricultural population of citizens in public cost sharing is essentially a government by nurturing a value-added income after the land conversion. Multi agent game sharing through agriculture population transfer costs of the public, that the peasants provide comprehensive welfare "placement" strategy is the local government dominated strategy, used by the central government transfer payment policy "with" is strictly dominated strategy. Even in the people's urbanization demands, the central government is only limited to choose cooperation "the local government to promote urbanization strategy. It is the transfer of the agricultural population and the government, are based on the expected net income of residents choose path. The macroscopic data and the microscopic case Verify the situation of people under the passive public cost, public cost sharing is the essence of nurturing behavior of the landless peasants. In the analysis of the corresponding government profit cost of land value-added income and public sharing basis, put forward by the government, enterprises, farmers share mechanism, and to ensure that local governments benefit in the development of non-agricultural land use, stressed, the local government powers and financial authority. Non-agricultural land value-added income distribution policy of the low efficiency of the overall implementation, has been the beginning step in improving the extensive utilization of land resources. The identity is of positive significance to current income distribution policy, while the implied social risk government debt crisis and economic risk and the farmers' land rights groups protest. The data envelopment analysis found that the overall low efficiency of agricultural land value-added income distribution policy, The average efficiency values of 2000-2013 years was 0.597, improved 40.3%; but from the time dimension, the efficiency of distribution policy changed from high to low, then from low to high evolution; there are great differences in inter provincial allocation policy efficiency value of absolute convergence? Analysis found that from the national level we can see that the economy under the background of urbanization of land extensive utilization of resources has been initially improved. Further using Tobit regression model to analyze the factors that may affect the efficiency of distribution policy, found that two or three of /GDP industry at the 5% level has significant positive impact on the allocation policy efficiency, income gap between urban and rural areas, local fiscal expenditure accounted for the proportion of GDP, the city population density are related and the efficiency of the allocation policy. The current negative non-agricultural land value-added income distribution policy have a profound impact on the process of urbanization, the need to adhere to the four policies through the transfer of agricultural optimization direction. Comparison of the evolution of evolution and the process of urbanization, urban and rural population, found that the resident population urbanization rate is higher than that of the household population urbanization rate, and the gap continues to expand from 5.72% in 1994 to 17.63% in 2013, and the emergence of new phenomenon of inverse flow of city population, urbanization rate this conclusion reveals proposed planning the state of the new town population of 45% is likely to be difficult to achieve. Non-agricultural land value-added income distribution policy needs to adhere to the four direction of optimization and continuous optimization, through to the related system reform system. This paper defines the connotation of innovation of agricultural population transfer sustainable urbanization, that the income distribution policy needs to adhere to the protection of land rights of farmers, to avoid falling into the the middle income trap, promote sustainable urbanization and sharing the land value-added income four policy optimization direction. In the next step of reform, is a To make the rural collective land ownership; the two is to deepen the reform of land expropriation system; the three is to deepen the reform of the paid use of land; the four is to improve the design of land tax system; the five is to the innovation of the financing system of town. However, optimize the conversion of agricultural land value-added income distribution policy still need to complete the household registration, social security system reform. Piecemeal improvement is difficult to achieve system optimization, rational allocation of farmland conversion gains a long, gradual process. In the context of new urbanization, on the one hand, need the government to get rid of the extensive mode of business ", improve the level of public welfare is facing great financial pressure. On the other hand, if the migrant peasants no welfare efficiency of resource utilization as the premise, even through reasonable adjustment of land rights and interests distribution, is likely to suffer by excessive welfare for the nature of the middle income trap. Therefore, the prices go public "and" private right "dispute can not solve the transfer of agricultural sustainable urbanization population, only consider the" flow of people, the flow of money to improve the efficiency of distribution, "it is possible to realize" Paul development, resources, protection of rights and interests, multidimensional objective environment "the new town.

【学位授予单位】：南京航空航天大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：F321.1
，

本文编号：1696494