IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i9p1746-d1235582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Farmers Realize Their Rights on the Collective Land in Rural China? An Explanatory Framework for Deconstructing the Subject of Collective Land Ownership

Author

Listed:
  • Yixiang Chen

    (School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Xiangmu Jin

    (School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

This study aims to deconstruct the collective, the subject of collective land ownership. With respect for the logic of the formation of collective land ownership, we propose the “transfreserve” mode to portray the division of rural land rights between the members and the organization in the transformation from private ownership to collective ownership. This idea can be expressed as, prompted by the public power of the state, each farmer as the owner of rural land having to transfer part of his/her rights to the organization when associating, meanwhile each one still reserves part of his/her rights. We term the rights transferred to the organization as special legal person ownership, while the rights reserved by each farmer are called membership rights. The rights exercised by all members on the basis of membership rights are the autonomous rights. In terms of the property rights, such as the distribution right of the collective income, farmers have to participate in decision-making to determine how to form the allocation scheme in a fair and reasonable way by exercising autonomous rights; then, organization fulfills the collective will to meet the needs of its members by exercising special legal person ownership. As for the right to use public infrastructure on the collective land, farmers, as the members, can use it reasonably by its own will, which is the process of exercising membership rights. If farmers’ rights are infringed by other members, they can choose to negotiate with other members in a proper way. If farmers’ rights are infringed when the organization carries out operation activity in the land market, they can obtain compensation from the organization, and the compensation standard is determined by the decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Yixiang Chen & Xiangmu Jin, 2023. "How Do Farmers Realize Their Rights on the Collective Land in Rural China? An Explanatory Framework for Deconstructing the Subject of Collective Land Ownership," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:9:p:1746-:d:1235582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/9/1746/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/9/1746/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ma, Shuang & Mu, Ren, 2020. "Forced off the farm? Farmers’ labor allocation response to land requisition in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Kong, Xuesong & Liu, Yaolin & Jiang, Ping & Tian, Yasi & Zou, Yafeng, 2018. "A novel framework for rural homestead land transfer under collective ownership in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 138-146.
    3. Jiao, Man & Xu, Hengzhou, 2022. "How do Collective Operating Construction Land (COCL) Transactions affect rural residents’ property income? Evidence from rural Deqing County, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Deininger, Klaus & Jin, Songqing, 2009. "Securing property rights in transition: Lessons from implementation of China's rural land contracting law," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 22-38, May.
    5. Wei Li & Dennis Tao Yang, 2005. "The Great Leap Forward: Anatomy of a Central Planning Disaster," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(4), pages 840-877, August.
    6. Kung James, Kaising, 1995. "Equal Entitlement versus Tenure Security under a Regime of Collective Property Rights: Peasants' Preference for Institutions in Post-reform Chinese Agriculture," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 82-111, August.
    7. Jayadev, Arjun & Reddy, Sanjay G., 2011. "Inequalities between Groups: Theory and Empirics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 159-173, February.
    8. Qiu, Tongwei & Zhang, Danru & Choy, S.T. Boris & Luo, Biliang, 2021. "The interaction between informal and formal institutions: A case study of private land property rights in rural China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 578-591.
    9. Ho, Peter, 2005. "Institutions in Transition: Land Ownership, Property Rights, and Social Conflict in China," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199280698.
    10. Qian Lu & Shurong Yao, 2018. "From Urban–Rural Division to Urban–Rural Integration: A Systematic Cost Explanation and Chengdu's Experience," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 26(1), pages 86-105, January.
    11. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi & Liu, Jinlong, 2019. "Principal-agent relationships in rural governance and benefit sharing in community forestry: Evidence from a community forest enterprise in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Lai, Yani & Wang, Jiayuan & Lok, Waiming, 2017. "Redefining property rights over collective land in the urban redevelopment of Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 485-493.
    13. Deininger, Klaus & Jin, Songqing & Xia, Fang & Huang, Jikun, 2014. "Moving Off the Farm: Land Institutions to Facilitate Structural Transformation and Agricultural Productivity Growth in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 505-520.
    14. Lin Zhou & Walter Timo de Vries, 2022. "Collective Action for the Market-Based Reform of Land Element in China: The Role of Trust," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, June.
    15. Shen, Mingrui & Shen, Jianfa, 2018. "Evaluating the cooperative and family farm programs in China: A rural governance perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 240-250.
    16. Sa, Haoxuan, 2020. "Do ambiguous property rights matter? Collective value logic in Lin Village," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    17. Li, Jingrong & Zhang, Chenlei & Mi, Yunsheng, 2021. "Land titling and internal migration: Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Zhou, Yang & Li, Xunhuan & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Rural land system reforms in China: History, issues, measures and prospects," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    19. Lin, Justin Yifu & Yang, Dennis Tao, 1998. "On the causes of China's agricultural crisis and the great leap famine," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 125-140.
    20. Xu, Zhongguo & Zhuo, Yuefei & Li, Guan & Bennett, Rohan Mark & Liao, Rong & Wu, Cifang & Wu, Yuzhe, 2022. "An LADM–based model to facilitate land tenure reform of rural homesteads in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Chen & Qian, Zhu, 2022. "The complexity of property rights embedded in the rural-to-urban resettlement of China: A case of Hangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Hongbin Liu & Yuepeng Zhou, 2020. "The Marketization of Rural Collective Construction Land in Northeastern China: The Mechanism Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Zhou, Yang & Li, Xunhuan & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Rural land system reforms in China: History, issues, measures and prospects," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Li, Xinyi & Ito, Junichi, 2021. "An empirical study of land rental development in rural Gansu, China: The role of agricultural cooperatives and transaction costs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. L Rachel Ngai & Christopher A Pissarides & Jin Wang, 2019. "China’s Mobility Barriers and Employment Allocations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(5), pages 1617-1653.
    6. Shenjie Yang & Lanjiao Wen, 2023. "Regional Heterogeneity in China’s Rural Collectively Owned Commercialized Land Market: An Empirical Analysis from 2015–2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    7. Zhang, Chuanyong & Song, Yanjiao, 2022. "Road to the city: Impact of land expropriation on farmers’ urban settlement intention in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    8. Peng Tang & Jing Chen & Jinlong Gao & Min Li & Jinshuo Wang, 2020. "What Role(s) Do Village Committees Play in the Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads? Evidence from Sichuan Province in Western China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, November.
    9. John Giles & Ren Mu, 2018. "Village Political Economy, Land Tenure Insecurity, and the Rural to Urban Migration Decision: Evidence from China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 521-544.
    10. Loh, Chung-Ping A. & Li, Qiang, 2013. "Peer effects in adolescent bodyweight: Evidence from rural China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 35-44.
    11. Jia, Lili, 2012. "Land fragmentation and off-farm labor supply in China," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 66, number 66.
    12. Dongshui Xie & Caiquan Bai & Huimin Wang & Qihang Xue, 2022. "The Land System and the Rise and Fall of China’s Rural Industrialization: Based on the Perspective of Institutional Change of Rural Collective Construction Land," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Xiuling Ding & Qian Lu & Lipeng Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Hua Li, 2023. "Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    14. Sayonee Majumdar, 2018. "Disinterring the Transition Debate in Maoist China," Arthaniti: Journal of Economic Theory and Practice, , vol. 17(1), pages 83-111, June.
    15. Xianlei Ma & Justus Wesseler & Nico Heerink & Futian Qu, 2013. "Land Tenure Reforms and Land Conservation Investments in China ¨C What Does Real Option Value Theory Tell Us?," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 3, pages 19-33, August.
    16. Li, Shi & Vendryes, Thomas, 2018. "Real estate activity, democracy and land rights in rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 54-79.
    17. Yang Liu & Jiajun Qiao & Jie Xiao & Dong Han & Tao Pan, 2022. "Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Rural Revitalization and an Improvement Path: A Typical Old Revolutionary Cultural Area as an Example," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-24, October.
    18. Jiao, Man & Xu, Hengzhou, 2022. "How do Collective Operating Construction Land (COCL) Transactions affect rural residents’ property income? Evidence from rural Deqing County, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    19. Xue Feng Hu & Gordon G. Liu & Maoyong Fan, 2017. "Long‐Term Effects of Famine on Chronic Diseases: Evidence from China's Great Leap Forward Famine," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(7), pages 922-936, July.
    20. Gørgens, Tue & Meng, Xin & Vaithianathan, Rhema, 2012. "Stunting and selection effects of famine: A case study of the Great Chinese Famine," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 99-111.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:9:p:1746-:d:1235582. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.