Tag Archives: urban-rural

Can rural industrialisation take place while China is in the process of urbanisation?

The gap between urban and rural areas has widened in China since the early 1980’s. Because economic opportunities are found in the cities, millions of peasants have moved to urban centres. The Central government is eager to find solutions to reduce migration flows and rebalance development between rural and urban regions. A possible remedy may be to industrialise these rural regions, so that the inhabitants are willing to stay in their home areas.

In a paper published in 2012, Song Huasheng, Zhu Xiwei (Zhejiang University) and Jacques-François Thisse (Université catholique de Louvain)1 studied the relations between rural industrialisation and urbanisation. According to their research, the two phenomena can take place simultaneously in China. If rural industrialisation is still rather weak in the Western provinces, this is mainly due to the lack of technology in the local firms.  Moreover, these firms have undergone stronger competition from urban companies as a result of the improved transportation infrastructures between urban and rural areas. 

According to the authors, rural industrialisation is conditioned by two factors: greater access, for rural companies, to technologies and better training for rural workers.  The “Go West” development strategy that has been implemented since 2000 includes several measures supporting education in the least developed parts of China.  However, these measures need to be further developed in order to reduce regional inequalities.

There is another measure that would help to industrialise rural areas, namely a reform of rural land ownership and rural land transactions. No real industrialisation can take place if peasants cannot cut their ties to their farm land. The marketisation of rural land would create larger and more efficient agricultural firms, and this would also allow former peasants to create their own local enterprises.  The money collected from land transactions could also be invested in their training.

All this means that rural industrialization cannot be successfully implemented unless distinctions (and inequalities) between rural and urban land statutes disappear.

  1. Song, Huasheng, Thisse, Jacques-François, Zhu, Xiwei. (2012)Urbanization and/or rural industrialization in China. Regional Science and Urban Economics, Volume 42, Issues 1–2, January 2012, pp.126–134. []

Sebastien Goulard

Ph.D. in political science (EHESS, Paris); M.A. in social sciences (EHESS, Paris); M.A. in international relations (IRIS, Paris), B.A. (Hons) in international political studies (ESE - Nottingham Trent University)

More Posts

Undo the discriminatory hukou system to achieve ‘cities of dream’?

1. Chan, Kam Wing. 2013, February 4. Turning China’s cities with invisible walls into cities of dreams. East Asian Forum (accessed 25 April 2013).

2. Chan, Kam Wing. 2013, January 19. China’s hukou system stands in the way of its dream of prosperity. South China Morning Post (accessed 25 April 2013). [Earlier version of 1.]

1. During a widely publicised tour of Shenzhen, China, the new head of the Communist Party, Xi Jinping, called for the realisation of the ‘Chinese dream’ — a great national revival.

Shortly after that, the Chinese character meng (dream) was voted ‘character of the year’ in an online poll of 50,000 people.

As China enters the urban age, a critical part of the Chinese dream is the ‘urban dream’: the promotion of urbanisation to generate household consumption to put the economy on a sustainable footing. This would steer China away from its currentexport- and investment-driven growth model, which has long been considered, even by the government, as ‘unbalanced’ and ‘unsustainable’.

Premier-designate Li Keqiang has championed urbanisation for years. Some media pundits are excited by his talk of a new type of urbanisation, though details are scant. Can he do it right and help China reach its urban dream?

Read more

2. Dreams are in vogue in mainland China. During a widely publicised tour of Shenzhen, the new head of the Communist Party, Xi Jinping , called for the realisation of the “Chinese dream” – a great national revival. Right after that, the Chinese character meng (dream) was voted “character of the year” in an online poll of 50,000 people.

The new year also began with a political storm over a censored article dreaming of Chinese constitutional reform. Whether those dreams are more like a fantasy than realistic hope remains to be seen.

Read more

Related

  • Chan, Kam Wing. (1994) Cities with invisible walls : Reinterpreting urbanization in post-1949 China, Oxford university press, 194 p.
  • Chan, Kam Wing and Will Buckingham. (2008) Is China abolishing the hukou system? The China quarterly, 195, pp. 582-606. [Full text here]
  • 陈, 金永. 2013年05月13. 户籍改革路线图. 财新《新世纪》. [Accessed 28 May 2013].
  • 陈, 金永. 2013年06月1.十五年完成户籍改革. 财新《中国改革》. Dowload PDF here.
  • Kam Wing Chan webpage

 

Monique Abud

Centre d'études sur la Chine moderne et contemporaine, EHESS, Paris, France

More Posts

高富平教授谈城乡一体化及农村集体经济的转型问题

2008年10月12日中共十七届中央委员会第三次全体会议通过《中共中央关于推进农村改革发展若干重大问题的决定》(下简称《决定》)。该《决定》的目的是进一步推进城乡一体化的落实,促进承包经营权流转(通过转让,出租,转包,互换,股份合作等形式)。但是农民对于土地流转的需求和渴望并没有学者和政策制定者期望的那么大。主要原因之一是现行体制下的土地承包经营权仍然是集体成员享有的权利,具有保障本村成员生存发展权利的社会保障功能。2012年12月在中央农村工作会议上,国家为了提高该《决定》的效果及加快城市化的进度要提出改革户籍制度。但改变现行户籍制度的具体方案还没公布。

最后,现行法律规定,流转承包经营权30年不变,即所谓的“增人不增地,减人不减地”,遏制土地调整。但在国内很多地方无论农民还是地方政府都不支持该规定。30年不变的规定虽然可以确保集体农村之外的投资者能稳定享有承包经营权。但是在经济落后地区,土地还是农民的主要收入来源。所以,该规定可能不符合削弱土地生存保障的经济功能。

访问回复内容由高富平华东政法大学教授填写

您觉得为什么该《决定》到目前为止效果不好?另外,实际上该《决定》出台之前,农村很多地方已开始实施承包经营权的流转,和以前的状况相比,该《决定》有什么不一样?

承包经营权流转一直处于开放的状态,《决定》无非是再次强调或重复过去法律已经规定的规则。但是,土地承包经营权是否流转或流转量取决于承包经营权人的内在需求,仅仅政策允许是不大可能根本转变流转的规模。在我国看来,现在流转不大的主要原因有二:其一,承包经营权仍然被农民视为生存保障手段,在没有确定谋生手段和社会保障之前,让农民转让其承包经营权是不现实的。其二,承包经营权流转意味着农民生存方式改变,从过去依赖村集体分配土地生存转变为依赖社会就业或者其他营业,这意味着根本上改变过去因出生或取得社员资格就可以取得土地的制度,而让农民接受这样结果目前恐怕有障碍。实质上,因社员资格取得土地维系现行农村集体经济的主要途径,而流转意味着不再通过直接分配土地使用权而是经营土地的收益或其他集体经济收入的再分配来间接体现集体经济。这无疑是巨大的转变,不是所有的农村能够实现这样的转变。

为了使农民愿意换户籍,国家应建立什么样的社会保障来取代土地?如户籍制度的改变让农民得到城市居民社会保障这不会意味着传统农村集体经济的解构吗?当承包经营权的流转年限结束时,农村集体还遵守传统承包经营权——按家庭承包的制度吗?

户籍和土地权属是支撑城乡分割的两个根源,而城乡之间的最大差别在于人的生存方式和保障体系不完全一样。让农民以放弃户籍来迫使农民放弃土地的前提是:农民有一定独立生存能力(比如有就业能力,或者投资经营能力),同时还可以像市民那样享受社会保障。如果真正实现了这样的转变,农地应丧失了身份,农民也就转变为市民,农民与农民之间的经济“合作”完全是契约性质的或经济性质的。这意味着传统以土地为联结点的农村集体经济转变为以资本或财产为联结点的商业组织。其结果是传统农村集体经济的解体或转型。
承包经营权的流转仍然受承包经营权存续期限约束,这意味着承包到期,受让人或者转承包人的权利也到期,到期后土地应当回归到集体组织。此时,土地如何再次发包?我认为,此时土地应当按照契约发包,而不是按户或村民身份发包,否则就会再一次回复到老路上,永远走不出土地与农民身份相联结的死胡同,土地去身份,人口去身份的现代市场经济或契约社会就无从建立。

您认为“30年不变” 政策如何落实?能按地方的经济发展水平来区分两个速度的实施吗?

中国农村经济差别很大,我认为,下一步无论中央推行什么样的政策都应当是允许有选择的、多元化的、循序渐进的,而不是一刀切的。在实行承包经营制的时候,我们就犯了强力普遍推行承包制的错误。我们再次引导走向以契约为主导的新型农村经济时,我们就不能再重蹈覆辙。农村承包经营权期限的固定是与流转相配合的,而农村承包经营权的调整是与传统集体经济相契合的。虽然农村经济最终是走向契约经济,但是,一定要根据每个地区的经济发展水平,因地制宜地推进和发展,允许不同进度的推进。可以不只两个速度,还可以更多的速度。总之,差异化发展是必然选择。但这对政府政策的制定和贯彻提出了更高的要求。

  • 高富平教授近期出版书包括: 2011年«物权法讲义»。北京:法律出版社,其他有关高富平教授的著作请点击此连结

Miguel Elosua

Spanish qualified lawyer; PhD in Chinese Law. UrbaChina Research Officer. Has lived in China since 2006.

More Posts