Related News
Home » Opinion » Chinese Views
Quake farmers share land with urban investors and tourists
By Qiu Lin |
May 25, 2009, Monday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
OWNING a two-story house would have been impossible for hog raiser Wang Quan without a new policy in Dujiangyan, one of the cities hardest hit by last year's Sichuan earthquake.
Wang's house in Chaping village became too dangerous to live in after the 8-magnitude quake on May 12.
"I wouldn't be able to afford to build such a house in 10 years, but now, without paying anything, I'm living in a villa," Wang says.
When he learned from the village committee in June that the Chengdu municipal government had issued a policy to encourage people from the city to jointly build homes with quake-hit farmers, Wang immediately thought of Zhang Zhonggui.
Zhang, a client of his hog business, had said that he wanted to build a house on Wang's rural housing land in the picturesque Mt Qingcheng area, but the law prohibited him from doing so. Now with the new policy, there is a chance, Wang says.
Under China's current land ownership structure, urban land is owned by the state while rural land is owned by the rural collective. The collective, often a village committee, distributes land-use rights to households. Rural land includes farmland and construction land for housing, enterprises and public structures.
Farmers are allowed to transfer their rural housing land use rights to other members within the rural collective.
"The (new) policy is basically saying that I give up some of my rural housing land to investors who in return will build a new home for me," said Wang. So he contacted Zhang, who agreed to invest 500,000 yuan (US$75,000) right away to build two two-story villas on Wang's 232 square meters of land.
Wang moved into his new house with his wife, daughter and uncle in October. It has a floor area of 132 square meters, with 242 square meters of building area. The house cost Zhang 280,000 yuan.
The rest of Wang's land, or 100 square meters, was given over to Zhang's new country guesthouse that has 170 square meters of building area. Zhang plans to receive tourists visiting Mt Qingcheng.
A complicated matter
But the legal basis of the policy is more complicated than Wang's initial understanding.
Under China's Land Administration Law, rural collective land use rights cannot be sold, transferred or leased for non-rural use.
"This means that the law does not forbid the transfer of rural collective construction land use right for tourism," says Luo Zhaopeng, director of Dujiangyan's Urban and Rural Planning Department.
Since rural housing land use rights can only be transferred within the village collective, the village collective must redesignate the part of the rural housing land agreed by farmers and investors as rural collective construction land, making it transferable for investors, Luo says. Individual investors or companies can use the land to run service businesses such as guesthouses or restaurants.
"Through this process, rural housing land becomes part of collective construction land that can be transferred legally," says Wu Jianling, of Chengdu University's Urban and Rural Development Center.
Both Zhang and Wang got two certificates: property ownership certificates and land use right certificates.
For Zhang, it is the collective rural construction land use right valid for 40 years. With the two certificates, Zhang will be able to sell his property on the market. But Wang cannot sell his because his certificate is rural housing land use right, which cannot be sold on the market.
"I feel that I've benefited a lot. I got a two-story villa without paying anything," Wang says. "I don't want to sell my house and move to the city, the air here on the mountain is so much better."
Han Jun, director of the State Council Development Research Center's Rural Economy Department, says such practices are unsuitable for other rural areas.
Han, who has just returned from doing research on countryside policies in Japan, says the restriction on rural land use is even tighter in Japan. "Japanese farmers are not allowed to sell their rural homes to city people and there is no way urban people can build houses on rural housing land."
Han thinks such practices might trigger disputes in the future, but "since we are dealing with the quake zones, the situation is different."
Luo Zhaopeng says land use rights should be freely transferred as long as the use of the land is not changed. "We shouldn't worry too much that once the farmers sell their rural housing land or farmland, they will have no place to live or nothing to eat," he says.
"Instead we should give them enough freedom and let them decide what to do with their land. The key point is to improve the social security system for the farmers."
(The author is a senior writer at Xinhua news agency.)
Wang's house in Chaping village became too dangerous to live in after the 8-magnitude quake on May 12.
"I wouldn't be able to afford to build such a house in 10 years, but now, without paying anything, I'm living in a villa," Wang says.
When he learned from the village committee in June that the Chengdu municipal government had issued a policy to encourage people from the city to jointly build homes with quake-hit farmers, Wang immediately thought of Zhang Zhonggui.
Zhang, a client of his hog business, had said that he wanted to build a house on Wang's rural housing land in the picturesque Mt Qingcheng area, but the law prohibited him from doing so. Now with the new policy, there is a chance, Wang says.
Under China's current land ownership structure, urban land is owned by the state while rural land is owned by the rural collective. The collective, often a village committee, distributes land-use rights to households. Rural land includes farmland and construction land for housing, enterprises and public structures.
Farmers are allowed to transfer their rural housing land use rights to other members within the rural collective.
"The (new) policy is basically saying that I give up some of my rural housing land to investors who in return will build a new home for me," said Wang. So he contacted Zhang, who agreed to invest 500,000 yuan (US$75,000) right away to build two two-story villas on Wang's 232 square meters of land.
Wang moved into his new house with his wife, daughter and uncle in October. It has a floor area of 132 square meters, with 242 square meters of building area. The house cost Zhang 280,000 yuan.
The rest of Wang's land, or 100 square meters, was given over to Zhang's new country guesthouse that has 170 square meters of building area. Zhang plans to receive tourists visiting Mt Qingcheng.
A complicated matter
But the legal basis of the policy is more complicated than Wang's initial understanding.
Under China's Land Administration Law, rural collective land use rights cannot be sold, transferred or leased for non-rural use.
"This means that the law does not forbid the transfer of rural collective construction land use right for tourism," says Luo Zhaopeng, director of Dujiangyan's Urban and Rural Planning Department.
Since rural housing land use rights can only be transferred within the village collective, the village collective must redesignate the part of the rural housing land agreed by farmers and investors as rural collective construction land, making it transferable for investors, Luo says. Individual investors or companies can use the land to run service businesses such as guesthouses or restaurants.
"Through this process, rural housing land becomes part of collective construction land that can be transferred legally," says Wu Jianling, of Chengdu University's Urban and Rural Development Center.
Both Zhang and Wang got two certificates: property ownership certificates and land use right certificates.
For Zhang, it is the collective rural construction land use right valid for 40 years. With the two certificates, Zhang will be able to sell his property on the market. But Wang cannot sell his because his certificate is rural housing land use right, which cannot be sold on the market.
"I feel that I've benefited a lot. I got a two-story villa without paying anything," Wang says. "I don't want to sell my house and move to the city, the air here on the mountain is so much better."
Han Jun, director of the State Council Development Research Center's Rural Economy Department, says such practices are unsuitable for other rural areas.
Han, who has just returned from doing research on countryside policies in Japan, says the restriction on rural land use is even tighter in Japan. "Japanese farmers are not allowed to sell their rural homes to city people and there is no way urban people can build houses on rural housing land."
Han thinks such practices might trigger disputes in the future, but "since we are dealing with the quake zones, the situation is different."
Luo Zhaopeng says land use rights should be freely transferred as long as the use of the land is not changed. "We shouldn't worry too much that once the farmers sell their rural housing land or farmland, they will have no place to live or nothing to eat," he says.
"Instead we should give them enough freedom and let them decide what to do with their land. The key point is to improve the social security system for the farmers."
(The author is a senior writer at Xinhua news agency.)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
