本文關(guān)鍵詞： 公益林劃定 法律性質(zhì) 管制性征收 民事權(quán)利保護(hù)　出處：《中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：公益林在保護(hù)生態(tài)環(huán)境、加強(qiáng)國防、促進(jìn)科學(xué)實驗等方面起著至關(guān)重要的作用。但森林一旦被國家劃定為公益林，就意味著相關(guān)林區(qū)嚴(yán)禁采伐，林業(yè)主體不能進(jìn)行任何林業(yè)經(jīng)營活動。如此對林業(yè)權(quán)利的極端限制導(dǎo)致林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的合法權(quán)益受到嚴(yán)重侵害。 為了解決這一問題，本文引入了國外的管制性征收制度，對我國劃定公益林的行為的法律性質(zhì)進(jìn)行分析。本文認(rèn)為，我國政府對公益林的劃定行為沒有啟動正式的征收程序，只是通過一些法令對林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的財產(chǎn)權(quán)進(jìn)行限制，在實質(zhì)上產(chǎn)生了權(quán)利被剝奪的后果。這符合管制性征收的制度特征，應(yīng)屬于管制性征收。在此基礎(chǔ)上，本文針對公益林劃定過程中涉及的民事權(quán)利，提出了保護(hù)林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的民事權(quán)利的合理建議。 本文共分七個部分： 第一部分通過介紹石光銀的案例提出本文擬討論的問題：我國劃定公益林的行為的法律性質(zhì)是什么？如何保護(hù)此中涉及的林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的合法權(quán)利？ 第二部分介紹了國內(nèi)公益林制度的實踐與理論現(xiàn)狀，重點闡述了學(xué)界對于公益林劃定行為的三種觀點：征用說、財產(chǎn)限制說、管制性征收說。 第三部分重點討論了管制性征收制度。首先分別闡述了美國和德國的相關(guān)制度的產(chǎn)生和演變。而后據(jù)此總結(jié)出管制性征收的概念及特征。 第四部分分析了公益林劃定行為的法律性質(zhì)。對征用說和財產(chǎn)限制說進(jìn)行了駁斥，，并結(jié)合上部分總結(jié)的管制性征收的概念和特征，得出公益林劃定行為屬于管制性征收的結(jié)論。 第五部分梳理了劃定公益林的過程中所涉及的林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的民事權(quán)利。 第六部分為如何保護(hù)林業(yè)經(jīng)營主體的民事權(quán)利提出了意見。主要從三方面闡述：事前的程序性權(quán)利、事后的訴訟性權(quán)利以及補(bǔ)償制度。 第七部分總結(jié)全文。
[Abstract]:Public welfare forest plays a vital role in protecting the ecological environment, strengthening national defense and promoting scientific experiments. But once the forest is designated as a public welfare forest by the state, it means that cutting is strictly prohibited in the relevant forest areas. The forestry subject can't carry out any forestry management activities, and the extreme restriction of forestry rights will seriously infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of the forestry management subject. In order to solve this problem, this paper introduces the foreign regulatory expropriation system, and analyzes the legal nature of the behavior of delimiting public welfare forest in China. Our government has not started the formal expropriation procedure for the demarcation of public welfare forest, but has restricted the property rights of forestry management subject through some decrees. In essence, there are the consequences of the deprivation of rights. This conforms to the system characteristics of regulatory expropriation and should belong to the regulatory expropriation. On this basis, this paper aims at the civil rights involved in the delineation process of public welfare forest. The reasonable suggestion of protecting the civil rights of forestry management subject is put forward. This paper is divided into seven parts: The first part puts forward the question to be discussed in this paper by introducing Shi Guangyin's case: what is the legal nature of the behavior of delimiting the public welfare forest in our country? How to protect the legal rights of forestry management subjects involved in this? The second part introduces the practice and theory of the public welfare forest system in China, focusing on the academic community to define the behavior of public welfare forest three views: expropriation theory, property restriction theory, regulatory expropriation theory. The third part mainly discusses the system of regulatory expropriation. Firstly, it expounds the emergence and evolution of the relevant systems in the United States and Germany, and then summarizes the concept and characteristics of the regulated expropriation. Part 4th analyzes the legal nature of the demarcation of public welfare forest. It refutes the theory of expropriation and the theory of property restriction, and combines the concept and characteristics of regulatory expropriation summarized in the preceding part. Draw the conclusion that the demarcation behavior of public welfare forest belongs to the control expropriation. Part 5th combs the civil rights of forestry management subject involved in the process of delimiting public welfare forest. Part 6th puts forward some suggestions on how to protect the civil rights of forestry management subjects, mainly from three aspects: the procedural rights in advance, the procedural rights afterwards and the compensation system. Part 7th summarizes the full text.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.63;D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 張千帆;“公正補(bǔ)償”與征收權(quán)的憲法限制[J];法學(xué)研究;2005年02期

2 張蕾;吳柏海;許慧娟;;試論物權(quán)法律制度與現(xiàn)代林業(yè)建設(shè)[J];林業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2007年12期

3 溫慶忠;許易琦;賴興會;;林改后集體公益林經(jīng)營管理面臨的問題及對策[J];林業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2010年07期

4 支玲;王術(shù)華;李謙;郭小年;;林改后農(nóng)戶對集體公益林投入意愿影響因素分析——以天保工程區(qū)武隆縣、會理縣和玉龍縣為例[J];林業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2012年03期

5 王敬波;;略論政府應(yīng)急征用法律制度的完善[J];行政法學(xué)研究;2011年04期

6 張千帆;;“公共利益”的困境與出路——美國公用征收條款的憲法解釋及其對中國的啟示[J];中國法學(xué);2005年05期

本文編號：1442969