本文選題：農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口市民化　切入點(diǎn)：新型城鎮(zhèn)化　出處：《南京航空航天大學(xué)》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：“十三五”規(guī)劃綱要提出“加快農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口市民化進(jìn)程,統(tǒng)籌推進(jìn)基本公共服務(wù)均等化”的目標(biāo)。本文以此為背景,一方面探討如何通過人、地、財(cái)?shù)慕y(tǒng)籌,協(xié)調(diào)土地增值收益的多方利益之爭,另一方面試圖回答如何解決農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口進(jìn)城后的社會(huì)綜合保障和地方經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的財(cái)政支撐基礎(chǔ)之間的矛盾,促進(jìn)農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口的可持續(xù)市民化。本研究的主體內(nèi)容包括以下六個(gè)方面:首先,圍繞城鎮(zhèn)化進(jìn)程中的農(nóng)村人口遷徙、農(nóng)村土地流轉(zhuǎn)、農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配等三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行文獻(xiàn)梳理;其次介紹了本文運(yùn)用的相關(guān)理論和方法,具體包括勞動(dòng)力遷徙理論、土地產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)能理論、地租理論、扎根理論方法、博弈論以及數(shù)據(jù)包絡(luò)分析;第三運(yùn)用相關(guān)理論解析農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益的形成,并運(yùn)用統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)解構(gòu)征地環(huán)節(jié)、出讓環(huán)節(jié)和二次開發(fā)環(huán)節(jié)的增值收益分配情況;第四,基于市民化成本分擔(dān)探討了農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益的合理分配;第五,采用數(shù)據(jù)包絡(luò)分析方法,就農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策的相對有效性進(jìn)行綜合評價(jià),并開展了相關(guān)影響因素分析;最后是提出促進(jìn)農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口可持續(xù)市民化的農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策的優(yōu)化措施。本研究得出以下主要結(jié)論。農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化主要通過農(nóng)地征用、土地出讓、土地二次開發(fā)三個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)實(shí)現(xiàn)增值,增值收益在多主體之間形成不均衡分配。研究運(yùn)用土地產(chǎn)權(quán)理論和地租地論,在中國現(xiàn)行土地制度框架內(nèi),構(gòu)建了農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配的多主體關(guān)系模型。在此基礎(chǔ)上,運(yùn)用面板數(shù)據(jù)測算了農(nóng)地征用環(huán)節(jié)、土地出讓環(huán)節(jié)、土地二次開發(fā)環(huán)節(jié)的農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益的多主體分配關(guān)系。就土地增值收益分配而言,從大到小依次為土地開發(fā)商、地方政府、被征地農(nóng)民、中央政府、支農(nóng)惠農(nóng)、其他主體,大體比例是62%:15%:12%:7%:2%:2%。當(dāng)前,農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化開發(fā)利用帶來的增值收益分配呈現(xiàn)以下幾個(gè)方面的特點(diǎn):一是由于制度的變遷,相關(guān)主體的權(quán)益賦予不同的時(shí)代特性;二是受社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展影響,土地市場價(jià)格的變動(dòng)造成不同年份間的增值收益分配出現(xiàn)較大的波動(dòng);三是非農(nóng)化用地結(jié)構(gòu)、土地出讓方式等因素顯著影響土地增值,進(jìn)而影響相關(guān)主體的利益分配。農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口市民化公共成本分擔(dān)實(shí)質(zhì)上是政府通過農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化獲得增值收益后的反哺。通過農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口市民化成本分擔(dān)的多主體博弈,發(fā)現(xiàn)對進(jìn)城農(nóng)民提供綜合福利保障的“安置”策略是地方政府的劣策略,中央政府運(yùn)用轉(zhuǎn)移支付政策進(jìn)行“配合”是嚴(yán)格的劣策略。即使在“人的城鎮(zhèn)化”訴求下,中央政府也僅是有限地選擇“配合”地方政府推進(jìn)城鎮(zhèn)化的策略。無論是農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口還是政府,均依據(jù)預(yù)期凈收益選擇市民化路徑。宏觀數(shù)據(jù)和微觀案例均驗(yàn)證了被動(dòng)市民化情境下,市民化成本公共成本分擔(dān)實(shí)質(zhì)上是政府獲利后對失地農(nóng)民的反哺行為。在土地增值收益與市民化成本分擔(dān)的對應(yīng)分析基礎(chǔ)上,提出了以政府為主導(dǎo),企業(yè)、進(jìn)城農(nóng)民共同分擔(dān)的機(jī)制,并且保證地方政府在農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化開發(fā)利用中獲得應(yīng)有利益,強(qiáng)調(diào)地方政府事權(quán)與財(cái)權(quán)的匹配。農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策的執(zhí)行效率整體偏低,土地資源粗放利用已經(jīng)得到初步改善。研究認(rèn)同現(xiàn)行收益分配政策具有積極意義,同時(shí)隱含了政府性債務(wù)危機(jī)的經(jīng)濟(jì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和農(nóng)民土地權(quán)益群體性抗?fàn)幍纳鐣?huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。經(jīng)數(shù)據(jù)包絡(luò)分析發(fā)現(xiàn),農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策的整體效率偏低,2000-2013年的全國的平均效率值為0.597,改進(jìn)空間為40.3%;但從時(shí)間維度看,分配政策的效率經(jīng)歷了由高到低、再由低到高的演化過程;分配政策效率值在省際之間存在較大的差異,絕對?收斂分析發(fā)現(xiàn),從全國層面可以看出趕超式城鎮(zhèn)化背景下的土地資源粗放利用已經(jīng)得到初步改善。進(jìn)一步采用Tobit回歸模型分析了分配政策效率的可能影響因素,發(fā)現(xiàn)二三產(chǎn)業(yè)/GDP在5%水平上顯著正向影響分配政策效率,城鄉(xiāng)收入差距、地方財(cái)政支出占GDP比重、城市人口密度均與分配政策效率負(fù)相關(guān)�，F(xiàn)行農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策對市民化進(jìn)程產(chǎn)生深遠(yuǎn)影響,需要堅(jiān)持四個(gè)政策優(yōu)化方向。通過農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口城鄉(xiāng)流動(dòng)的演進(jìn)與城鎮(zhèn)化進(jìn)程的演進(jìn)比較,發(fā)現(xiàn)常住人口城鎮(zhèn)化率高于戶籍人口城鎮(zhèn)化率,且兩者的差距從1994年的5.72%持續(xù)擴(kuò)大至2013年的17.63%,而且當(dāng)前出現(xiàn)了人口逆城市化流動(dòng)的新現(xiàn)象,這一結(jié)論揭示國家新型城鎮(zhèn)化規(guī)劃提出的戶籍人口45%的城鎮(zhèn)化率很可能難以實(shí)現(xiàn)。農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策需要堅(jiān)持四個(gè)優(yōu)化方向,并通過系統(tǒng)性配套制度改革才能持續(xù)優(yōu)化。本文創(chuàng)新地界定農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口可持續(xù)市民化的內(nèi)涵,認(rèn)為收益分配政策需要堅(jiān)持保障農(nóng)民土地權(quán)益、避免掉入中等收入陷阱、促進(jìn)可持續(xù)市民化和全民共享土地增值收益四個(gè)政策優(yōu)化方向。在下一步改革中,一是要做實(shí)農(nóng)村集體土地所有權(quán);二是要深化征地制度改革;三是要深化土地有償使用改革;四是要完善土地稅費(fèi)制度設(shè)計(jì);五是要?jiǎng)?chuàng)新城鎮(zhèn)化融資體系。但是,優(yōu)化農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益分配政策還需要配套的戶籍、社會(huì)保障等制度改革,零敲碎打的改善難以實(shí)現(xiàn)系統(tǒng)性優(yōu)化,農(nóng)地非農(nóng)化增值收益合理分配一個(gè)長期的、漸進(jìn)的過程。在新型城鎮(zhèn)化背景下,政府一方面需要擺脫“以地生財(cái)”的粗放模式,另一方面面臨提高公共福利水平帶來的財(cái)政壓力。如果進(jìn)城農(nóng)民的福利沒有資源利用效率的提高作為前提,即使通過合理的土地權(quán)益分配調(diào)整,極有可能遭遇以過度福利為本質(zhì)的中等收入陷阱。因此,單純的“漲價(jià)歸公”和“私權(quán)保護(hù)”之爭無法解決農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移人口可持續(xù)的市民化,只有統(tǒng)籌考慮“人的流動(dòng)→地的流動(dòng)→財(cái)?shù)姆峙洹侍嵘?才有可能實(shí)現(xiàn)“保發(fā)展、保資源、保權(quán)益、保環(huán)境”新型城鎮(zhèn)化多維目標(biāo)。
[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.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京航空航天大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：F321.1
，

本文編號：1696494