山区土地流转过程中的零租金现象及其解释——基于交易费用的视角

doi:10.18402/resci.2019.07.14

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

近年来山区土地流转过程中的零租金现象较为普遍,厘清土地零租金流转的规模及其原因对于提高农村土地流转市场的运行效率具有重要价值。在理论解释的基础上,本文基于重庆市永川区、忠县和酉阳县的农户调查数据,从地块尺度测算了土地零租金流转的规模,并构建Logit模型实证检验了交易费用对土地零租金流转的影响。研究表明：案例区零租金转出地块的比例达到78.62%,其中75.47%的地块转给了亲人或熟人;实证模拟显示,事前、事中和事后3类交易费用的存在是土地零租金流转的重要原因,低成本的流转中介组织、第三方协调机构的存在以及签订规范的书面合同均能显著降低土地零租金流转的概率;规模偏小、质量等级较低、灌溉条件较差和地理位置偏远的劣质地块的零租金流转概率普遍较高。目前,山区土地边际化导致的地租下降是零租金现象的根源,而交易费用偏高则是土地零租金流转的重要原因之一。为此,今后应着重降低山区土地流转中面临的各类交易费用,建立以乡镇为网络节点的低成本流转平台,引导双方签订规范的书面合同。同时,还应关注山区耕地撂荒和农户耕地资产贬值等现象。

关键词: 土地零租金流转, 交易费用, 土地撂荒, 山区, Logit模型, 土地边际化

Abstract:

In recent years, rent-free land transfer in mountainous areas is increasingly prominent. Clarifying the extent of land transfer without rent in rural China and its explanation is of great value for the development of land rental market. On the basis of theoretical inference, the extent of rent-free land transfer was estimated at the land parcel scale and the Logit model was developed to empirically evaluate the impact of transaction costs on such transfer based on the survey data of farming households from Yongchuan District, Zhongxian County, and Youyang County of Chongqing Municipality. The results show that the proportion of the land parcels transferred at zero rent in the case study areas reached 78.62%, among which 75.47% of the land parcels were transferred to relatives or acquaintances. The empirical modeling results show that the existence of three types of transaction costs significantly increased the probability of rent-free land transfer. Low-cost brokerage, third-party coordination organizations, and signing of standardized written contracts in the process of land circulation can significantly reduce the probability of rent-free land transfer. The decline in rent caused by the marginalization of mountainous land is the root cause of rent-free land transfer, and high transaction cost is one of the important reasons for this type of transfer. The policy implication is that the reform of land system should focus on reducing all kinds of transaction costs faced by land transfer in mountainous areas. Low-cost transfer platforms as nodes at the county or township level should be established and guide the parties to sign standardized written contracts. In addition, the government should pay attention to the abandonment of cultivated land in mountainous areas and the depreciation of farmers’ cultivated land assets.

Key words: rent-free land transfer, transaction cost, land abandonment, mountainous areas, Logit model, land marginalization

王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰. 山区土地流转过程中的零租金现象及其解释——基于交易费用的视角[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(7): 1339-1349.

Yahui WANG, Xiubin LI, Liangjie XIN. Rent-free land transfer in mountainous areas and its explanation[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(7): 1339-1349.

图/表 10

图1

图2

图3

表1

表2

表3

Table 4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 32

[1]	王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰, 等. 中国农地经营规模对农业劳动生产率的影响及其区域差异[J]. 自然资源学报, 2017, 32(4): 539-552.
	[Wang Y H, Li X B, Xin L J, et al.The impact of farm land management scale on agricultural labor productivity in China and its regional differentiation[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2017, 32(4): 539-552.]
[2]	冀县卿, 钱忠好, 葛轶凡. 交易费用、农地流转与新一轮农地制度改革: 基于苏、桂、鄂、黑四省区农户调查数据的分析[J]. 江海学刊, 2015, (2): 83-89.
	[Ji X Q, Qian Z H, Ge Y F.Transaction costs, farm land transfer and new round of farm land institution reform: Based on rural household survey in provinces of Jiangsu, Guangxi, Hubei and Heilongjiang[J]. Jianghai Academic Journal, 2015, (2): 83-89.]
[3]	Xie Y, Jiang Q B.Land arrangements for rural-urban migrant workers in China: Findings from Jiangsu Province[J]. Land Use Policy, 2016, 50: 262-267.
[4]	Huang L P.The analysis on the massive circulation of contracting and operating right of rural land in southeastern coastal regions of China: Investigation based on 3 provinces of Zhejiang, Fujian and Guangdong[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2009, (8): 71-77.
[5]	王亚运, 蔡银莺, 李海燕. 空间异质性下农地流转状况及影响因素: 以武汉、荆门、黄冈为实证[J]. 中国土地科学, 2015, 29(6): 18-25.
	[Wang Y Y, Cai Y Y, Li H Y.The status of farmland transfer in the context of spatial heterogenity and its influencing factors: Case studies in Wuhan, Jingmen and Huanggang[J]. China Land Sciences, 2015, 29(6): 18-25.]
[6]	Wang Y H, Li X B, Xin L J, et al.Spatiotemporal changes in Chinese land circulation between 2003 and 2013[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018, 28(6): 707-724.
[7]	王佳月, 李秀彬, 辛良杰. 中国土地流转的时空演变特征及影响因素研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(12): 2067-2083.
	[Wang J Y, Li X B, Xin L J.Spatial-temporal variations and influential factors of land transfer in China[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018, 33(12): 2067-2083.]
[8]	Teklu T, Lemi A.Factors affecting entry and intensity in informal rental land markets in Southern Ethiopian highlands[J]. Agricultural Economics, 2004, 30(2): 117-128.
[9]	何威风, 阎建忠, 周洪. 重庆市山区农户耕地转入特征及其影响因素[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(11): 1566-1576.
	[He W F, Yan J Z, Zhou H.Characteristics of farmland transfer-in and determinants in mountainous areas of Chongqing[J]. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(11): 1566-1576.]
[10]	Deininger K, Savastano S, Carletto C.Land fragmentation, cropland abandonment and land market operation in Albania[J]. World Development, 2012, 40(10): 2108-2122.
[11]	Huy H T, Lyne M, Ratna N, et al.Drivers of transaction costs affecting participation in the rental market for cropland in Vietnam[J]. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2016, 60(3): 476-492.
[12]	王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰. 农业劳动力年龄对土地流转的影响研究: 来自CHIP2013的数据[J]. 资源科学, 2017, 39(8): 1457-1468.
	[Wang Y H, Li X B, Xin L J.The impact of agricultural labor force age on land transfer according to CHIP2013[J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(8): 1457-1468.]
[13]	伍振军, 张云华, 孔祥智. 交易费用、政府行为和模式比较: 中国土地承包经营权流转实证研究[J]. 中国软科学, 2011, (4): 175-183.
	[Wu Z J, Zhang Y H, Kong X Z.Transaction cost, government behavior and model comparison: Empirical research on the transaction of land contract right in China[J]. China Soft Science, 2011, (4): 175-183.]
[14]	Williamson O E.Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations[J]. Journal of Law & Economics, 1979, 22(2): 233-261.
[15]	Teklu T.Rural land, emerging rental land markets and public policy in Ethiopia[J]. African Development Review-Revue Africaine Developpement, 2004, 16(1): 169-202.
[16]	Jin S Q, Jayne T S.Land rental markets in Kenya: Implications for efficiency, equity, household income and poverty[J]. Land Economics, 2013, 89(2): 246-271.
[17]	Jin S Q, Deininger K.Land rental markets in the process of rural structural transformation: Productivity and equity impacts from China[J]. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2009, 37(4): 629-646.
[18]	Skoufias E.Household resources, transaction costs and adjustment through land tenancy[J]. Land Economics, 1995, 71(1): 42-56.
[19]	Jin S Q, Jayne T S.Land rental markets in Kenya: Implications for efficiency, equity, household income and poverty[J]. Land Economics, 2013, 89(2): 246-271.
[20]	孙宪忠. 推进农地三权分置经营模式的立法研究[J]. 中国社会科学, 2016, (7): 145-163.
	[Sun X Z.Model research on legislation of “the separation of three rights” of rural land[J]. Social Sciences in China, 2016, (7): 145-163.]
[21]	张毅, 张红, 毕宝德. 农地的“三权分置”及改革问题: 政策轨迹、文本分析与产权重构[J]. 中国软科学, 2016, (3): 13-23.
	[Zhang Y, Zhang H, Bi B D.“The separation of three rights” of rural land and reform issues: Policy track, text analysis and property recnstration[J]. China Soft Science, 2016, (3): 13-23.]
[22]	陈朝兵. 农村土地“三权分置”: 功能作用、权能划分与制度构建[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(4): 135-141.
	[Chen C B.“Divison of three rights” of rural land: The function, right content and system construction[J]. China Population, Resouces and Environment, 2016, 26(4): 135-141.]
[23]	Wang Y H, Xin L J, Li X B, et al.Impact of land use rights transfer on household labor productivity: A study applying propensity score matching in Chongqing, China[J]. Sustainability, 2017, 9(1): 2-18.
[24]	Deininger K, Monchuk D, Nagarajan H, et al.Does land fragmentation increase the cost of cultivation: Evidence from India[J]. Journal of Development Studies, 2017, 53(1): 82-98.
[25]	陈奕山, 钟甫宁, 纪月清. 为什么土地流转中存在零租金: 人情租视角的实证分析[J]. 中国农村观察, 2017, (4): 43-56.
	[Chen Y S, Zhong F N, Ji Y Q.Why does “zero rent” exist in farmland transferf: An empirical analysis from the perspective of rent type[J]. China Rural Survey, 2017, (4): 43-56.]
[26]	农业部农村经济体制与经营管理司, 农业部农村合作经济经营管理总站. 中国农村经营管理统计年报(2015年)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2016.
	[Department of Rural Economic System and Management of Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Cooperative Economic Managemet Center of Ministry of Agriculture. Annual Report on Rural Management Statistics of China (2015)[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2016.]
[27]	李秀彬, 王亚辉, 李升发. 耕地的社保功能究竟还有多大? [EB/OL]. (2018-06-25) [2019-03-14]. .
	[Li X B, Wang Y H, Li S F. How Reliable Is the Social Security Function of Cultivated Land Assets for Chinese Farmers? [EB/OL]. (2018-06-25) [2019-03-14]. .]
[28]	农业部农村经济体制与经营管理司, 中国社会科学院农村发展研究所. 中国家庭农场发展报告(2016年)[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2016.
	[Department of Rural Economic System and Management of Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Developemtn Institute Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Development Report of Family Farms in China(2016)[M]. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2016.]
[29]	邵景安, 张仕超, 李秀彬. 山区土地流转对缓解耕地撂荒的作用[J]. 地理学报, 2015, 70(4): 636-649.
	[Shao J A, Zhang S C, Li X B.The role of rural farmland transfer in preventing farmland abandonment in the mountainous areas[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2015, 70(4): 636-649.]
[30]	Zhang Y, Li X B, Song W.Land abandonment under rural restructuring in China explained from a cost-benefit perspective[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2016, 47: 524-532.
[31]	李升发, 李秀彬, 辛良杰, 等. 中国山区耕地撂荒程度及空间分布: 基于全国山区抽样调查结果[J]. 资源科学, 2017, 39(10): 1801-1811.
	[Li S F, Li X B, Xin L J, et al.Extent and distribution of cropland abandonment in Chinese mountainous areas[J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(10): 1801-1811.]
[32]	Li S F, Li X B, Sun L X, et al.An estimation of the extent of cropland abandonment in mountainous regions of China[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2018, 29(5): 1327-1342.

区县	样本数	有效样本数	样本有效率/%	户均土地规模/亩	块均规模/亩	地块与家庭距离/m	亩均租金/元
永川区	129	125	96.89	6.77	1.11	950.86	201.24
忠县	137	137	100.00	8.36	0.74	1055.19	43.27
酉阳县	128	118	92.18	7.60	0.85	1322.12	65.31
合计	394	380	96.45	7.58	0.90	1109.39	141.78

变量	单位	平均值	标准差	最小值	最大值	样本数
亩均获得租金	元/亩	141.78	370.71	0.00	2920.00	697
是否零租金转出（yes=1）	—	0.74	0.43	0.00	1.00	697
交易费用
是否存在流转中介组织/TC₁（yes=1）	—	0.25	0.44	0.00	1.00	697
是否存在第三方协调结构/TC₂（yes=1）	—	0.23	0.43	0.00	1.00	697
是否签订书面合同/TC₃（yes=1）	—	0.29	0.45	0.00	1.00	697
户主特征
户主年龄	岁	52.73	11.67	15.00	85.00	380
户主教育程度	—	1.40	0.67	0.00	4.00	380
户主健康状况	—	1.13	0.43	0.00	3.00	380
家庭特征
有效劳动力数量	个	0.98	0.80	0.00	4.00	380
土地细碎化程度^[24]	—	0.59	0.20	0.00	0.88	380
农机器具总价值	元	268.01	997.60	0.00	10000.00	380
非农收入占比	%	87.00	29.00	0.00	100.00	380
地块特征
地块质量等级	—	3.26	0.75	1.00	4.00	697
地块与公路的距离	km	1.11	3.21	0.10	15.00	697
是否为水田	—	0.60	0.49	0.00	1.00	697
灌溉条件	—	2.72	0.68	1.00	3.00	697
地块坡度	—	1.21	0.44	1.00	3.00	697
地块受灾风险	%	17.00	38.00	0.00	100.00	697

分类	零租金转出土地比例/%	两者之差	T值	P值
事前交易费用TC₁
不存在流转中介组织	90.54	78.08***	102.95	0.000
存在流转中介组织	12.46
事中交易费用TC₂
不存在第三方协调机构	91.17	73.04***	47.78	0.000
存在第三方协调机构	18.13
事后交易费用TC₃
口头约定或未签订合同	88.23	72.38***	41.93	0.000
签订书面合同	15.85

分区	户数	转出地块数量	租金等于0		租金介于0~500		租金介于500~1000		租金大于1000
分区	户数	转出地块数量	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%
酉阳县	118	173	148	85.55	14	8.09	6	3.47	5	2.89
忠县	137	281	263	93.59	11	3.91	5	1.78	2	0.72
永川区	125	243	137	56.38	71	29.22	19	7.82	16	6.58
合计	380	697	548	78.62	96	13.77	30	4.31	23	3.3

分区	户数	转出地块数量	转出给亲人		转出给熟人		转出给村集体		转出给公司或者大户
分区	户数	转出地块数量	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%	地块数	比例/%
酉阳县	118	173	86	49.71	64	36.99	2	1.16	21	12.14
忠县	137	281	159	56.58	105	37.37	1	0.36	16	5.69
永川区	125	243	60	24.69	52	21.39	10	4.11	121	49.71
合计	380	697	305	43.76	221	31.71	13	1.86	158	22.67