不同农村宅基地资本化模式中农户参与意愿及其影响因素

doi:10.18402/resci.2016.09.08

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on data from questionnaire surveys conducted in Tianjin,Guangdong and Chengdu,we explore farmer willingness to participate in rural housing land capitalization reform and influential factors in different capitalization models. The results show that factors including householder age,distance from the homestead to town and,per-capita housing involved in the rural residential land capitalization reform have a significant negative impact on farmer willingness to participate in rural housing land capitalization reform. At the same time,factors including householder educational level,family size to participate in social security,family main employment type,the off-farm income ratio of the family,number of homesteads owned by the family,economic development level,village characteristics,evaluation of government action,and expectations of capitalization reform have a significant positive impact on farmer willingness to participate in rural housing land capitalization reform. From differences between the three models,under the government-led model,farmer willingness is more affected by economic development level and evaluation of government actions;in the market-led model farmer willingness is more affected by family main employment type and number of homesteads owned by the family;and in the autonomous governance model farmer willingness is more affected by village characteristics and expectations of capitalization reform. According to regional resources and economic development levels,on the basis of respecting farmer willingness,government should select the appropriate rural housing land capitalization reform model,formulate reasonable income distribution rules and build farmer autonomous governance mechanisms. With these measures China can improve the performance of rural housing land capitalization reform and realize sustainable land-use.

Key words: rural housing land, capitalization, influence factors, model, Logistic regression

ZHU Xinhua,WANG Han. Farmer willingness to participate in rural housing land capitalization reform and influence factors in different models[J].Resources Science, 2016, 38(9): 1702-1710.

Figures/Tables 6

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Logistic regression results of farmers' willingness to participate in reform"

		模型1			模型2			模型3			模型4
		B	S.E.	Exp（B）	B	S.E.	Exp（B）	B	S.E.	Exp（B）	B	S.E.	Exp（B）
农户家庭特征	户主性别	1.013	0.014	0.842	1.024	0.016	0.895	0.987	0.021	0.802	1.001	0.020	0.798
	户主年龄	-0.016*	0.008	1.124	-0.018	0.020	0.988	-0.012	0.014	1.035	-0.017*	0.016	1.020
	户主受教育程度	0.083*	0.103	1.205	0.104	0.112	0.985	0.095*	0.085	1.107	0.110	0.997	1.098
	家庭总人口	0.212	0.142	0.755	0.234	0.146	0.789	0.115	0.50	0.804	0.197	0.148	0.784
	家庭赡养人口	-0.534	0.098	1.061	-0.612	0.098	1.065	-0.557	0.086	1.058	-0.502	0.103	1.057
	家庭参保人数	0.368*	0.157	0.987	0.330*	0.164	0.102	0.297*	0.150	0.995	0.412*	0.162	0.967
	家庭主要从业类型	0.310*	0.016	1.132	0.332	0.019	1.024	0.304**	0.014	1.214	0326*	0.020	0.981
农户经济特征	农业收入比例	-0.195	0.113	0.774	-0.207	0.127	0.785	-0.186	0.134	0.768	-0.190	0.124	0.795
	非农收入比例	0.201*	0.256	0.981	0.224	0.284	0.962	0.241*	0.302	0.869	0.220*	0.265	0.903
	家庭年人均纯收入	0.333	0.075	0.856	0.341	0.069	0.884	0.257	0.071	0.903	0.334	0.074	0.917
	家庭年支出	-0.357	0.214	0.625	-0.324	0.235	0.598	-0.298	0.196	0.632	-0.304	0.231	0.696
宅基地及住宅特征	宅基地距城镇距离	-0.120**	0.009	1.024	-0.156*	0.012	1.03	-0.131**	0.008	1.104	-0.157	0.007	1.037
	宅基地距主干道距离	-0.265	0.147	0.756	-0.258	0.164	0.748	-0.204	0.146	0.802	-0.197	0.150	0.749
	基础设施状况	-0.475	0.153	1.035	-0.503	0.150	1.104	-0.481	0.148	1.106	-0.449	0.158	1.024
	家庭拥有宅基地数	0.295	0.023	1.104	0.261	0.024	1.028	0.364*	0.028	1.067	0.330	0.020	1.108
	人均住房面积	-0.111*	0.191	0.223	-0.103*	0.185	0.284	-0.124*	0.196	0.257	-0.105*	0.190	0.261
	住房结构	-0.405	0.141	0.869	-0.400	0.152	0.895	-0.502	0.142	0.857	-0.434	0.137	0.814
地域特征	经济发展水平	0.477	0.841	1.056	0.481	0.802	1.120	0.459*	0.795	1.034	0.432	0.824	1.067
	土地法规约束程度	-0.563	0.156	0.658	-0.610	0.147	0.694	-0.547	0.163	0.712	-0.623	0.157	0.683
	村庄特色	1.057*	0.009	0.210	1.123	0.012	0.234	1.034	0.008	0.221	1.007*	0.010	0.217
政策认知特征	对政府行为的评价	0.297**	0.054	1.445	0.321***	0.056	1.520	0.354**	0.061	1.401	0.331**	0.058	1.453
政策认知特征	对资本化改革的预期	0.452*	0.147	0.375	0.543	0.141	0.410	0.454*	0.145	0.371	0.510*	0.142	0.354
最大似然平方的对数值		25.214			15.245			14.871			15.015
Cox & Snell R Square		0.513			0.466			0.452			0.477
Nagelkerke R Square		0.740			0.713			0.720			0.721
样本量		1 014			341			338			335

Table 6

References 15

[1]	孟宪平. 当前农村宅基地现行管理制度存在的矛盾与问题[J]. 国土资源,2014,(9):51-53.
	[Meng X P.Contradictions and problems in rural homestead management system[J]. Land & Resources,2014,(9):51-53.]
[2]	朱新华. 农村宅基地制度创新与理论解释[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境,2012,22(3):19-25.
	[Zhu X H.Homestead system inno-vation and its theoretical explanation[J]. China Population,Re-sources and Environment,2012,22(3):19-25.]
[3]	韩康. 宅基地制度存在三大矛盾[J]. 人民论坛,2008,(14):38-39.
	[Han K.Three contradictions in homestead system[J]. People’s Tribune,2008,(14):38-39.]
[4]	张东一. 农村土地资本化改革之困境和路径微探[J]. 中国不动产法研究,2012,(0):158-166.
	[Zhang D Y.Dilemma and micro-probe in capitalization reform of rural land[J]. Research on Real Estate Law of China,2012,(0):158-166.]
[5]	徐伟. 城乡一体化进程中农村宅基地流转问题探析[J]. 兰州学刊,2010,(10):99-101.
	[Xu W.Exploration on problems of rural housing land transition in the process of urbanization[J]. Lanzhou Academic Journal,2010,(10):99-101.]
[6]	朱新华,张金明. 农村宅基地资本化及其收益分配研究[J]. 经济体制改革,2014,(5):73-76.
	[Zhu X H,Zhang J M.Study on the capitalization reform of rural land and income distribution[J]. Reform of Economic System,2014,(5):73-76.]
[7]	周婧,杨庆媛. 农户层面农村宅基地流转研究进展与述评[J]. 地理科学进展,2012,31(2):139-148.
	[Zhou J,Yang Q Y.Review of researches on rural housing land transfer at farm household level[J]. Progress in Geography,2012,31(2):139-148.]
[8]	胡峰. 农村宅基地流转驱动力分析[J]. 经济研究导刊,2008,(9):39-40.
	[Hu F.Analysis on rural housing land transfer driving force[J]. Economic Research Guide,2008,(9):39-40.]
[9]	章波,唐健,黄贤金,等. 经济发达地区农村宅基地流转问题研究-以北京市郊区为例[J]. 中国土地科学,2006,20(1):34-38.
	[Zhang B,Tang J,Huang X J,et al.Research on problems of rural housing land transition in developed regions-a case study of Beijing suburb[J]. China Land Sciences,2006,20(1):34-38.]
[10]	陈利根,成程. 基于农民福利的宅基地流转模式比较与路径选择[J]. 中国土地科学,2012,26(10):67-74.
	[Chen L G,Cheng C.Comparison and path choice rural residential land transfer from the perspective of farmers’ welfare[J]. China Land Sciences,2012,26(10):67-74.]
[11]	邓大才. 社会化小农:动机与行为[J]. 华中师范大学学报:人文社会科学版,2006,45(3):9-16.
	[Deng D C.The socialized farmers:Motivation and behavior[J]. Journal of Huazhong Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences),2006,45(3):9-16.]
[12]	冯玲玲,邱道持,赵亚萍,等. 影响农户农地流转意愿因素的调查与思考-以重庆市璧山县农户调查为例[J]. 调研世界,2008,(2):45-46.
	[Feng L L,Qiu D C,Zhao Y P,et al.Investigation and reflection on influencing factors of farmer’s willingness towards agricultural land transmission:Bishan County,Chongqing city farmers case study[J]. The World of Survey and Research,2008,(2):45-46.]
[13]	孙涛,黄少安. 制度变迁的路径依赖、状态和结构依存特征研究-以改革开放以来中国农村土地制度变迁为例[J]. 广东社会科学,2009,(2):19-24.
	[Sun T,Huang S A.Study on path de-pendence,state and structure characteristics of institutional change[J]. Guangdong Social Science,2009,(2):19-25.]
[14]	关江华,黄朝禧,胡银根. 农户宅基地流转意愿差异及其驱动力研究-基于农户可持续生计视角[J]. 资源科学,2013,35(11):2266-2272.
	[Guan J H,Huang C X,Hu Y G.Research on welfare changes of farmer’s family with different allocation of livelihood assets in the rural residential land conversion[J]. Resources Science,2013,35(11):2266-2272.]
[15]	郑和园,张琳琳. 我国宅基地使用权资本化运行机制的法学分析[J]. 辽宁工业大学报(社会科学版),2015,17(1):18-21.
	[Zheng Y Y,Zhang L L.Legal analysis on homestead right capital operation mechanism[J]. Journal of Liaoning University of Technology(Social Science Edition),2015,17(1):18-21.]

指标类别	变量定义	赋值说明	预期作用方向
农户家庭特征	户主性别	女=1,男=2	不确定
	户主年龄/岁	=实际年龄	负
	户主受教育程度	文盲=1,小学=2,初中=3,高中=4,大专以上=5	正
	家庭总人口/人	=实际人数	不确定
	家庭赡养人口/人	=实际人数	负
	家庭参保人数/人	=实际人数	正
	家庭主要从业类型	务农=1,兼业=2,非农=3	正
农户经济特征	农业收入比例/%	20以下=1,20~40=2,50=3,60~80=4,80以上=5	负
	非农收入比例/%	20以下=1,20~40=2,50=3,60~80=4,80以上=5	正
	家庭年人均纯收入/万元	0~1=1,1~2=2,2~3=3,3以上=4	正
	家庭年支出/万元	0~1=1,1~2=2,2~3=3,3以上=4	负
宅基地及住宅特征	宅基地距城镇距离/m	3 000以下=1,3 000~5 000=2,5 000~10 000=3,10 000以上=4	负
宅基地及住宅特征	宅基地距主干道距离/m	1 000以下=1,1 000~2 000=2,2 000~3 000=3,3 000以上=4	负
	基础设施状况	不完善=1,一般=2,完善=3	负
	家庭拥有宅基地数	一处=1,2处=2,3处及以上=3	正
	人均住房面积/m²	15以下=1,15~30=2,30~50=3,50~80=4,80以上=5	负
	住房结构	砖木=1,砖混=2,钢混=3	负
地域特征	经济发展水平	低=1,一般=2,高=3	正
	土地法规约束程度	低=1,一般=2,高=3	不确定
	村庄特色	无=1,有=2	不确定
政策认知特征	对政府行为的评价	强政府,损害农户利益=1;基本满足农户需求,平稳推进=2;充分考虑了农户利益,实现了社会和谐=3	正
	对资本化改革的预期	不会实施且政府不会支持=1,保持现状=2,短期内会实施并得到政府支持=3	正

	政府主导模式	市场主导模式	农民自主治理模式	合计
农业户	9.6	7.2	12.3	29.1
兼业户	11.3	15.6	9.4	36.3
非农户	10.5	14.7	9.4	34.6

		政府主导模式	市场主导模式	农民自主治理模式	合计
家庭年人均纯收入	<1万元	7.8	7.1	9.4	24.3
	1~2万元	12.2	11.7	13.3	37.2
	2~3万元	9.8	10.5	7.5	27.8
	>3万元	3.5	4.1	3.1	10.7
收入	种地	10.8	8.3	13.4	32.6
来源	畜牧养殖	1.7	1.7	4.2	7.6
	出租房屋	1.2	3.1	0.5	4.8
	外出务工	18.3	17.9	13.1	49.3
	经营性收入	1.3	2.3	2.1	5.7
主要	生活支出	10.5	10.1	8.2	28.9
支出	子女教育	11.7	12.9	10.7	35.3
	赡养老人	3.5	3.5	2.9	9.9
	医疗支出	7.6	6.8	11.5	25.9

		政府主导模式	市场主导模式	农民自主治理模式	合计
对政府行为的评价	强政府,损害农户利益	8.3	5.4	6.1	19.8
对政府行为的评价	基本满足农户需求,平稳推进	10.7	14.5	14.8	43.0
	充分考虑农户利益,实现了社会和谐	10.0	11.6	15.6	37.2
对宅基地资本化改革的预期	不会实施且政府不会支持	4.8	5.2	6.5	16.5
对宅基地资本化改革的预期	保持现状	11.3	14.8	16.5	42.6
	短期内会实施并得到政府支持	12.4	15.2	13.3	40.9

	政府主导模式	市场主导模式	农民自主治理模式	全体
愿意	32.4	44.3	38.7	38.5
不愿意	67.6	55.7	61.3	61.5

Farmer willingness to participate in rural housing land capitalization reform and influence factors in different models

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Cited

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 15

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	QIAN Chen, SHAO Liqun, WANG Shuai, ZHANG Hui, CHEN Haibin. Influence of social network on grassland renting behaviors of herdsmen: A case study in four villages of Menyuan County, Qinghai Province [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2): 269-279.
[2]	LIU Xiaoyang, WEI Ming, ZENG Jian, ZHANG Sen. Ecological network analysis and construction: A case study of the urban agglomeration of the Min River Delta, China [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2): 357-367.
[3]	ZHAO Yanyun, LI Qian. Regional difference and industrial effects of wind power feed-in-tariff policy [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 12-22.
[4]	ZHAO Nana, WANG Zhibao, LI Hongmei. Change of energy consumption pattern and its impact on economic development in China [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 122-133.
[5]	PENG Shangui, SUN Hao, WANG Jian, WU Qun. Officials’ individual effect on local government land transfer behavior [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 134-147.
[6]	ZHOU Yihu, FANG Tingting, LI li. Decision-making mechanism of farmers’ homestead exit based on the TAM-TPB framework [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 148-160.
[7]	WANG Yuge, MENG Quanxing, CHEN Bingpu. Impact of forest land tenure security on the circulation of ecological forest land:From the perspective of endowment effect and security perception [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 161-170.
[8]	HUANG Zhigang, LI Jie. Influence of land acquisition for rural tourism on the well-being of landless farmers based on the empirical analysis of PSM model [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 171-184.
[9]	ZHANG Fan, DENG Hongbing, PENG Yongzhang. Spatial spillover effect and threshold characteristics of economic agglomeration on industrial wastewater discharge in the Yangtze River Economic Belt [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 57-68.
[10]	SUN Yixuan, CHENG Yu, LIU Na. Spatiotemporal evolution of China’s high quality economic development and its driving mechanism of scientific and technological innovation [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 82-93.
[11]	Abudureheman· Abudikeranmu, SHI Xiaoping, RAO Fangping, ZHOU Yuepeng, MA Xianlei. Tenure integrity, security, and farmland transfer under the background of “three rights separation”: Based on farmers’ perception of land tenure [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1643-1656.
[12]	WANG Qian, YU Jin. Effect of maize price decline on land transfer in the North China Plain [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1668-1679.
[13]	LI Min, CHEN Yao, TANG Peng, FENG Yue. Influence of family life cycle on farming households’ willingness to exit rural residential land [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1692-1703.
[14]	QIANG Wenli, ZHANG Cuiling, LIU Aimin, CHENG Shengkui, WANG Xiang, LI Fan. Evolution of global virtual land flow related to agricultural trade and driving factors [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1704-1714.
[15]	REN Xiaosong, MA Qian, LIU Yujia, ZHAO Guohao. The impact of carbon trading policy on the economic performance of highly polluting industrial enterprises：Empirical analysis based on multiple mediating effect model [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1750-1763.