县域宅基地退出的政策工具与实践比较

doi:10.18402/resci.2021.07.03

Abstract

Abstract:

Exploring the mechanism of voluntary and paid withdrawal of homesteads is an important measure to deepen the reform of the homestead system, promote the overall revitalization of rural areas, and optimize the allocation of human and land resources in urban and rural areas. Setting the policy objectives scientifically and adopting policy tools appropriately are the key contents of the construction of homestead withdrawal mechanism. Using text analysis and taking Yiwu City of Zhejiang Province, Yucheng City of Shandong Province, Yicheng City of Hubei Province, and Pingluo of Ningxia the four pilot areas of homestead system reform as case areas, this study conducted a comparative analysis of policy tools and practice of homestead withdrawal at the county level. Based on the local characteristics, we explored the adaptability of the homestead exit policy in the case areas, and summarized its characteristics. The results show that: (1) The choice of policy tools is different in different regions. Yiwu mainly uses supply-oriented policy tools, while Yucheng, Yicheng, and Pingluo mainly use environmental policy tools. (2) There are differences in the specific policy objectives of different pilot areas. Yiwu mainly focuses on the realization of economic goals while taking into account social and ecological goals. Yucheng and Pingluo focus on the realization of social goals and take into account the realization of economic goals. Yicheng pays more attention to social goals. (3) The types of policy tools used in different models of homestead withdrawal are not completely consistent with the policy instruments of the policy texts. Except for Yiwu in Zhejiang Province, the main policy tools in the other three places have changed in practice, and the policy objectives of different models are consistent with the policy texts. (4) The level of economic development, local financial strength, the importance of primary industry in economic development, the level of urbanization and regional cultural characteristics have a great influence on the choice of homestead withdrawal policy tools and policy objectives. Based on this, this paper proposes that homestead withdrawal policy should be scientifically set up considering local characteristics and realistic needs, comprehensively use a variety of policy tools to establish a long-term homestead withdrawal mechanism, and make differentiated homestead withdrawal plans according to the function value of homestead.

Key words: homestead withdrawal, text analysis, policy tools, policy objectives, practice models, comparative analysis, at the county level

LV Xiao, XUE Ping, NIU Shandong, PENG Wenlong. Comparative study on policy tools and practice of homestead withdrawal at the county level[J].Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1307-1321.

Figures/Tables 10

Figure 1

Figure 2

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Figure 3

Table 4

Table 5

Comparison of the dimensions of homestead withdrawal policy objectives under different models

政策目标	浙江义乌（经济目标）	山东禹城（社会目标）	湖北宜城（社会目标）	宁夏平罗（社会目标）
退出后宅基地用途	政府统一征收后按规划使用;村集体经济组织按基准地价回购;复垦为耕地等农用地,经验收合格后折算为建设用地指标,发放“集地券”,可在市域流转	鼓励在集体经济组织内部流转;对退出的宅基地进行土地综合整治,经验收合格后净增的建设用地指标,由市乡统筹使用	预留一定面积用于村集体宅基地再分配;剩余部分可在符合相关规划的基础上转为经营性建设用地就地入市,或复垦整治为农用地后在市域范围统一使用	鼓励流转;镇村规划范围外的由村集体经济组织收储并登记造册,统一管理;镇村规划范围内的由村集体经济组织收储后,用于安置符合申请条件的农户;村民拆除房屋腾出的宅基地,集体土地使用权由村委会收回,统一安排使用
保障机制	城乡新社区集聚建设：农民可享受城镇居民养老、医疗、就业保险、就业、子女教育等同等权利,并继续享有原村级集体经济组织除宅基地以外的其他权益;高层公寓置换权益面积由政府按权益保护价回购。“集地券”：市政府每年确定指导价格,确保第一次流转价格不低于指导价格;政府对“集地券”实行兜底回购	全部退出或放弃宅基地申请资格并迁入城镇定居的,可享受城镇住房保障及城镇居民同等的子女入学、再就业培训等优惠政策。探索建立宅基地资格权重获制度,对因自然灾害造成宅基地使用权灭失的、进城落户农民自愿将宅基地无偿退给集体的,允许重新获得宅基地资格权	对全部退出农村宅基地的农户保留土地承包经营权、林权、自留山、自留地等在本村享有的其他权利;进城落户的,可享受办理城镇户口、就业培训、自助创业小额贷款、城镇居民社会养老保险、医疗保险等优惠政策	自愿退出集体土地和房屋产权的农户必须参加城乡居民社会养老保险和医疗保险;进城入户的,可享受廉租房、经济适用房、购房补助等保障性政策;县人民政府通过财政预算安排一定数量的收储基金,村集体经济组织收储资金不足时,可申请预借收储基金
权利变化	宅基地使用权、资格权全部退出,不再安排产权属村级集体经济组织的其他配套用房,但可继续享有原村级集体经济组织除宅基地以外的其他权益	鼓励农户自愿有偿退出使用权和资格权;但对有退出意向又不想彻底失去宅基地资格权的农户,探索“留权不留地”、颁发地票期权等方式保留资格权;自然灾害造成宅基地使用权灭失的、进城落户农民自愿将宅基地无偿退给集体的,可以重新获得宅基地资格权	使用权、资格权全部退出,但对全部退出农村宅基地的农户保留土地承包经营权、林权、自留山、自留地等在本村享有的其他权利	使用权、资格权、地上建筑物所有权全部退出,不得再次申请宅基地,不再参与集体经济组织新增收益的分配;探索农民带产权、带股份进城,进城镇农民在不改变村集体经济组织成员身份的前提下,可依法享受村集体经济组织“三资”（资源、资产、资金）收益分配

Table 5

Table 6

Figure 4

References 23

[1]	胡银根, 杨春梅, 董文静, 等. 基于感知价值理论的农户宅基地有偿退出决策行为研究: 以安徽省金寨县典型试点区为例[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(4):685-695.
	[ Hu Y G, Yang C M, Dong W J, et al. Farmers’ homestead exit behavior based on perceived value theory:A case of Jinzhai County in Anhui Province[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(4):685-695.]
[2]	Lu X, Peng W L, Huang X J, et al. Homestead management in China from the “Separation of Two Rights” to the “Separation of Three Rights”: Visualization and analysis of hot topics and trends by mapping knowledge domains of academic papers in China national knowledge infrastructure[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104670. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104670
[3]	张元朋, 赵鹏, 刘华. 宅基地有偿使用制度实施效果差异及原因诊断研究: 基于利益相关者视角[J]. 农业经济问题, 2021, (2):14-25.
	[ Zhang Y P, Zhao P, Liu H. Study on effect difference and reason diagnosis of paid use system of homesteads: From the perspective of stakeholders[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2021, (2):14-25.]
[4]	魏后凯, 杜志雄. 中国农村发展报告(2020): 聚焦“十四五”时期中国的农村发展[M], 北京: 社会科学出版社, 2020.
	[ Wei H K, Du Z X. China Rural Development Report(2020): Focus on China’s Rural Development in the “Fourteenth Five-Year” Period[M]. Beijing: Social Sciences Press, 2020.]
[5]	李丽, 吕晓, 张全景. “三权分置”背景下宅基地使用权流转的法学视角再审视[J]. 中国土地科学, 2020, 34(3):16-23.
	[ Li L, Lv X, Zhang Q J. Re-examination on the transfer of rural residential land use right in the context of “Tripartite Entitlement System” from the legal perspective[J]. China Land Science, 2020, 34(3):16-23.]
[6]	余永和. 农村宅基地退出试点改革: 模式、困境与对策[J]. 求实, 2019, (4):84-97.
	[ Yu Y H. Pilot reform of rural homestead withdrawal: Model, dilemma and countermeasures[J]. Truth Seeking, 2019, (4):84-97.]
[7]	卢艳霞, 胡银根, 林继红, 等. 浙江农民宅基地退出模式调研与思考[J]. 中国土地科学, 2011, 25(1):3-7.
	[ Lu Y X, Hu Y G, Lin J H, et al. A survey and analysis on the modes of rural residential land readjustment in Zhejiang Province[J]. China Land Science, 2011, 25(1):3-7.]
[8]	彭小霞. 农民权益保护视角下农村宅基地退出机制之完善[J]. 农村经济, 2015, (4):9-13.
	[ Peng X X. Perfection of rural homestead withdrawal mechanism from the perspective of farmers’ rights protection[J]. Rural Economy, 2015, (4):9-13.]
[9]	郭贯成, 杜鹏. 江苏省农户宅基地退出意愿影响因素分析[J]. 农业与技术, 2020, 40(24):154-159.
	[ Guo G C, Du P. Analysis on the influencing factors of farmers’ intention to withdraw from homestead land in Jiangsu Province[J]. Agriculture and Technology, 2020, 40(24):154-159.]
[10]	梁发超, 刘丽惠. 不同模式下农村宅基地退出的农户选择偏好及其影响因素: 基于福建省晋江市的实证分析[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2020, 41(9):128-135.
	[ Liang F C, Liu L H. Research on farmers’ selection preference and influencing factors of rural residential land withdrawal under different patterns: Empirical analysis based on Jinjiang City, Fujian Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2020, 41(9):128-135.]
[11]	杨慧琳, 袁凯华, 陈银蓉, 等. 农户分化、代际差异对宅基地退出意愿的影响: 基于宅基地价值认知的中介效应分析[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(9):1680-1691.
	[ Yang H L, Yuan K H, Chen Y R, et al. Effect of farmer differentiation and generational differences on their willingness to exit rural residential land: Analysis of intermediary effect based on the cognition of the homestead value[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9):1680-1691]
[12]	陈霄. 农民宅基地退出意愿的影响因素: 基于重庆市“两翼”地区1012户农户的实证分析[J]. 中国农村观察, 2012(3):26-36.
	[ Chen X. Factors of peasants’ willingness to return residential lands: An empirical study with survey data from 1012 rural households in the “two-wing” area of Chongqing[J]. China Rural Survey, 2012(3):26-36.]
[13]	程春丽. 农村宅基地退出补偿与利益机制构建探析[J]. 农村经济, 2014, (1):13-17.
	[ Cheng C L. The explore and analyze of rural homestead withdrawal compensation and the construction of interest mechanism[J]. Rural Economy, 2014, (1):13-17.]
[14]	王兆林, 杨庆媛, 王娜. 重庆宅基地退出中农民土地收益保护研究: 基于比较收益的视角[J]. 中国土地科学, 2016, 30(8):47-55.
	[ Wang Z L, Yang Q Y, Wang N. A study of the protection of farmers’ homestead exit revenue in Chongqing: Basing on comparative revenue[J]. China Land Science, 2016, 30(8):47-55.]
[15]	Strauss A, Corbin J M. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques[M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1990.
[16]	Rothwell R, Zegveld W. An assessment of government innovation policies[J]. Review of Policy Research, 1984, 3(3-4):436-444. doi: 10.1111/ropr.1984.3.issue-3-4
[17]	刘润秋, 余超. 基于二维分析框架的农村宅基地退出政策工具优化研究[J]. 农村经济, 2020, (9):34-41.
	[ Liu R Q, Yu C. Optimization of policy tools in the withdrawal of rural homestead based on the two-dimensional analytical framework[J]. Rural Economy, 2020, (9):34-41.]
[18]	林耀奔, 叶艳妹. 基于政策工具视角的中国耕地占补平衡制度分析[J]. 农村经济, 2019, (5):45-50.
	[ Lin Y B, Ye Y M. Analysis of the balance system of arable land occupation and compensation in China from the perspective of policy tools[J]. Rural Economy, 2019, (5):45-50.]
[19]	孙雨婷. 禹城农村宅基地退出的问题及对策建议[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2017, 58(10):1857-1860.
	[ Sun Y T. Problems and suggestions on the withdrawal of rural homestead in Yucheng[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 58(10):1857-1860.]
[20]	湖北省自然资源厅. 宜城市 “五个结合” 探索宅基地有偿退出新模式[EB/OL]. (2017-07-25) [2021-07-09]. http://zrzyt.hubei.gov.cn/bmdt/sxdt/201911/t20191101_288053.shtml .
	[Hubei Provincial Department of Natural Resources. The “Five Combination” of Yicheng City Explores a New Mode of Paid Withdrawal of Homestead Land[EB/OL]. (2017-07-25) [2021-07-09]. http://zrzyt.hubei.gov.cn/bmdt/sxdt/201911/t20191101_288053.shtml .]
[21]	曹琳剑, 王杰, 王欢欢, 等. 京津冀基础设施建设与人口集聚耦合演进分析: 基于推拉理论解析[J]. 地理科学, 2019, 39(8):1256-1264. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2019.08.007
	[ Cao L J, Wang J, Wang H H, et al. Evolutional analysis of coupling between infrastructure and population agglomeration in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region: An analysis based on Push-Pull Theory[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2019, 39(8):1256-1264.]
[22]	李浩媛, 段文技. 中国农村宅基地制度改革的基底分析与路径选择: 基于15个试点县(市、区)的分析[J]. 世界农业, 2017, (9):15-20.
	[ Li H Y, Duan W J. Base analysis and path choice of rural homestead system reform in China: Based on 15 pilot counties(cities and districts)[J]. World Agriculture, 2017, (9):15-20.]
[23]	孙雪峰, 朱新华, 陈利根. 不同经济发展水平地区农户宅基地退出意愿及其影响机制研究[J]. 江苏社会科学, 2016, (2):56-63.
	[ Sun X F, Zhu X H, Chen L G. Study on farmers’ intention to withdraw from homestead land and its influencing mechanism in different economic development levels[J]. Jiangsu Social Sciences, 2016, (2):56-63.]

工具类型	具体工具	内涵
供给型	基础设施建设	政府通过农村更新改造、建立集中居住区、农村基础设施建设等项目,改善农村生活和居住条件,鼓励农民退出宅基地或搬迁至集中居住区
	资金投入	政府为宅基地退出的各参与主体提供财政资金支持
	信息技术支持	政府通过提升信息化水平、组建信息平台等措施来保证宅基地退出政策的实施
	人力资源投入	政府根据政策实施的需要,建立相关组织机构,配备专业人员,加强政策实施的人力资源投入
需求型	补偿安置	政府为退出宅基地的农民提供货币补偿、购房补贴、宅基地置换、社会保障等优惠政策
	服务外包	政府与其他社会主体或市场主体合作,通过签订合同,委托其他主体进行相关建设和管理,吸引多方主体参与宅基地退出政策的实施
	示范工程	政府通过实施宅基地退出试点工程,形成可复制和可推广的实践经验,为本地区和其他地区宅基地退出提供指导和借鉴
环境型	目标规划	政府在综合考虑当地的现实情况和未来需求的基础上,对宅基地退出的现实目标和长远目标进行规划
	法规管制	政府制定宅基地退出的相关法规制度,对宅基地退出的主体的行为、实施程序等进行约束,为农村宅基地退出提供较好的制度环境
	金融支持	政府通过创造融资条件,为宅基地退出政策实施提供良好的融资环境,缓解宅基地退出的资金压力
	策略性措施	政府通过完善社会保障,提供就业支持,开展农村土地确权,解决农村宅基地历史遗留问题等措施来激励农民自愿有偿退出宅基地

文本编号	发文地	政策名称	发布时间	分析单元	编码
1	浙江义乌	义乌市城乡新社区集聚建设实施办法（试行）	2013.7	成立市城乡新社区集聚建设领导小组,下设办公室	1-1
				制订城乡新社区集聚建设工作总体规划、年度计划和阶段性任务	1-2
				确定宅基地置换标准	1-3
				对参加集聚建设农户的宅基地进行复垦	1-4
				集聚建设项目建筑设计费用由市财政承担	1-5
				项目建设资金可采取预收工程款和向金融机构融资等方式解决	1-6
				积极引进经验丰富的品牌房地产开发企业或知名代建公司参与城乡新社区建设项目代建	1-7
				参加集聚建设的农户可享受城镇居民养老、医疗、就业等保险,享有城镇居民职业培训、就业服务等同等权利	1-8
……

		供给型					需求型					环境型			总数/个	占比/%
		基础设施建设	资金投入	信息技术支持	人力资源投入		补偿安置	示范工程	服务外包	目标规划		法规管制	金融支持	策略性措施	总数/个
浙江义乌	经济目标/个	5	23	9	10		38	0	0	5		12	5	5	112		49.56
	社会目标/个	4	8	0	17		18	1	5	8		20	1	18	100		44.25
	生态目标/个	4	2	1	1		0	0	2	4		0	0	0	14		6.19
	总数/个	13	33	10	28		56	1	7	17		32	6	23	226	-
	占比/%	5.75	14.60	4.42	12.39		24.78	0.44	3.10	7.52		14.16	2.65	10.18	-	100.00
	总占比/%	37.17					28.32			34.51					-	100.00
山东禹城	经济目标/个	6	8	0	1		8	0	0	1		0	0	5	29	41.43
	社会目标/个	1	1	0	5		6		1	0		0	16	0	8	38	54.29
	生态目标/个	2	0	0	0		0		0	1		0	0	0	0	3	4.29
	总数/个	9	9	0	6	14		1	1	1		16	0	13	70	-
	占比/%	12.86	12.86	0.00	8.57	20.00		1.43	1.43	1.43		22.86	0.00	18.57	-	100.00
	总占比/%	34.29				22.86			42.86					-	100.00
湖北宜城	经济目标/个	1	3	2	0	0	0	0	1		3	1	0	11	18.33
	社会目标/个	1	2	2	12	0		1	0		2	21	2	5	48	80
	生态目标/个	1	0	0	0	0		0	0		0	0	0	0	1	1.67
	总数/个	3	5	4	12	1		0	0		3	24	3	5	60	-
	占比/%	5.00	8.33	6.67	20.00	1.67		0.00	0.00		5.00	40.00	5.00	8.33	-	100.00
	总占比/%	40.00				1.67			58.33					-	100.00
宁夏平罗	经济目标/个	2	9	4	1	16	0	2	1		2	1	1	39	42.29
	社会目标/个	0	5	1	5	4		1	0		3	16	0	17	52	56.52
	生态目标/个	1	0	0	0	0		0	0		0	0	0	0	1	1.09
	总数/个	3	14	5	6	20		1	2		4	18	1	18	92	-
	占比/%	3.26	15.22	5.43	6.52	21.74		1.09	2.17		4.35	19.57	1.09	19.57	-	100.00
	总占比/%	30.43				25.00			44.57					-	100.00

	浙江义乌	山东禹城	湖北宜城	宁夏平罗
退出模式	城乡新社区集聚建设+“集地券”	整村搬迁+分区分类	分区分档+“五个结合”	土地收储+“以地养老”
主要政策工具类型	供给型	供给型	需求型	供给型
主导方	地方政府+市场	地方政府	地方政府	地方政府+村集体经济组织
补偿安置方式	城乡新社区集聚建设：采用高层公寓+商业用房、商务楼宇、产业用房的1+X置换模式,也可选择房产、货币、权益安置凭证、购房补贴等多种方式组合置换;集地券：持有人可通过交易平台进行交易,向金融机构抵押融资,在后备资源储备库存储或预支等方式获得资金	整村搬迁：由政府在“面积不超标”标准下重新分配宅基地,或采取货币化安置方式;分区分类：针对不同情况,分别采取无偿退出、货币化安置、由市政府发放相应价值房票抵扣购置新房价款3种方式	分区分档：针对不同退出情形采取差别化货币补偿标准;“五个结合”：货币补偿、宅基地置换	土地收储：根据不同情况,采取以法定面积的宅基地使用权置换廉租房使用权、货币补偿或给予购房补助方式;“以地养老”：将闲置的小学改造成养老院,允许老年农民自愿退出宅基地后用补偿费换取养老服务
资金来源	政府资金投入以及“集地券”城乡增减挂钩指标转让费、宅基地有偿使用费等	政府资金投入、城乡增减挂钩指标转让费	政府资金投入、村集体经济组织自筹、城乡增减挂钩指标转让费、宅基地有偿使用费等	村集体经济组织自筹、地方政府通过预算安排收储基金、城乡增减挂钩指标转让费

	浙江义乌	山东禹城	湖北宜城	宁夏平罗	全国
人均GDP/元	108113	47116	69672	57587	70581
第一产业占GDP比重/%	1.6	18.3	15.0	12.3	7.1
一般公共预算收入/亿元	101.2	20.6	17.3	8.6	-
常住人口城镇化率/%	78.5	48.3	53.5	53.7	60.6
地域文化特色	浙商文化	儒家文化	荆楚文化	农耕文化	-

Comparative study on policy tools and practice of homestead withdrawal at the county level

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 23

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	WANG Zhaolin, WANG Min. Influencing factors of farmers’ homestead withdrawal decision based on the technology acceptance model and perceived risk：Evidence from Chongqing [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1335-1347.
[2]	SHI Peng, YU Jin. Impact of risk expectation, citizenization perception, and farmers’ cognition on the relocated rural households’ homestead withdrawal [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1387-1402.
[3]	GAO Yuan, SUN Pengfei, ZHAO Kai. The influence path of farmers’ homestead withdrawal behavior in poor areas:From the family life cycle perspective [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1403-1418.
[4]	CHEN Ming. Compensation preference and heterogeneity sources of homestead withdrawal of farming households: Based on choice experiment method [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1467-1478.
[5]	ZHANG Bailin, ZHANG Fengrong, QU Yanbo, JIANG Guanghui, XIE Zhen, CAI Weimin. Research hotspots and prospects of homestead withdrawal and reuse [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1277-1292.
[6]	QU Yanbo, CHAI Yifan, ZHU Weiya, PING Zongli, ZONG Haining, WANG Sen. Archetype analysis of rural homestead withdrawal patterns based on the framework of “diagnosis-design-outcome” [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1293-1306.
[7]	YUAN Shaofeng, GAN Xinyi, TANG Yiyu. Increment income sharing of rural homestead withdrawal based on alliance interest distribution: A case of typical counties and cities in Zhejiang Province [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1361-1374.
[8]	ZHOU Yajuan, LIN Aiwen, ZHANG Ershen. Rural homestead value reconstruction and withdrawal compensation pricing based on marginal opportunity cost [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(7): 1428-1439.
[9]	LI Zihao, YUAN Bingbing. Environmental policy mechanism of local governments in the treatment of haze pollution：Policy tools, spatial correlations and threshold effects [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 40-56.
[10]	GE Jianping, LIU Jiaqi. International comparison of critical mineral strategies: Historical evolution and tool selection [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(8): 1464-1476.
[11]	Zhe LIU, Xuli ZAN, Wei LIU, Diyou LIU, Shaoming LI, Xiaodong ZHANG, Dehai ZHU. Filling and comparison of the growth period data of agricultural meteorological stations [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(1): 176-184.
[12]	WANG Jingru,MA Long,LIU Tingxi,HUANG Xing,LIU Danhui,LI Hongyu. Comparative analysis of temperature before and after abrupt changes in Horqin Sandy Land from 1951 to 2012 [J]. Resources Science, 2016, 38(4): 690-703.
[13]	SU Shipeng,WU Junyuan,GAN Jianbang. Comparative analysis of total factor productivity change among family forestry operators since forest tenure reform in Fujian,Zhejiang and Jiangxi provinces [J]. Resources Science, 2015, 37(1): 112-124.
[14]	LIU Manzhi, WANG Rui, ZHANG Jing, ZHOU MeiHua. A Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Regional Coal Consumption in China: An Empirical Study Based on the Panel Data Model [J]. , 2011, 33(9): 1641-1649.
[15]	CHEN Mei-qiu, PENG Yun-fei, ZHOU Bing-juan. Comparative Analysis of Differences According to Social and Economic Development Levels and Farmer Willingness to Transfer Cultivated Land [J]. , 2008, 30(10): 1491-1496.