Institutional diversity in transferring land development rights in China : government, market, and self-organization

Author(s):  
Chen Shi
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 13402
Author(s):  
Chen Shi ◽  
Zhou Zhang

With the continuous urbanization, China is facing a dilemma of achieving two conflicting targets in land governance, i.e., the continuous supply of urban construction land to support urbanization and the preservation of cultivated land for food security. Under China’s dual land system, the implementation of the “Linkage between Urban-land Taking and Rural-land Giving” (Linkage) policy is of great significance in promoting more inclusive urbanization by commodifying the land development right and connecting urban and rural land markets. In the specific land property right system and changing land governance of China, this policy appears to provide an opportunity for stakeholders other than the state to compete for the value from the transfer of development rights (TDR) and triggers the emergence of diversified approaches in organizing land projects in rural China. Based on the theoretical perspective of New Institutional Economics and empirical evidence from Zhejiang Province, Hubei Province, and Sichuan Province, this paper conducts a comparative institutional analysis for China’s TDR practice and argues that the diversified operational approaches in China’s practice have aligned various interests of the stakeholders through flexible participation methods and elaborate reallocation of land property rights, in order to fit various institutional environments and material conditions


2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-424
Author(s):  
Ting Xu ◽  
Wei Gong

Economic development at both the domestic and global levels is associated with increasing tensions which are inextricably linked to the meaning and allocation of property rights, which has a great impact on appropriation of resources and may lead to different paths of development. ‘Taking’ – the appropriation of private land for public needs – is a typical example that exhibits those tensions, posing a challenge to the conventional conception of property as individualistic and exclusive rights of possession, use and disposition and to the associated neoliberal model of development. Should the individual landowner be left to bear the cost of a regulatory intervention which endures to the wider benefit of the whole community? How can the tensions between private ownership and public regulation be mitigated? If we take the liberal concept of property, then private property seems to be in constant conflict with public interests and wider social concerns. Meanwhile, community, situating between the state and the individuals, and community’s relationship to development rights have not provoked enough discussion. The paper explores the different ways land development rights might be seen both in Western, essentially common law, systems and in China, especially now and in view of two case studies. An empirical example in Wugang, China, reveals the importance of integrating the ‘community lens’ proposed by Roger Cotterrell into studies of the transfer of land development rights. Reading through the community lens, taking could be giving and appropriation could also be access. This approach provides a new perspective to re-evaluate the relationship between legal appropriation and development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 97 ◽  
pp. 104803
Author(s):  
Lanjiao Wen ◽  
Lioudmila Chatalova ◽  
Van Butsic ◽  
Fox ZhiYong Hu ◽  
Anlu Zhang

Urban Studies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Shi ◽  
Bo-sin Tang

Rapid urbanisation in China has led to a substantial decrease in agricultural land. To address this unsustainable form of urban development, the Chinese government has implemented the ‘Linkage’ Policy ( Zengjian Guagou), which requires any increase in new urban land by local governments to be compensated for with an equivalent amount of new arable land. This paper examines the institutional changes and the implications for China’s land production and development arising from this mechanism of transferring land development rights from the rural to the urban sectors. Using Chengdu as a case study, our research concludes that this institutional mechanism has conferred commodified and tradeable development rights on rural land, leading to the emergence and direct involvement of new players in village land consolidation, resettlement of affected villagers and, indirectly, in the supply of new urban land. Process efficiency has been improved with the local governments, developers and village collectives capitalising on their niches in village improvement projects. The conventional state-led model of land production is enriched with bottom-up market initiatives, and villagers have more choices to realise their land property rights under the dual land market. Land use efficiency has been enhanced by the reallocation of construction land potential. However, infringements of villagers’ interests and negative impacts on balanced regional development under this policy were also found.


2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 454-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Wang ◽  
Ran Tao ◽  
Lanlan Wang ◽  
Fubing Su

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document