IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v92y2020ics0264837719316023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Power, capital, and the poverty of farmers’ land rights in China

Author

Listed:
  • Hong, Zhaohui
  • Sun, Yi

Abstract

This article is intended to conduct a three-dimensional examination of China’s rural land rights and the complex dynamic among political power, economic capital, and farmers’ rights during the past seventy years. First, the study takes a close look at the historical changes in the nature, scope, and ownership of land property in rural China during four significant time periods from 1949 to 2019. Second, it uses Ronald Coase’s theory on property rights in dissecting the four paradoxes and dilemmas in China’s rural land ownership, including the extent of clarity and stability of land property rights, the “three rights system” (the rights to ownership, contracting and operation of land) and three stagnations in defining and exercising such three rights, the simultaneous shortage and waste of land resources, as well as the restrictions on land transactions and the requirement to protect collective property. With examples derived from selected evidence, the article documents how both political power and economic capital have worked together to deprive farmers’ land rights. It concludes with a critical analysis of the current status of China’s rural economy, the problem of applying Western economic theories to China’s reality, as well as the theoretical definition, legal protection and policy parameters of land property rights in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong, Zhaohui & Sun, Yi, 2020. "Power, capital, and the poverty of farmers’ land rights in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:92:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719316023
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719316023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104471?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronald H. Coase, 2008. "The Institutional Structure of Production," Springer Books, in: Claude Ménard & Mary M. Shirley (ed.), Handbook of New Institutional Economics, chapter 2, pages 31-39, Springer.
    2. Ken Moak & Miles W. N. Lee, 2015. "Deng Xiaoping Theory," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: China’s Economic Rise and Its Global Impact, chapter 0, pages 91-115, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Kong, Xuesong & Liu, Yaolin & Jiang, Ping & Tian, Yasi & Zou, Yafeng, 2018. "A novel framework for rural homestead land transfer under collective ownership in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 138-146.
    4. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    5. Lewis, W Arthur, 1979. "The Dual Economy Revisited," The Manchester School of Economic & Social Studies, University of Manchester, vol. 47(3), pages 211-229, September.
    6. Ronald Coase, 2006. "The Conduct of Economics: The Example of Fisher Body and General Motors," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 255-278, June.
    7. Tony Lawson, 1997. "Situated rationality," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 101-125.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daquan Huang & Shihao Zhu & Tao Liu & Pingping Ma, 2022. "Do land ownership types matter in manufacturing firms’ location choice? Using Beijing as a case study," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 151-169, March.
    2. Leizhou Zhu & Yaping Huang, 2022. "A Framework for Analyzing the Family Urbanization of China from a “Culture–Institution” Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Chou, Lichen & Dai, Jie & Qian, Xiaoyan & Karimipour, Aliakbar & Zheng, Xuping, 2021. "Achieving sustainable soil and water protection: The perspective of agricultural water price regulation on environmental protection," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    4. Qian, Chen & Antonides, Gerrit & Heerink, Nico & Zhu, Xueqin & Ma, Xianlei, 2022. "An economic-psychological perspective on perceived land tenure security: Evidence from rural eastern China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Hu, Zhenhua & Song, Gaohui & Hu, Ziyue & Fang, Jiaqi, 2024. "An improved dynamic game analysis of farmers, enterprises and rural collective economic organizations based on idle land reuse policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    6. Min Zhao & Weijian Guo, 2022. "Does Land Certification Stimulate Farmers’ Entrepreneurial Enthusiasm? Evidence from Rural China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Zehua Wang & Fachao Liang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2023. "Can socially sustainable development be achieved through homestead withdrawal? A hybrid multiple-attributes decision analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Yang, Chen & Qian, Zhu, 2022. "The complexity of property rights embedded in the rural-to-urban resettlement of China: A case of Hangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    9. Chao Hu & Jianping Tao & Donghao Zhang & Damian Adams, 2021. "Price Signal of Tilled Land in Rural China: An Empirically Oriented Transaction Costs Study Based on Contract Theory," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    10. Yan, Jinming & Yang, Yumeng & Xia, Fangzhou, 2021. "Subjective land ownership and the endowment effect in land markets: A case study of the farmland “three rights separation” reform in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wiser, R. H., 2000. "The role of public policy in emerging green power markets: an analysis of marketer preferences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 177-212, June.
    2. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2007:i:68:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Amar Gande & Kose John & Vinay B. Nair & Lemma W. Senbet, 2020. "Taxes, institutions, and innovation: Theory and international evidence," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1413-1442, December.
    4. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Wang, Sen & Bogle, Tim & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Forestry and the New Institutional Economics," Working Papers 130818, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    6. Per L. Bylund, 2015. "Signifying Williamson's Contribution to the Transaction Cost Approach: An Agent-Based Simulation of Coasean Transaction Costs and Specialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 148-174, January.
    7. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2011. "Appropriation, violent enforcement, and transaction costs: a critical survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 227-253, April.
    8. Akee, Randall K. Q., 2006. "Checkerboards and Coase: Transactions Costs and Efficiency in Land Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 2438, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Ervin, David E. & Fox, Glenn, 1998. "Environmental Policy Considerations In The Grain-Livestock Subsectors In Canada, Mexico And The United States," Proceedings of the 4th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop 1998: Economic Harmonization in the Canadian\U.S.\Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector; 16754, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    10. Vítor Gaspar, 2010. "Financial Stability and Policy Cooperation," Working Papers o201001, Banco de Portugal, Economics and Research Department.
    11. Nolan Charles & Trew Alex, 2015. "Transaction Costs and Institutions: Investments in Exchange," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 391-432, July.
    12. Williamson, Oliver E., 1995. "Some uneasiness with the Coase Theorem: Comment," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 9-11, May.
    13. Peter Maskell & Mark Lorenzen, 2004. "The Cluster as Market Organisation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(5-6), pages 991-1009, May.
    14. Valentiny, Pál, 2018. "Coase-kép másképp: középpontban a közszolgáltatások [Coase otherwise: Public utilities]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(4), pages 346-381.
    15. Yang, Chen & Qian, Zhu, 2022. "The complexity of property rights embedded in the rural-to-urban resettlement of China: A case of Hangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Gary D. Libecap, 2016. "Coasean Bargaining to Address Environmental Externalities," NBER Working Papers 21903, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2010. "Assessing the Relative Merits of Development Charges and Transferable Development Rights in an Uncertain World," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(4), pages 891-911, April.
    18. Mike, Károly, 2016. "Merre vezessen a magyar kapitalizmus útja?. Látkép Ronald Coase világítótornyából [Which course for Hungary s capitalism?. A view from Ronald Coase s lighthouse]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 597-614.
    19. S Datta & C W J Granger & M Barari & T Gibbs, 2007. "Management of supply chain: an alternative modelling technique for forecasting," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(11), pages 1459-1469, November.
    20. Rao, Ramesh K.S., 2015. "The public corporation as an intermediary between “Main Street” and “Wall Street”," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 64-82.
    21. Anetta Čaplánová & Marcel Novák, 2015. "Transakčné náklady, vlastnícke práva a externality - k vedeckému odkazu R. H. Coasea [Transaction Costs, Property Rights and Externalities - on the Contribution of R. H. Coase to Economic]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(2), pages 244-257.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:92:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719316023. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.