IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719321258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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 (CNKI)

Author

Listed:
  • Lu, Xiao
  • Peng, Wenlong
  • Huang, Xianjin
  • Fu, Qianqian
  • Zhang, Quanjing

Abstract

Rural to urban migration under China’s rapid urbanization has created inefficient use of rural homestead land. To address these issues, there is increasing interest in rural homestead system reform in China. Although several reforms have been implemented in pilot areas, reviews of the related accumulated literature are rare. The objectives of this study are the following: (i) to discuss the research transition from the “separation of two rights” to the “separation of three rights” in homestead management and (ii) draw conclusions on current research conditions, hot topics, and trends. This study provides a reference for further and deeper rural homestead system reform in China and regions worldwide. We collected and sorted 640 research papers on the topic of the separation of three rights in homestead (hereinafter referred to as STRH) or the homestead land use rights from China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and used CiteSpace and VOSviewer to visualize and map knowledge domains. The results show that: (1) From the study of the homestead land use rights to the study of the STRH, there is pronounced synergy between national policies and the number of published papers. The STRH has become a popular research field since 2018. (2) Most researchers are experts and scholars engaged in the study of agricultural economics, civil and commercial law, administrative law, or local legal systems. (3) Current and future studies on the STRH are and will be conducted in terms of the definition of concepts and connotations, confirmation of rights and registration, implementation paths, rural homestead system reform, rural revitalization strategy, reform challenges and countermeasures, risk control, and overall planning. (4) The studies on the STRH have integrity, and show characteristics of inheritance between it and studies on the homestead land use rights. (5) Studies on typical cases for the STRH should be conducted in combination with the latest strategic requirements such as rural land system reform, rural revitalization strategy, and integrated urban and rural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu, Xiao & Peng, Wenlong & Huang, Xianjin & Fu, Qianqian & Zhang, Quanjing, 2020. "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 pape," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719321258
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104670
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719321258
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104670?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ying Chen & Xiaolu Ni & Yajia Liang, 2022. "The Influence of External Environment Factors on Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Rural Homesteads: Evidence from Wuhan and Suizhou City in Central China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Wentao Si & Chen Jiang & Lin Meng, 2022. "Leaving the Homestead: Examining the Role of Relative Deprivation, Social Trust, and Urban Integration among Rural Farmers in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-28, October.
    3. Xiao Lu & Yi Qu & Piling Sun & Wei Yu & Wenlong Peng, 2020. "Green Transition of Cultivated Land Use in the Yellow River Basin: A Perspective of Green Utilization Efficiency Evaluation," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Hualin Xie & Yuyang Wen & Yongrok Choi & Xinmin Zhang, 2021. "Global Trends on Food Security Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Mingyang Nan & Jun Chen, 2022. "Research Progress, Hotspots and Trends of Land Use under the Background of Ecological Civilization in China: Visual Analysis Based on the CNKI Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Zhang, Anquan & Ni, Pengfei & Ling, Chen, 2022. "Peer effects in rural housing demand: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Yunfei Yang & Guifei Qu & Lianlian Hua & Lifeng Wu, 2022. "Knowledge Mapping Visualization Analysis of Research on Blockchain in Management and Economics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-24, November.
    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. Weiyan Qi & Zhemin Li & Changbin Yin, 2022. "Response Mechanism of Farmers’ Livelihood Capital to the Compensation for Rural Homestead Withdrawal—Empirical Evidence from Xuzhou City, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Xianjun Wang & Junfang Kang, 2023. "Decision Making and Influencing Factors in Withdrawal of Rural Residential Land-Use Rights in Suzhou, Anhui Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, February.

    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:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719321258. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.