Research on compensation standards for cultivated land protection based on a value-added benefit model in Xinjiang, China

Abstract

This study examines the content of the compensation standard measurement for cultivated land protection to effectively address the imbalance between local economic development and cultivated land protection. The empirical analysis relies on a value-added benefit model. Using the grain supply and demand balance method, 14 prefectures (cities) in Xinjiang were divided into cultivated land deficit/surplus areas, and based on the theory of value-added benefits of converting cultivated land to construction land, a compensation standard measurement system for cultivated land protection was established, and correction coefficients such as potential urban development intensity and government payment capacity were introduced to accurately determine the realistic compensation standard for cultivated land protection in areas that are paid and receive compensation. The results of the study found that the total surplus area of cultivated land in Xinjiang is 271.57 × 104 hm2, which is in surplus overall, while within Xinjiang, four states (cities) are cultivated land deficit areas, which are also the areas that need to pay compensation amounts, and 10 states (cities) are cultivated land surplus areas, which receive compensation payments. The average compensation standard for cultivated land protection in Xinjiang is 24.27 × 104 RMB/hm2, while the compensation standard for cultivated land protection in each state (city) is mainly influenced by the benchmark land price and the comprehensive value of cultivated land, of which the benchmark land price is the core factor affecting the compensation standard. In terms of the total amount of compensation, the total amount of compensation paid for cultivated land protection in Xinjiang is 5,323.93 × 108 RMB, which is paid by the provinces where cultivated land is scarce, and in terms of the provinces, by the four compensation areas to the remaining 10 reimbursement areas, for which we put forward policy suggestions such as adopting diversified forms of compensation, alleviating financial pressure, financing through multiple channels, securing sources of funding, establishing cultivated land protection compensation standards, dynamic measurement platforms, and supervision and management mechanisms to realize long-term compensation mechanisms for cultivated land. The study is conducive to clarifying the rights and responsibilities of cultivated land protection, mobilizing the motivation of the main actors in cultivated land protection, and promoting balance and harmony between regional economic development and cultivated land protection.

Research on Realization Mechanism of Land Value-Added Benefit Distribution Justice in Rural Homestead Disputes in China—Based on the Perspective of Judicial Governance

“…Under the background that the adaptability problem of land value-added benefit distribution rules has become the standardization perplexity of homestead disputes, some scholars have proposed to distribute the value-added benefit of homestead through the moderating value of collectivity and homestead value-added tax [29], as well as the transfer of use rights, in order to achieve a balance between government guarantee fairness and market promotion efficiency [30]. Based on the analysis of the distribution of value-added benefit from homesteads, some scholars believed that the current homestead system caused a high degree of idleness in homesteads [31], and based on the analogy of the compensation model for cultivated land compensation, they proposed a compensation mechanism for homestead land that would effectively allocate the increased benefits within the collective property rights and mitigate the degree of rural housing vacancy [32]. Presently, the mode of distribution of the value-added benefit of homesteads among different property owners is mainly "Quota Transaction" represented by land coupon trading in Chongqing, in which land value-added benefit flows between urban and rural areas.…”

“…It is worth noting that if the application of legal principles is taken as the intervention path when applying the homestead policy in the trial, the homestead policy should also be a "principled" policy norm, such as in (2019) Su 06 Line Final No. 647 32 , otherwise it would face the dispute between the change and the application of the homestead policy. Homestead disputes often face a situation that lasts from three years to more than ten years, making it difficult to solve the current problem of unfair distribution for the parties when applying specific policy regulations of that year.…”

“…31 The right to use the homestead involved in this case has been registered by the government to confirm the owner, and the plaintiff Mou cannot apply for confirmation of the right to use again. 32 In this case, the boundaries of collective land ownership and individual homestead use rights were not correctly distinguished, and the spirit of the principles of the national homestead reform policy was not correctly understood, which was an error in the application of law and should be corrected according to law. 33 In this case, the People's Government of Pidu District issued the Interim Measures for the Collection and Management of the Adjustment Fund for the Value-added Benefit of Rural Collective Operation Construction Land in Pidu District.…”