hu),whichwasmuchmoreradical,wasimplemented.Inaccordancetothesystem,allcollectivelandsinproductionteamsweretobedistributedamonghouseholdsbasedontheirpopulationorlaborers.Thehouseholdscouldmanagethelands,madeproductiondecisionsbythemselves,andboretheresults.Whentasksassignedbyuppergovernmentandthecollectiveaccumulation,e.g.acertainquantityofgrainandlivestock,werecompleted,theremainedproductscouldbeownedbythehouseholdsandnotdistributedamongmembersintheproductionteam.Moreover,ifthehouseholdmadesurethattheyhaveenoughration,theyhadrighttoselltheleftgraintostateownedagriculturalenterprisesorconsumethemastheywant,usuallyfeedinglivestockormakingwineforexample.ThatmeantthemodelfromFengyangwasfinallyadmittedbyParty.InOctober1983,thePartyandtheStateCounselissuedthedocumentNoticeofSeparatingtheCo-operativefromPoliticsandSettingUptheTownshipGovernmentandrequiredthecooperativetoseparatefromlocalgovernment.Theactorderedthatthepeople’scommuneswerereplacedbyadministrativetownships.Bytheendof1984,98%ofproductionteamshadtakenthereformofHouseholdResponsibilitySystem.Itwasuntilthen,thecollectivizationsystemwasdismantledcompletely.
　　SomeCharactersofDe-collectivizationandProblemsleft
　　Norestitution
　　Yet,de-collectivizationandtheimplementofthehouseholdresponsibilitysystemisneitherareformoftheownershipoflandnoraprocessofprivatization.Aswehavementionedabove,aftertheCommunistPartysetupitsowngovernmentin1949,itstartedlandreformanddistributedlandstothepoorfromlandlordsandrichpeasants.Peasantacquiredparcelsoflandaccordingtothelaborforces,thenlandwereregisteredundernameofeachhousehold.Beforetheeveofcollectivization,mostoflandsinruralChinawerelegallyprivatelyowned.Butwhende-collectivizationbegan,peasantsdidnotgetbacktheirformerlandsagain.Thehouseholdresponsibilitysystemonlydistributetherightofmanageandbenefitoflandsamonghouseholdsaccordingtotheirpopulationorlaborers.So,thede-collectivizationinChinadidnotlikethatinmostofEastEuropeancountriessuchasBulgaria,Czech,Hungary,Poland,RomaniaandSlovakia,butlikethatinAlbania.Thatistosay,therewasnorestitutionofland.However,informerEastEuropeanCountries,whetherrestitutionwasimplementedornot,thede-collectivizationhadsymbiosiswithprivatization.InChina,althoughduringtheprocessofde-collectivizationtherewereinrealitysomeopinionsthatlandsshouldberestituted,suchvoiceswerenotaccepted,norevendiscussed.
　　Thereasonswhyrestitutionoflandinthede-collectivizationofruralChinadidnothappenmaylieinsomehistoricreasons.Firstofall,althoughpeasantsinChinahadprivateownershipoverlandsbeforethecollectivization,largepercentofpeasantsownedfarmlandsthatdidnotbelongtothembefore,theyobtainthemfrompoliticaltransformation.Theoretically,violencecan’tconsistthelegalreasonoftransferofownershipoverrealestate,thereforeevenaftertheterrorizeduringthelandreformatbeginningof1950s,theprivateownershipoflands,whichwasmadeoutbythecommunistgovernment,hadnotyetbecamestableandcommonlyaccepted.However,theformerlandlordclasshadrootedoffduringthepoliticalmovement,landcontactsandregisterbooksoflandtitlehadbeendestroyed,noonedaretochallengethepowerofCommunistPartyanymore.Sincethecollectivizationbegansoonafterthelandreform,thenewestablishedownerrelationshipwasbrokenagain,whende-collectivizationcameabout,withoutsupportsfromthecentralgovernment,mostofpeasantsonlytookthehouseholdresponsibilitysystemasanotherchanceofequallydistributinglands,justlikethelandreformin1949.Astodescendantsofformerlandlordclass,theymighthavenotforgottentheexperienceoftheirpoorancestors’:claimingprivaterightbeforethePartywhichregardingpublicownershipasuniversaltruthisadangerousdeal.
　　Secondly,differentfrommostcountryinformercommunisteastEuropeancountries,inwhichfarmers’nominalownershipoflandswasremained,eventhoughtheirlandswererequisitionedincollectivefarmswithoutanypayment,andsothatitwaseasyforpeasantsinthesecountriestotakebackthelandwhenthecollectivefarmswentover.Onthecontrary,inChina,privateownershipoflandwastotallyabolishedassoonasthepeople’scommunesystemwassetup,after20years,thecollectiveownershiphadalreadyfestbasis.Asaresult,thetransactioncostsofrestitutionsohighastowipeitout.Thatmeans,evenapeasantwanttotakebacktheformerfarmlandwhichbelongedtothem,it’sveryhardtohimtocollecttherelevantevidencestosupporthisclaim,moreover,therewasnolegaljusticeprocesstosupportsuchapplication.SonormalfarmerwouldrathertoaccepttheHouseholdResponsibilitySystem.
　　Finally,thekeyreasonliesinthesocialismsystemitself.EventhoughtheCommunistPartyofhadpoorperformanceinleadingthecountryanditspeopletowealthandhappinessduringsocialistrevolution,Chinesepeoplehavetakensocialismasthecharacteristicofthecountryforgrant,afteralltheslogan“SocialismsavedChina”hasbeendeeplyimpressed.SothatevenaftertheCultureRevolution,mostpeoplestillproppeduptheParty.ThePartyledtheruralreformanddecidedthede-collectivization.However,thereformisa“liberationoftheruralproductivity”,whichsuittherequirementoftheParty.BecausetheChineseCommunistPartyinsistedthathismissionistorealizesocialism,andsocialismisbasedonpublicownershipsystem.Collectiveownershipwasdeemedasoneformofpublicownershipinruralregions,sothatasChinakeptontheroadofrealizingsocialism,“landinruralareasbelongtocollective”wascertainlyremainedafterruralreform,andregulatedintheConstitutionof1982,whichisvalidtillnow.
　　Atthetimeofde-collectivization,thedissolutionofpeople’scommuneandthewideimplementofresponsibilitysystemwereregardasagreatinnovation.Accordingtothestatistic,TheHouseholdResponsibilitySystemdidbringaboutamoreprosperousagricultureinChina.From1978to1984,grainoutputinChinaincreasedatanannualaveragerateof5%andthegrossvalueofagricultureby7.7%(Lin,1997).IncontrastwithformerEuropeancountries,thede-collectivizationseemsbringmorebenefittoChinesepeasantsatbeginning.Sothatatthattime,rarepeasantdidrealizethatsuchareformwithouttransformationofownershipwasincompletely.However,Thenaturalshortcomingsofthede-collectivizationwouldsurelybringaseriesofproblems.
　　institutionalproblem:landdistribution
　　Asweshowedabove,thede-collectivizationransmoot

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]  下一页