农村地权研究：1949～1983

【作者】 黄荣华；

【导师】 姜义华；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 中国近现代史， 2004， 博士

【摘要】 土地是重要的农业生产资料。地权是全部社会关系的高度浓缩，它在本质上体现着人与人之间的关系。在中华人民共和国成立以来的历史变迁中，农业生产关系变动频繁，每次变革无不涉及地权的变动，而每次地权变动又会同时涉及一系列重大的理论及政策的探讨和选择，使得农民的生产生活方式发生变化，并影响到社会心理的变化和社会结构的转型。农村地权变迁成为共和国史研究中一个绕不开的环节。 本文以鄂东的新洲县为个案，对该县1949～1983年间的地权变迁问题作一个全面系统的研究。全文由绪论、结束语和四章正文构成： 绪论主要阐述选题依据、探讨的问题、本课题的研究现状和个案的选择，并对论文资料作了说明。 第一章主要考察1949～1952年期间新洲县土地改革、查田定产以及土改复查的基本情况，并从几个方面分析了土改的社会影响。新洲县建县于1951年，属于新解放区，最初开展减租减息，1951年冬～1952年5月全面推行土地改革运动。同时，分三个阶段进行了查田定产，即结合减租减息、土地改革以及1952年9月～11月间的大规模查田定产运动。土改使农民分得了土地，查田定产则使新生的人民政权确立了征收农业税的依据。土地改革将农业资源在不同的阶级阶层之间进行了重新分配，对新洲县的经济产生巨大影响。土改后新洲经济呈现出贫雇农经济上升、中农徘徊观望和副业低落的态势，而农业税额在土地总产量中所占的比例明显偏高。 第二章探讨了农地集体所有制的建立，集体组织生产的方法及合作社的分配制度等问题。在新洲县，农民的土地主要通过三种方式加入合作社，即评产入社、折标准亩入社以及作股入社。初级社的股份基金，大多数按照土地分摊，只有少数按照劳动力分摊。高级社的股份基金，一般按照劳动力分摊。高级社里，农民对于土地、耕牛、农具等生产资料的所有权转归合作社，农地集体所有制得以建立。在组织生产方面，合作化时期，互助组和合作社通过换工、临时按件包工、分季节按段包工、包工包产、土地分户管理连续操作等方式将农民组织起来进行生产，建立起农民与土地之间的日常关联。农业社制定定额，生产队执行定额，修改权归合作社的格局，既增加了合作社的成本，又影响农业生产和社员的生产积极性。在分配方面，乡干部、社队干部和普通社员的收入呈现倒金字塔状。合作社将“集体”引入了农村，土改后形成的国家与农民二元关系被国家、集体与社员三者关系所替代，也由此开始了土地产出在国家、集体与社员三者之间进行切割的时期。合作化时期的生产与分配方式使平均主义和瞒产私分成为无法克服的顽疾。 第三章考察人民公社时期地权演变的基本情况以及由此所导致的农民生产生活方式的变化。新洲县人民公社内部体制经历了几个阶段，从最初的公社所有到“三级管理，两级核算”(公社、大队、小队分级管理，公社、大队两级核算)，到四级(公社、管理区、生产队即原高级社、生产小队)管理、四级核算、以生产队为基本核算单位，到三级(公社、生产大队、生产队)所有、(大)队为基础，到包死产、扩大实物奖赔、分配大包干和以生产队为基本核算单位并存，再到以大队核算和生产队核算并存。自留地是集体化时代社员拥有的小自由，公社时期的自留地政策反复多变，但一定程度上弥补了农民完全失去土地所有权的利益损失，对农民形成了一种利益补偿机制，为农民提供了福利和部分保障，构成了集体土地所有制长期存在和稳定的一个支架。在分配领域，人民公社体制各级之间的天然模糊性、体制自身的不稳定、各级的所有权限缺少法律的保障以及频繁的政治运动轻易改变财产所属关系成为一平二调的根源。以按级发工资为内核的人民公社工资制和以公共食堂为载体的供给制相结合的分配制度，造成了公社无法克服的平均主义。消极怠工和瞒产私分成为社员抵制集体生产和分配方式的惯常消极手段。 第四章主要阐述家庭联产承包责任制在新洲确立的基本情况，分析了农民负担加重的原因和农民的财产权问题。改革促进了农业经济的发展，给农民带来了实惠，但是政策性变化、部分农用工业品提价造成农民农业投资加大、一些部门乱摊派、乱集资、乱涨价、乱开销以及地方性的生产建设和文化福利事业开支过大等因素，加重了农民负担。在承包制下，农民的财产权没有得到根本的满足和维护。 结语部分对建国以后农地制度的演变作了法理上的梳理，系统清理了十一届三中全会以来的各种农地制度创新目标模式，认为国家、集体与农民必须对地权进行明晰的比例分割，使农民拥有得到确切保障的相应份额或者一定比例的地权，为农业现代化创造条件。 本文论述的重点在于探讨农村地权演变的基本情况以及由此所造成的农民生产生活方式的变化和社会关系的变动。更多还原

【Abstract】 Land is an important kind of means of agricultural production. The land ownership is the highly concentrated expression of all social relations, it in essence reflects the relationship of mankind. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the relationship of agricultural production changed frequently and every change involved the alteration of land ownership which would involve the inquiry and selection of a series of great theory and policy. All these not only changed the peasants’ mode of production and life, but affected the change of psychology of society and the transformation of social structure. Then, the change of land ownership is an unavoidable issue while studying the history of the People’s Republic of China.This doctoral dissertation selects Xinzhou County laid in the eastern part of Hubei Province as an example, tries to make a detailed study on the change of land ownership in this county from 1949 to 1983. It has six parts: the introduction, four chapters and the conclusion.Chapter one mainly elaborates a series of social movements happened in Xinzhou from 1949 to 1952. They include the Land Reform, the movement of examining land distribution and evaluating land yield, and the re-examining of land reform. Then it analyzes the social influence brought by land reform in several aspects. Xinzhou was delimited as a county in 1951, belonged to new liberated area. At first, it launched the movement of reduction of rent and interest, then pursued an overall movement of land reform from the winter of 1951 to May 1952. Meanwhile, the movement of examining land distribution and evaluating land yield was carried out by three stages, ie the stage combined with the movement of reduction of rent, the stage combined with land reform and the stage of the large-scale movement brought out from September to November in 1952. Land reform gave peasants land, the check-up on land distribution and production quota made the government gam the bases to levy agricultural tax. Land reform re-distributed the agricultural resources among different classes, this influenced Xinzhou’s economy greatly. The economic status of poor peasants developed while the middle peasants hesitated and the sideline production declined. Furthermore, the agricultural tax took a high proportion hi the total yield.Chapter two expounds the issues about the setting up of land collective ownership, the organizing mode of collective production labor, and the distribution mode of cooperative. In Xinzhou, the peasants’ land was admitted into the cooperative by three ways, ie evaluating land yield, converting different land to standard mu andconverting land to stock. In elementary agricultural producers’ cooperative, major of the fund was apportioned according to land area, minor to hands, while fund of advanced agricultural producers’ cooperative was mainly apportioned according to hands. In advanced agricultural producers’ cooperative, as the peasants’ ownership of the means of production such as land, farm cattle and farm tools was transferred to the cooperative, the land collective ownership had been established. In the aspect of labor organization during the period of cooperative, the peasants were organized in several ways by which the day-to-day relationship between peasants and land was set up. But, as the production quota was defined and revised by the cooperative, the production teams could only carry out these quotas, it not only added up the production cost, but did harm to peasants’ initiative. Since the cooperative brought "collective" into the rural social relationship, the dual relationship between the state and the peasants was replaced by triple relationship among the state, the collective and the peasants. Then, the output would be shared by the state, the collective and the cooperative members. The modes of production and distribution made equalitarianism and the phenomenon of concealing the output to contribute in private an inextricable trouble.Chapter three expounds the changes of land ownership and their conseque更多还原