【作者】 何得桂；

【导师】 吴理财；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 政治社会学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 这是一篇对集体林权变革进行政治社会学解读的论文。它选择福建中部地区的溪乡作为研究单元,以集体林权变革为载体和切入点,运用“国家——社会”关系理论,综合政治学、社会学和经济学等学科知识进行探索。它想回答的核心问题是:中国的集体林权制度变革是表现为一种历史逻辑的断裂和置换,还是存在着某种一以贯之的逻辑?旨在通过这一探讨来拓展中国乡村研究的领域、理论和方法。在充分占有资料的基础上,它借助比较研究、历史研究等多种方法,站在中国现代化的立场和农民本位的立场,以国家介入、社会变迁、市场发育、农民行动与集体林权改革作为或明或暗的线索,来观察和思考改革开放以来闽中溪乡集体林权制度变革的实践及其内在机理。其中,集体林权制度改革的约束条件和变革逻辑是考察重点;国家作用、农民行为和乡村发展则是这一考察的最基本维度。通过此研究,它在为丰富20世纪后期中国农村土地制度改革历程的图像提供一个独特的、详尽的微观案例的同时,也表达了作者对这一历程本身的思考。从溪乡的经验来看,无论是林业“三定”改革、林业股份合作制改革,还是集体林权市场化运作、被称为“第三次土地改革”的集体林权再造,每一次改革都是对现实经济社会背景的策略性反应。一般而言,集体林权变革历程不仅是农民的林地权利回归与增长的展现,同时也是行政力量——主动或者被动——放权让利的过程,更是政府对林业发展的主导地位逐步淡出的表现。如果从农村改革整体推进和国家整合乡土社会的视角来看,农林非均衡发展结果的背后依然在一定程度上隐藏着均衡发展的理念和制度设置,只是由于各种因素的制约致使相同或者说类似的制度安排没有取得相同的成效而已。因此,集体林权制度改革也遵循着“均衡发展的制度性安排”的逻辑。研究发现,在中国,包括林地制度在内的土地制度不仅是经济制度、法制制度,更涉及政治制度,涉及到对国家的理解。产权问题实质上是一个政治问题。作为一项重要的农村政策及实践,集体林权制度改革是国家意志和能力在乡村社会的直接贯彻和生动展现。土地政策的调整可以起到平衡国家建设与农民关系的作用。在现代国家与乡村社会互动关系的理论视角下,国家介入集体林权制度改革,首先考虑的往往是国家战略需要而不是农民权益或者其它。正因为如此,国家宏观发展目标和意识形态偏好的变化不仅对集体林权改革影响十分巨大,还关系到农民权益和乡村发展状况。虽然作为社会主体的林农并非仅仅是作为某一制度安排和社会结构的影子消极地存在着,他们可以在制度与结构所给定的框架内进行思考、选择和行动,并最终给制度和结构造成影响,乃至于改变制度结构的特征与性状;但是相对于国家在制度供给中的强势地位和主导作用,无权者抵制的影响是很有限的。即使是一项以相关社会主体为需求导向的制度安排,也未必会产生预期效果。这其中一个重要因素是由于社会主体对以往相关改革实践的体验和记忆会起到一定制约作用。也就是说,社会主体的政策预期不仅仅指向未来,还可能指向过去;二者共同影响着公共政策的实践成效。当代中国的改革开放实质上是一个制度变革和构造的过程。虽然制度导入未必会促进乡村发展,但是伴随着国家转型,中国农村发展最引入注目的推动方式是基于“还权于民”理念的制度输入。在这个意义上,与其说中国农村的发展取决于制度改革,还不如说它取决于“政治”状况、取决于更好的政府治理。更多还原

【Abstract】 This is a thesis which applies political sociology to explain collective right of forests transformation. It chooses Xi village in central Fujian as the research unit and collective right of forests as the carrier and the breakthrough point, utilizes country - social analysis paradigm, integrates discipline knowledge such as politics, sociology and economic to research. It wants to answer the core question whether China’s collective right of forests institution’s change is one kind of historical logic break and the replacement or it follows some logic all the way. It’s purpose is to develop the Chinese village research’s domain, theory and method.On the basis of holding related materials and utilizing comparative research and historic research, it observes and thinks about the practice and mechanism of collective forest’s right reform after reform and opening-up of Xi town in central Fujian province in the view of China’s modernization process and farmer’s own department and follows the route of state intervence, society transformation, market growth, farmer action and collective forest’s right reform. In which, the restrictions and transforming logic is it’s primary study and it’s basic research dimensionality is state effect, farmer action and rural development. Through this research, it offers an uniqe and strict case for China’s rural land reform process in the later half of 21 Century and expresses author’s thinking.On Xi village’s experience, regardless of forestry’s "Three Fixes " reform, forestry stock cooperation system reform and the collective ownership of forests market operation, all can be called the rechange of third land reform and each reform is the strategical response to the present economic and social background. Generally speaking, the collective right of forests change course is not only fanner’s forest land right return and it’s growth, but also the process of administrative strength--initiative or passive - which releases authority, and shows that state’s dominant position is fading out gradually from forestry development.If looking from the whole rural reform advancement and the national conformity to rural society, the farming and forestry’s imblanced development is resulted from balanced development idea and the system establishment to some extent, for which, same or similar institutional arrangements have not brought the same progress because of different restricted factors. Therefore, the collective right of forests institution reform follows the balanced development institutional arrangement logic.Research discovered that in China, land institution including the forest land’s is not only the economic institution, also involves the legal institution and the political institution and even involves to the country’s understanding. In fact, the property right is a political issue. As an important policy and the practice for rural area, the collective right of forests institution reform is the direct implementation and the vivid development of the national will and ability in rural area. Land policy’s adjustment may balance national construction and farmer’s relation.In the theory of interaction between modern country and rural society, the national intervence in collective right of forests institution reform primaryly consides is not the farmer rights and interests or other but the national strategy needs. Because of this, the country macroscopic development targets and ideology change has not very only huge influence to the collective right of forests reform, but also relates the farmer rights and interests and the village development condition. That is to say, social bodies’s policy expectation not only relates the previous but the futhure. They influence the real practical effect of public policy.Although the owner of forest whose passive existence is merely not decided by institutional arrangements and the social structure, they may consoder, choice and move in the system and the structure assign in the frame and influence and change the system and the structure’s characteristic and the character. However, in contrast with nation’s dominat position in policy’s supplying, their resistance is very limited. Even if one social body needed-oriented insistution arrangment may not make prosperctive effect. An important factor for this problem is that participant’s practice experience and reacll may play restricted role. That is, the social main body’s policy anticipated will not only aim at the future, but also possibly aimed the past; The two joint influences community policy practice result.As a matter of fact, China’s reform and opening-up is the process of institution transformation and construction. Although the institution intervence may not advance rural development, the most attractive way to promote rural develpoment is the input of logos of redevolution power to people. To the extent that, it is better to say that China’s rural development is decided by politic condition and better governence rather than the institution reform.更多还原