L. D. BONI, Doctor of Economics

Far East Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Key words: Keywords: economic system, land system reform, family economy, peasant cooperation, agricultural enterprises, family farm, collective land ownership," division " of rights

The accelerated pace of industrialization and urbanization of the country has led to profound changes in the structure of production, labor, and income in the agricultural sector. The departure from agriculture of the majority of the young and healthy labor force to the city, the aging of the main army of rural producers, the emptying of villages, the strengthening of the trend of part-time work, the curtailment of commodity production in a number of districts, and the expansion of extensive production methods are recent trends in the Chinese countryside.

Under these conditions, the leadership of the People's Republic of China has developed and started implementing a large-scale program for the modernization of agriculture and a consistent transition to a new model of management in the agricultural sector.

It is estimated that in recent years, 1 young and healthy workforce has left the farm of each contracting yard*. The main workers in the field are old people, women and children, female labor in agriculture has become predominant, and the level of education of peasants is falling. It has become a common practice to attract outside services to support production.

Small-scale dispersed farming of contract yards, despite its low economic efficiency, in the context of a sharp increase in the cost of basic agricultural resources and a further drop in the comparative profitability of the industry, is not able to provide the necessary increase in production. As a result, in recent years, the growth rate of demand for food (grain) outstrips that of supply. Income from contract farming as the main source of household income is falling more and more. They fell from 82.4% in 1990 to 44.6% in 2012, and to 41% in ^2013.1

Limited terms of the land contract (i.e. the rights of the contract to manage on land), unclear property rights to land do not encourage long-term investments of producers in land. The weak protection of peasants ' property rights to land, the frequent arbitrary rejection of land during requisition and the underestimated amount of compensation for its loss, and the lack of ways to exercise their property rights to land, especially for migrant peasants, have caused growing social tension in the village.

The attitude of the new generation of peasants to the land and to farming has changed dramatically. According to a survey conducted in 2013 by the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, 70% of the surveyed farmers do not want to engage in agriculture at all. Most of the 30% who want to stay in the countryside prefer to engage in agriculture only to meet their personal needs, and not for the development of commodity production.² The public is increasingly concerned about the question: who will cultivate the land, produce food, and feed the country? Accelerating the modernization of agriculture, the problem of changing the model of its development has become an urgent objective necessity.

MODERNIZATION OF THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM MECHANISM

The problem of transition to a new model of agricultural development was first identified at the 3rd plenum of the CPC Central Committee of the 17th convocation (2008), which put forward the strategic task of modernizing agriculture with Chinese characteristics and, accordingly, the task of innovative renewal of the mechanism of the economic system in agriculture as a key link in modernization.

The current basic economic system of China's agriculture is a two-stage structure based on collective ownership of agricultural land.

* With the transition to the family form of management on a contract basis during the reform (1978-1983), the peasant farm became the main production unit in China's agriculture. The land in the village is owned by a collective economic organization, of which almost all the peasants of the village are members. On the basis of the law, based on the calculation "by eaters", land is assigned to them on the rights of a contract that gives the yard (peasant family) the right of economic independence for a certain period (editor's note).

** Property right - the object of property rights, the subjective rights legally assigned to peasants within the framework of a contract related to the ownership, use and disposal of collective land as its "collective owners" (editor's note).

land and linking the "dispersed" and "unified" or family farm of a contract yard (1st stage) as the basis of the system, and collective farming (2nd stage). It should be noted that today the collective stage of the system in the majority of rural areas is poorly developed or does not work at all.

The decision of the 3rd plenum in this regard emphasized that the existing economic system in the countryside "corresponds to the system of the socialist market economy, corresponds to the peculiarities of agricultural production, is the cornerstone of the party's policy in the countryside, and it must be preserved without fail."³. At the same time, the plenum set the task "to promote innovations in the mechanism of the economic system in agriculture, to accelerate the change of the management model in the agrosphere" ⁴.

An important step of the 3rd plenum of the 17th convocation was also the permission to put contract land into circulation (the right of contract management*) in accordance with the law, the principle of voluntariness, retribution and compliance with the "three not" (not to change the agricultural purpose of the land, not to change the form of collective ownership, not to violate the contract right of peasants).

The 18th CPC National Congress (2012), followed by the 3rd Plenum of the CPC Central Committee of the 18th convocation (2013), put on the agenda the strategic task of accelerating the deployment of agricultural modernization and consistently moving to a new model of management in the agrosphere. A new model should be created by innovatively updating the existing basic economic system, bringing it in line with the requirements of the development of modern agriculture, stimulating its intensification, specialization, organization, and socialization. ⁵ Thus, we are talking about a qualitative change in the current system, giving it properties that can transfer the arrows of development of the agricultural economy to modern rails, on the way to a new technological order.

The essence and content of such a qualitatively updated economic system of the future are presented in the decision of the 3rd plenum of the 18th convocation: "Accelerate the creation of a new type of agricultural management system, maintain the basic position of the family economy, promote innovative renewal of agricultural management methods, ensure the joint development of the family economy, collective economy, cooperative economy, by type of rural enterprises and other forms of management. Resolutely preserve the right of collective ownership of land in the countryside, protect the peasants ' right to contract management of land on the basis of law, and develop and strengthen the collective economy. To stabilize contractual land relations in the countryside and not change them for a long time " ⁶.

The main statement in the content of the task - "to ensure the joint development of the family economy, collective economy, cooperative economy, economy according to the type of rural enterprises and other forms of management in agriculture" - is a completely new formulation of the problem, which actually means the transition from one form of farming-the family farm of the contract yard within the framework of the current economic system to a variety of economic forms, including farms of different forms of ownership.

In the new type of economic system, in addition to the family farm (contract yard), which plays the main role, all other economic entities represent new forms of farms that are characteristic of modern agricultural production. This means that they should become a new driving force for further development, introduce modern factors of production and management methods to agriculture, and provide incentives for the development of modern productive forces.

As for the nature of ownership of new economic forms, along with the family contract economy (considered a form of realization of collective property, its lower level in the agrosphere) and the cooperative economy (which is referred to as a "semi-socialist" form of ownership), the updated system includes a new form - "agricultural enterprises", which actually represents farms headed by the city council. private industrial and commercial capital (including foreign capital, such as partially in the processing of agricultural products).

At the same time, the basis of the future economic system retains the essential features of the current one - the right of collective ownership of land, contract relations, family farming as the main form of management. Thus, we can talk about the transition to a new type of economic system, which is a mixed agrarian economy, in which the leading role of the public sector remains.

* The right to use land, which in the conditions of the contract form of farming in the agricultural sector of the country was called " the right of contract management "(approx. ed.).

(collective form) property ownership. This is the system framework of the updated economic model in the agricultural sector, put forward by the 3rd plenum of the CPC Central Committee of the 18th convocation.

THE BASIS FOR THE FORMATION OF A NEW TYPE OF ECONOMIC SYSTEM

The land system is the basis of the economic system in agriculture, and accordingly, its innovative renewal leads to a deeper reform of the existing economic system in the countryside as a whole. According to the Document of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council of the People's Republic of China No. 1 for 2014, the following areas of land reform in the Chinese countryside are identified:: 1) reform of the system of property rights of peasants to land in the countryside, i.e. the right of contract farming by the peasant household; 2) creation of a "single land market" for construction purposes in the city and village; 3) reform of the land system for residential buildings of peasants in the countryside and improvement of its management system; 4) reform of the land requisition system in the countryside and the creation of a system of distribution of income from the increment of the resulting added value of land.

These areas of reform actually affect not only the problems of forming a new type of economic system in the agricultural sector. These reforms are also of national significance, being closely linked to the solution of such major strategic tasks of the country as modernizing agriculture, changing the model of economic development, moving to a new type of urbanization, integrating urban and rural development, the problem of food security and, of course, the task of fully building a middle-income society (hsiao-kang).

At the same time, it is obvious that all these reforms concern only one side of the property right to land - the right to use, leaving the right of collective ownership of land unshakable. Each direction requires a separate study. Here we should focus on the first direction of reforms, which is most directly related to the innovative renewal of the main economic system in agriculture.

The change in the structure of the property right to land, in other words, the solution of the problem of the right of contract management on land in the countryside, is called a precondition, a prerequisite for the innovative formation of a new type of farming system in the agrosphere. Its essence is as follows. Before the economic reform (1978), the land system in the Chinese countryside was a unity of ownership of land and the right to manage (use it) on it. The current basic two-stage system of agricultural management was formed during the reform on the basis of dividing the property right to land into two parts: the right to own and the right to use or manage. This system was called "contract management rights" (chengbao jining Quan), when the right of collective ownership passed to the collective*, and the right of contract management-to the peasant.

According to the figurative expression of the Chinese scholar Dan Guoying, a piece of the right of ownership was "chewed off", handing it over to the peasant household, which, on the basis of a contract agreement, received the right to own and dispose of land, while still remaining collective property.⁷

Nevertheless, this "separation of two rights" allowed preserving the right of collective ownership of land and ensuring the transition to a system of contract farming, giving farmers a relatively independent right to own and use collective land and run a family farm on it, to increase the intensity of labor, and to increase incomes. This was the biggest systemic "breakthrough" in rural economic reform.

The practice of subsequent years showed that such an economic system contributed to increasing the material interest of peasants in the development of production, protecting land resources, and maintaining stability in a growing market. It allowed us to take into account the interests of all parties - the state-

* That is, to a collective economic organization, whose members are all peasant contract yards of the village, and which represents a form of implementation of a two-stage management system in the agrosphere (approx. ed.).

va, collective, farmers-producers ⁸. Ultimately, this two-stage system of management stimulated a sharp increase in the production and income of peasants, allowing them to solve the problem of food in the country in a short time.

The preservation and strengthening of collective land ownership in the Chinese countryside is the basis of the agricultural policy of the Chinese leadership. The importance of preserving the right of collective ownership of land, in turn, was dictated by a number of important objective and subjective factors.

In the first years of economic reform, the main strategic task was to raise production, feed the people (ren ren ye fan chu - "so that everyone has food"). The mobilization of the labor activity of millions of peasants to boost production could only be achieved by equalizing the distribution of land "according to consumers" between households on the basis of a contract. And to solve the problem of the mechanism of mobilization of productive activity of peasants, ensuring the social function of land as the main means of maintaining the existence of peasants, it was possible only on the basis of collective ownership of land, but not private, according to the experience of Chinese history. ⁹

The second equally important reason was the need to prevent the redistribution of land resources in the interests of the minority in the market conditions and the inevitable de-colonization of the poorest and very significant part of the peasantry and, as a result, the aggravation of social contradictions in the countryside, the violation of stability in society.¹⁰

Finally, in the context of expanding market relations, it was important to preserve and prevent the national arable wedge from being pulled apart as the basis of social production and the solution to the country's food problem.

And, of course, the most important thing - the preservation of public ownership (its collective form) of the main means of production in the countryside, primarily land, corresponded to the general line of the country's leadership to build socialism with the specifics of China.

It should be emphasized that the principle of "separation of two rights", first implemented during the economic reform in rural areas (1978-1983), was later actively used in the reform of state-owned enterprises*, related to the introduction of a joint-stock management system and the creation of a corporate system11.

CREATING A MECHANISM FOR FORMING A NEW TYPE OF ECONOMIC SYSTEM

Recently, the reform of the land system in the Chinese countryside has faced a similar problem - the need to once again resort to the practice of dividing property rights, to move from the "division of two rights" to the "division of three rights". This need is already motivated by new factors.

With the acceleration of industrialization and urbanization, when a significant amount of surplus agricultural labor has moved from agriculture to other areas of production and to the city (up to 263 million people in 2013), problems have arisen in the implementation of contract management rights. The part of the labor force that has left agriculture still retains the social status of a peasant, but no longer works in agriculture. And although it still remains a subject of contract management on collective land, in fact (or mostly) it is no longer such.

As a result, in the conditions of increasing rates of circulation of collective land in the countryside, the practice of breaking the right of contract farming into two parts is expanding day by day: for the right to land contract and the right to manage land. Although at the end of December 2012, according to statistics, 270 million mu (18.09 million ha) of rural land was already in circulation, or ²¹% of the total contract arable land in the country12, there is no such division in the current land legislation, although in real life it exists. There was a need for official recognition of the separation of these two rights.

In general, during the years of reform, the problem of providing the population with food was mostly solved. However, the large increase in the rural population, the crushing of land plots in peasant households under the conditions of an equalized distribution of land "by eaters" with a shortage of arable land, on the one hand, and on the other - a large - scale outflow of agricultural labor from agriculture to other areas and the city under the influence of urbanization and industrialization-led to profound structural changes and new trends in the development of macro - and micro-level economies.

At the micro level, changes, as mentioned above, affected not only the structure of the family economy (an active part of the labor force left it, the main employees were the elderly, women and children): family contract farming ceased to be the main source of income in the total income of the peasant household. At the same time, the significance of the functions of land in the countryside has changed: its importance as the main means of maintaining existence and increasing income has decreased, while its property function and the function of protecting arable land have simultaneously increased. ¹³ Accordingly, the attitude of peasants to the property right to land, to the ways of its implementation (hence the requirements for accelerating the market circulation of land, to the efficiency of its circulation, etc.) is changing. more protection of property rights to land, participation in the distribution of income from the increase in the added value of land, especially during requisition, etc.). This, in turn, requires changing the boundaries, nature and structure of property law, i.e. giving its system more flexibility, diversity of forms, expanding the boundaries of transactions with property law, greater guarantees for its protection, and finally, the effectiveness of transactions with this right.¹⁴

It is precisely these objective changes and the requirements for changing the system of property rights to land that have put in place in the Government of the Russian Federation.-

* This work began several years ago on a pilot basis in a number of selected provinces and districts. After specifying the size and position of the contract plot of the peasant (as a rule, it consists of several separate pieces (up to 5-7 or more), each family (yard) is issued three official documents-certificates confirming: 1) the right of contract management on this land; 2) the right to use a plot of land under a residential structure; 3) the right of ownership of a residential structure (house) (editor's note).

The issue of "dividing the three rights"is on the agenda. The task is to solve the most acute and stressful problem in the countryside - the problem of fair regulation of land relations: instead of administrative regulation of the size of contract land "by consumers", to make a transition to more efficient redistribution and placement of arable land through market circulation on the basis of law, thus providing a new mechanism for mobilizing the material interest of peasants in development and the expansion of production, in its modernization.

According to the country's leadership, such a new mechanism should be a new system of property rights to land. As indicated in the CPC Central Committee Document No. 1 for 2013, it is necessary to "create a clear, competent, open to land circulation system of property rights of the collective in the countryside-an organic requirement to stimulate the vital forces of the development of agriculture and the countryside" ¹⁵.

SEPARATION OF THE "THREE RIGHTS"

In response to the challenge of the times, the Government decided to "create a renewed economic system based on the separation of three rights: collective property rights, contract rights, and business rights." ¹⁶ As a result of this "division" of the right of contract farming, the right of management was separated and became relatively independent, which the owner of the contract yard can transfer to another yard for a fee, i.e. for a certain remuneration, in the process of land circulation. At the same time, the right of the contract does not participate in the appeal and remains with the contractor's yard.

This step plays an extremely important role in stabilizing the contract rights of the peasant household. Until recently, cases of loss of contract rights were quite frequent in the course of disordered land circulation and the practice of local authorities in relation to peasants who were forced to give up contract land in favor of developing a large-scale economy. This caused serious concern among the peasants and hindered the circulation of land to close relatives and acquaintances within the village. Accordingly, the goal of deepening the reform of the property law structure has been put forward: "to exercise the right of collective ownership of land, to stabilize the right to contract, to revive the right to manage" ¹⁷.

It should be noted that in the three most important official documents (the decision of the 3rd plenum of the CPC Central Committee of the 18th convocation, Documents of the CPC Central Committee No. 1 for 2013 and 2014), which considered the issues of agricultural modernization and the creation of the main economic system in the country's agriculture, as well as the reform of the land system in the Chinese countryside as their basis, the term "separation" itself and direct clear wording are missing. The installation of the course "Separation of three rights" contains only some fragments of it, which makes it very difficult to recreate a complete and correct picture of these reforms.

Here is how the reform of the property law system is presented in the CPC Central Committee Document No. 1 for 2014: "... stabilization of contract relations for a long time, strengthening the contract right of the peasant household and reviving the right to manage on contract land, granting peasants the rights of ownership, use, income generation, land circulation, as well as the right to pledge and sureties"¹⁸.

And only in the materials and comments covering the work of the National Meeting of the CPC Central Committee on Rural Work (December 2013), one can find a direct statement on the "division of three rights". A well-known agricultural scientist and deputy Head of the Department of Agriculture. Chen Yiwen, head of the Rural Affairs Department of the CPC Central Committee, writes the following about the" division of three rights " in his article: "This time, the meeting on rural work spent a lot of time and effort to explain the" separation of the three rights " (property rights, contract rights, and business rights), to demand the implementation of land ownership rights, the stabilization of contract rights, and the revival of business rights... First of all, the peasant household has taken the position of contractor (chen Bao zhe) on the collective land of the village, which no one else can replace. But this does not mean that if a peasant has a contract, he must necessarily conduct economic activities on the land... Leaving the land for the city, he does not lose his position as a contractor, he transfers only the right to manage the land to others. " ¹⁹

The new course of reform of the property system includes a number of areas for strengthening and stabilizing contract law and contract relations as a basis and an important condition for the successful "separation of the three rights". On the one hand, the country's leadership has confirmed its determination to adhere to the right of collective ownership of land.²⁰ On the other hand, it has stepped up extensive and painstaking work to clarify and register farmers ' property rights to land (with the issuance of certificates), giving it a policy of implementing a strict system of arable land protection and preserving the minimum required size of arable land (the so-called red line) of 120 million hectares, as a guarantee of food security.

The decision is aimed at strengthening the role and significance of the family land contract system, according to which the right to receive a collective land contract is now linked to the status of a "member of a collective economic organization". In this regard, the CPC Central Committee Document No. 1 of 2014 states: "Resolutely preserving the basic position of the family economy, collective land in the countryside should be leased only to peasant families who are members of a collective economic organization, no other subjects can replace the right of land contract of a peasant family; regardless of how the right of the contractor is applied. the right to contract collective land always belongs to the peasant family " 21.

In the conditions of" division of rights", the increasing importance of the right to contract is manifested mainly in 2 aspects: the first is obtaining the right to contract. To get a land contract right, a certain condition is now required - you must have the status of a member of a collective economic organization. Second - implementation

contract rights. In the conditions of "division of rights" , the subject of the contract receives property income through the assignment of the business right.

The allocation of the right to manage contract land through the "division of three rights" led to a revival of economic activity in the agricultural sector, stimulated the circulation of land on the open market and its transfer to new economic entities, the development of large-scale production.

This was also facilitated by the granting of large property rights to the peasants: the confirmation of the right of ownership, use, income generation, and circulation of land already held by the peasants (in relation to contract land), and the allocation of new rights to them by the 3rd plenum-the right of pledge suretys22, which is very important in the context of deepening market relations. In fact, it is allowed to hand over the right to farm on contract land as collateral to fund organizations in order to receive funds, as a result of which the right to receive income from the property rights of peasants is realized.

"Reviving the right to farm based on the preservation of collective ownership of land in the village, while stabilizing the right to contract the yard, is an important innovation in deepening the reform of the Chinese rural economic system," said Feng Haifa, head of the Rural Management Sector of the CPC Central Committee's Policy Research Division.

The emergence of a relatively independent right to manage a farm makes it possible for its subject, without affecting the right to contract for land and the right to receive income, to pledge the right to manage and receive financial support for the development of agricultural production. Finally, the "separation of three rights" makes it possible to provide a flexible system mechanism for farmers who have moved to the city to withdraw from the right to manage on contract land24.

This is how Zhang Hongyu, Head of the Rural Economic System and Management Department at the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, assesses the role of this innovation: "The regularization of three relations - land ownership rights, contract rights, and management rights-was a major breakthrough in the theory and practice of rural reform. The separation of the right of management from the right of contract management promotes (on the basis of the stabilization of the right of collective ownership and the right to contract the yard) the revival of the right of management on land, the development of large-scale farming, and the acceleration of the formation of a new type of economic system in agriculture"²⁵.

It is also important that the "splitting" of the property right to land and transactions with it can not only give a variety of forms of manifestation of the family economy, but also create the possibility of their close interweaving with many service sector entities. Therefore, family farming and large-scale farming can coexist quite consistently with the organizational forms of modern production26, which creates favorable conditions for the joint development of many forms of farming within the new economic system.

Thus, the family economy is considered to be the basis of a new type of economic system, because all new forms of farms are formed mainly on the basis of the circulation of the right of management assigned by the contract yard from its right to conduct a contract economy. Two new theoretical guidelines for deepening rural land reform- "the basic state of the family economy" and "the joint development of many forms of management" - are not only closely interrelated, but also represent two complementary halves of the emerging economic model of a new type. Thus, due to the change of the subject of the business right, a kind of system mechanism is created for the formation of new forms of farming based on the division of the property right of the family economy, and by and large, a mechanism for creating a new type of economic system.

However, as Chinese scientists emphasize, in the future a more solid and substantial confirmation of the guarantees of economic law for new economic entities should be created in order to preserve their stable development. It is no coincidence that Chinese President Xi Jinping during his trip to the prov. In the summer of 2013, Hubei emphasized the need to study in depth the issue of "the relationship of the three land rights" while deepening rural reform and improving the basic economic system in the agrosphere.²⁷

(The ending follows)

¹ Zhongguo nongcun jingji xingshi fen-xi yu yueze. Nongcun liupishu. 2013-2014 (Analysis and forecast of the state of China's agricultural economy for 2013-2014 Green Book of the village). Beijing. Shehui kexue wen xiang chubanshe. 2014. p. 203.

² http://rdi.cass.cn/show_News.aspid. 35124

³ People's Daily. 20.10.2008.

⁴ Ibid.

⁵ 3rd Plenum of the CPC Central Committee of the 18th convocation -http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2013 - 11/15/con-tent_2528179.htm/

⁶ Ibid.

^{Dan Goin.} 7 Analysis of the impact of the land system reform on the growth of peasant incomes // Nongmin zengshou wentidy lilun tan-so yu shizheng fenxi (Theoretical searches and evidence-based analysis of the problem of growth of peasant incomes). Beijing. Jingji guanli chubanshe, 2007, p. 188.

⁸ Nuncun jingji biange dy sytun ka-ocha (Study of the systemic evolution of the agrarian economy). Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe. Beijing, 1984, pp. 268-272.

^{Chen Jianbo.} 9 Struktura upravleniya kollektivnoi sobstvennosti na zemli-problema, vzaimodeistvuyushchaya uchrezhdeniya [The structure of collective land ownership management-a problem that again requires attention]. Zhong'go nongcun zhengce baogao tiaocha (Analysis of reports of the agrarian policy of China). Shanghai yuandong chubanshe. 2008. pp. 257-258.

¹⁰ Zhongguo nongcun jingji (Agricultural Economy of China). 2011, N 4. P. 6.

Ostrovsky A.V. 11 Kitayskaya model perehoda k rynochnoi ekonomike [Chinese model of Transition to a market economy]. Moscow, IDV RAS, 2007, p. 29. M, IDV RAN. 2007. S. 29.)

¹² Nongmin Daily. 18.11.2013.

^{Chen Jianbo.} 13 Decree. Op. p. 256.

¹⁴ Ibid.

¹⁵ http://rdi.cass.cn/show_News.aspid. 33987

¹⁶ http://rdi.cass.cn/show_News.asp7id. 35075;35032

¹⁷ Ibid.

¹⁸ http://rdi.cass.cn/show_News.asp7id. 35075

¹⁹ http://rdi.cass.cn/show_News.asp7id. 35115

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ http://finance/people/com/cn/n/ 2013/1225/cl004 - 23939020.html/

²² http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2013 - 11/15/ conten__2528179.htm/

²³ Nongmin Daily (Peasant Newspaper). 18.11.2013.

²⁴ Ibid.

²⁵ Nongmin Daily. 19.02.2014.

²⁶ Ibid.

²⁷ Ibid., 18.12.2013.

Permanent link to this publication: