土地征收法律中的公众参与机制研究

研究目的：以公众参与理论为基础,分析我国土地征收法律制度中公众参与机制的不足,借鉴国外经验提出进一步完善的建议。研究方法：比较法和演绎法。研究结果：土地征收决策要充分吸纳公众参与,利害关系人和其他公众的参与程度应当不同;目前我国土地征收中的公众参与不足主要体现在未能充分听取公众意见和进行专家论证,听证方式适用范围狭窄及具体规定不明确,成片土地征收中的协商内容局限,以及社会稳定风险评估中的公众参与方式不明确。研究结论：我国土地征收公众参与机制完善的重点是充分听取公众意见,加强专家论证,加强听证方式的作用并进一步明确规定,将协商方式扩展应用到成片土地征收中的补偿安置决策,并在社会稳定风险评估中建立明确的公众参与制度。     

土地征收法律制度的公共利益反思

公共利益是土地征收法律制度的首要问题,《土地管理法》应当明确公共利益的法律定义和分类,限制行政机关的土地征收权力,保障被征收土地农民的权利。土地征收制度的公共利益规范缺少明确的法律定义,存在分类和范围的逻辑混乱,本次修正案既没有化解兜底条款扩张立法的危险,也未能克服公权制衡与私权救济的虚空。国家耕地资源匮乏、公共利益解释宽泛化、宪法财产权保护表象化是土地征收制度的现实挑战。土地征收的公共利益理应排除开发园区、成片开发等地方政府各类名目的经营性活动,经济发展产生的各种红利、缓解社会矛盾的政策目标均不是公共利益,兜底条款也应予舍弃。公共利益的规范现状和现实挑战共同决定我国必须实行最严格的土地征收制度,在最狭小的意义上确立公共利益的定义和分类。全国人大常委会再次修法前可以通过立法解释暂时缓解相应规则的空缺。     

土地征收成片开发方案编制的实践困境及对策

本文在总结土地征收成片开发方案编制实践困境及形成原因的基础上,提出坚持公共利益需求为先、做好规划编制和各类调查等基础工作、落实公众参与以及加强监管等对策建议。     

关于《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例（征求意见稿）》的几点思考

研究目的：通过对公共利益界定、征收补偿和征收程序3方面内容的分析,为《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例（征求意见稿）》的修订完善提供有益借鉴。研究方法：比较研究法,个案研究法。研究结果：房屋征收体现的并不是简单的公私利益冲突问题,条文列举的公共利益类型并不一定就代表公共利益;公平补偿仍将是房屋征收补偿的努力目标;公众参与程序设计存在缺陷。研究结论：《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例（征求意见稿）》在一些直接影响房屋征收法律制度本质的关键环节上实现了突破。     

论土地征收中的公共利益

公共利益制度是土地征收中的一项重要制度,由于现行法律对公共利益的内涵外延缺乏明确规定,使得土地征收中公共利益的判断主体、判断标准十分模糊,界定程序、补偿标准不尽合理.应尽快完善土地征收中的公共利益制度.具体措施包括:(1)采用"列举和概括式"模式界定公共利益;(2)完善公共利益审查、救济程序和征收补偿制度;(3)确立被征收方买回权制度.     

集体土地征收的程序规制

公共利益是判定土地征收是否具有正当性、合法性的标准,然而在集体土地的征收中,征收被申请人对公共利益的认定没有程序性权利,我国现行法律对土地补偿费、安置补助费的程序规制也有不足之处。为了制止征地权的恣意行使,应赋予征地被申请人对公共利益认定的程序性权利,理清征地当事人、土地行政主管机关、人民政府在征地中的关系,使征地当事人的法律地位平等,在征地纠纷的裁决中应实行回避制度、案卷排他制度。     

土地征收过程中农民平等权的保护

土地征收是国家为了公共利益,依法定程序强制取得农民集体所有的土地,并且给予一定补偿的行为。平等权作为一项宪法权利理应对土地征收制度有所拘束,宪法平等权贯穿整个土地征收过程的始终,在不同阶段与不同的权利相结合产生特定的内容。在我国目前的土地征收过程中,还存在着很多侵犯农民平等权的现象,具体表现在不平等的征地参与权、不平等的征地补偿权、不平等的事后救济权。土地征收过程中农民平等权的实现包括实体权利上的平等和程序权利上的平等,具体包括明确农民在征地中的地位、在补偿中实现同地同价原则、保障农民平等的知情权和平等地获得救济权。     

土地征收的新公众参与边界讨论——基于台湾典型土地征收案例的分析

研究目的:分析比较公众参与在土地征收中的制度状态与实际操作,探讨土地征收程序中公众参与机制的构建与操作边界。研究方法:结合案例分析和制度经济学的理论方法,以台湾典型土地征收案中的公众参与为案例,建立由主体边界、权利边界、途径边界三要素组成的"新"公众参与边界分析框架。研究结果:结合公众参与制度在实际执行中的内生缺陷,解释现有公众参与机制下的冲突形成与演变路径,在微观层面提出并细化了新公众参与的制度分析评估框架。研究结论:制度化、可操作化土地征收的公众参与边界,建立利益相关者合作博弈决策机制,允许一定的弹性空间,有利于实现公共参与的阶梯式进步。     

中国土地征收程序模式之转型：从管理主义到协商合作

研究目的:通过对中国不同时期土地征收程序制度的梳理,探寻其制度特点及发展趋势,找到符合经济社会发展需求的程序模式。研究方法:规范分析法、历史分析法、归纳总结法。研究结果:中国土地征收程序制度整体上强调管理、注重效率,政府主导各个程序环节,被征收人主体地位不被重视,表现出浓厚的管理主义色彩。研究结论:管理主义型土地征收程序制度已不适应当代社会发展需求,应努力构建协商合作型土地征收程序制度,需要在土地征收各个环节加强被征收人主体地位、信息公开、协商沟通、说明理由、权利救济等制度建设,才能更好地实现土地征收中的公平正义。     

台湾区段征收制度检讨及启示

研究目的:梳理中国台湾区段征收的发展历程,明确其基本构造及面临的问题,以期对成片开发征收有所启示。研究方法:规范分析法、文献研究法。研究结果:(1)区段征收先后经历涨价归公时期与抵价地时期,成为以目的要件、程序要件、土地分配要件为特别构造的征收形态;(2)区段征收的本质是征收权的扩张,面临公益性及必要性不足、程序正当性不足、土地分配适法性等问题。研究结论:以区段征收为鉴,成片开发征收实施性立法应秉持严格限制态度,聚焦公益性及必要性评估与审查、程序改进、土地分配等核心环节。     

《土地管理法》成片开发征收标准的体系阐释

研究目的:阐明《土地管理法》成片开发征收标准的核心要旨及其体系构成。研究方法:规范分析法,文献分析法。研究结果:成片开发标准应当以促成公益目的实现为核心要义,并秉持系统思维,既要明确其面积范围、用地构成及类型、补偿方式等基本构成要素,还应建立征收权行使之事前、事中、事后全过程动态监控机制。研究结论:成片开发征收入法本身具有权宜性,待土地要素市场化配置机制更加健全,成片开发征收完成特定历史时期使命之后应退出公益征收范围。     

Effects of the private land acquisition process and costs on mining enterprises before mining operation activities in Turkey

According to the mining legislation in Turkey, different permits must be obtained from the authorized institutions or to reach an agreement with a private landowner according to whether there is private or public land for mining. If the landowner and the mining investor do not agree, the expropriation is conducted if the public interest is observed in the mining operation. There is no doubt that the rights of landowners should be adequately ensured by legislation. However, there are cases where land ownership problems cannot be solved in areas that overlap with mining areas and are subject to private ownership. The expropriation permit process may sometimes last 1.5–2 years. Therefore, mining enterprises are unable to start production activities and risk losing their investments. Especially for the reasons related to private landowners and experts, private land acquisition/expropriation costs for mining activities are quite high compared with the market.To identify and produce solutions to the legal problems in Turkey, in May, June, and July of 2018, a survey study was conducted to ask mining enterprises about their problems in private land acquisition and the costs for them. The mining sector in Turkey expects that all applicable legislations will be proposed in a manner that does not waste the time of the mining investor and that the private land acquisition/expropriation costs will be reduced in a manner that does not pose a risk of mining investment. In this respect, the ratio of expropriation costs to the mining investment amount (MIA) was analyzed according to the different mineral groups and the social and economic development level of the cities where mining was conducted. Based on this research, legislation practices also have negative effects on mining enterprises, on the expropriation costs and the expropriation permit processes.     

土地征收中的社会稳定风险评估——以广州新客站周边土地储备项目二期征地为例

土地征收作为一种重大事项,必须进行社会稳定风险评估。依据风险评估的有关要求,以广州某征地项目为例,介绍了社会稳定风险评估报告的主要内容和程序、方法,风险评估结果表明:新客站征地拆迁项目总体社会稳定风险较小,但部分内容仍然可能诱发风险,因此需制定详细的预案,注意加强对风险的防范。     

基于市场决定理念下的征地补偿标准确定方法研究 ——以甘肃省张掖市城市规划区为例

研究目的：针对现行征地补偿标准确定方法的弊端,探索符合各地实际的征地补偿标准确定方法。研究方法：社会调查法,逻辑推理法,实证研究法。研究结果：按照征地后用途不同采用不同的确定方法能够提高征地补偿标准,保障农民权益,充分体现土地价值,具有可操作性。研究结论：公益性用地采用地价构成法,非公益性用地采用基准地价反算法,从不同角度测算征地补偿标准切实可行。     

对完善中国现行征地制度的思考

研究目的:分析中国现行征地制度,提出完善建议.研究方法:文献资料法和比较分析法.研究结果:(1)2004年宪法修正案区分了土地征收和土地征用两个概念,但与海外国家和地区相比,中国在相关的部门法律与实践中仍然存在征地目的不明确、补偿范围过小、补偿标准过低等问题.(2)提出明确规定公共利益的范围,适时、适当调整征地补偿标准,推行征地制度的市场化运作等建议.研究结论:中国现行征地制度需要进一步改革.     

农村集中居住政策风险演化与因应——基于苏北G集中社区的扎根研究

农村集中居住是我国乡村振兴战略背景下地方政府推进的一项重大政策,在促进城乡融合发展的同时应着力防范化解政策执行中的潜在风险。文章选择以江苏省北部地区实践和下辖G集中居住社区民众为研究对象,采用扎根理论研究方法,挖掘并提炼该项政策实施背后的系列风险要素,包括土地风险、生计风险、心理风险和地方管理风险。研究表明,这些风险的现实存在对农村集中居住政策的实施构成了隐性影响,其衍生和演化反映了我国城镇化加速背景下涉农政策运行的复杂性特征,需要地方政府予以重视和回应。以农村可持续发展为指引,尊重农民主体意愿、健全补偿机制、完善公共服务与保障供给、强化产业配套是化解农村集中居住政策风险的关键施政方向。     

征地制度伦理定位在“社会主义”和“市场经济”

文章指称的“征地”主要限定在土地权属的永久性变更,即国家利用公权力,为公共利益需要,依法将农民集体所有的土地转为国家所有并给与补偿的行为,也称国家征收。探讨征地制度的伦理定位是制度建设的思想基础,也是实践理性的边界。近年来我国征地问题上之所以矛盾频发越演越烈,一个重要因素是征地制度中的伦理定位偏差,催生了征地中的非理性和非合理化行为,直接挑战了主流良心、社会公理和国家目标。21世纪是我国工业化、城市化的加速期,必然对土地有较大的需求。因此,探讨征地的当代伦理和符合社会主义市场经济的本质要求的征地伦理定位,是土地管理法制建设的理性基础。     

Zoning plan-based legal confiscation without expropriation in Turkey in light of ECHR decisions

The right to property is a fundamental human right guaranteed by international conventions. In countries like Turkey, where the principles of private ownership apply, this right is guaranteed by laws. The right to property may be restricted by law only in the case of public interest. Nevertheless, the right of ownership of immovable property can be transferred to the public authority only with payment. However, in some cases, a person's immovable property may be de facto converted into a public facility without expropriation. This process is called “confiscation without expropriation”. This concept was introduced into the Turkish Legal System in 1956 by the unauthorized conversion of immovable property for a road. Today, especially in planned areas, a different type of confiscation without expropriation is often seen. Zoning plans are known to be public tools that reorganize properties in public interest. However, the uncertainty in the implementation process of these plans negatively affects the owners of parcels reserved for public use in the zoning plan. This situation is defined in terminology as “legal confiscation without expropriation”. In this study, the subject has been discussed in the light of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decisions and Turkish judicial decisions, and which institutions are responsible for what kind of zoning functions within zoning plans have been investigated. Official (ex officio) applications and voluntary applications have been compared. Conceptual illustrations on the subject have been prepared. According to the results obtained from the study, it has been stated that all public spaces in the zoning plan are not subject to legal confiscation. Due to their location or characteristics, protected areas, unsuitable geological areas and parcels remaining in agricultural areas can be allocated as public spaces in the zoning plan. In such a case, it is not possible to say that there is legal confiscation. In terms of plan classification, there may be legal confiscation in areas if only a 1/1000-scale implementary zoning plan is in practice. As a solution for legal confiscation, land and real estate arrangements should be made ex officio and without delay. In addition to this, alternative models are also needed. Otherwise, public institutions will be subject to severe financial burdens. Some of the proposals include: granting construction right to zone cadastral parcels affecting public facility areas, or granting the right to construct all cadastral parcels in the plan in specified amounts and also developing a zoning right transfer system.     

How do planners manage risk in alternative land development models? An institutional analysis of land development in the Netherlands

While risk is a key concern in property development, it tends to be discussed by planners only relative to the effects of regulatory planning on private sector risk. Yet planning encompasses a broad range of activities that go beyond its function of regulating private sector development. Despite active approaches to land development being commonly used across different planning contexts, frameworks for analysing public sector strategies to address risk are rarely discussed. We attempt to redress this deficit by investigating the actions of public sector development actors with regard to risk across three different land development models: public land development, land development by public-private partnership, and land readjustment. Using recent Dutch experience, we conduct an institutional analysis of each land development model in order to highlight the effects of alternative governance structures on risk as a particular transaction attribute, from the perspective of public sector planning. Our findings indicate the importance of highlighting the role of public risk in alternative models of land development where there may be a tendency to adopt institutional arrangements without due regard to this, and point to possible future applications of institutional analysis at the particular, rather than the general, level.