Legal Problems Of Urban Housing Demolition

January21,2011, the State Council promulgated the "state-owned land on thehousing levy and Compensation Ordinance", the often-criticized "Urban HousingDemolition Management Regulations" withdrew from the stage of history. Newregulation has multiple progress, lawmakers tried to find out the point of thesafeguard of public interest and the defending of private rights. Especially, it’s thefirst time that they pointed out that the forced relocation must be in the public interestneed,and they defined the scope of public interests firstly. Unfortunately, in this yearafter the birth of the new regulation, the vicious demolition have not been reduced. Amore sensational case is the starting point of this paper: malignant demolition event inYihuang Fuzhou Jiangxi.This paper argues that, although the clarity of the public interests is indeedsignificant, but it not the best remedy to solve the current housing Demolition. Firstof all, to clarify the standard of public interests is not necessarily able to dispel thedemolition of a conflict of interest, because either the public or commercialdemolition, will involve the demolition parties interests, public interests standardclearly defined is not equal to safely coordinate the interests of both sides; Secondly,to establish the public interest identification mechanism is a very idealized picture;Finally, even if the whole society formed a understanding of consensus on the publicinterest, we also have to face such a problem: deal with the demolition mixed with thepublic interests and commercial interests. In the social background of the transition toa market economic system from a planned, conflict of demolition is a inevitablephenomenon caused by the transformation of the main interest from single tomultiple.The the essence of the problem of demolition is a redistribution of interestssurrounding housing and land. The urgent problem to think is how to guide andregulate the distribution of benefits.On the basis of law and economics research method, this paper first examines the kinds of gain and cost that the housing demolition parties may have. Then byusing game theory as the analysis tool, it built a game model based on the benefitallocation of the demolition of housing to do quantitative analysis. It tried to find thecauses of the conflict of house demolition. Through the analysis, this paper will provethat: when the income of post-conflict between the income that participants canobtain after compromise and tough, the conflict is bound to the outbreak; when theincome of post-conflict is smaller than it after compromise, the conflict is avoidablewith a certain probability, this probability and the difference between the income ofpost-conflict and it after compromise is a positive correlation, namely when thedifference is smaller, more smaller the possibility of conflict is. In addition, conflictcost will also affect the probability of the occurrence of the conflict.Based on this conclusion, this paper is to show the current legal dilemma andpossible way out of housing demolition. It mainly exists in such aspects: First, housedemolition compensation standards with a high degree of generality and ambiguity,there are a large number of ambiguous statements and the upper long-term absence ofthe principle of compensation; Second, it lacks the dynamic compensation of thestandard mechanism, the trouble began in the law’s own characteristics and the role ofhuman factors; Third, it lacks a fair and transparent relocation costs assessmentsystem, the reasons for both the institutional level and the social dimension of thereasons; Fourth, the cost of conflict is non-institutionalized and non-legalized, it’svery wanton and accidental; Fifth, the information communication channel is blocked,negotiation mechanism is not perfect, this situation and the long-term inequality ofdemolition of the two sides in the dominant position interact,and the demolitionparties are losing interest and willingness to dialogue each other. The correspondingsolution is to strengthen the establishment and improvement of the rules andregulations: scientific standard of compensation, dynamic compensation mechanism,neutral main body of evaluation, reasonable conflict cost control as well asinstitutionalized discourse mechanism.