| On the one hand rural-urban land conversion provides land support for social and economic development and the development of urbanization, on the other hand decreased cultivated land bring food safety problems, land expropriation conflicts threaten social stability, reduced agricultural land area poses the ecological environment pressure. For farmers, farmland conversion offers farmers the opportunity to enjoy a part of urban development achievements, improves infrastructure status near the residence. At the same time, it deprives farmers of the stable financial resources, jobs, and old-age security, especially for the elderly, they must change the way of life habit and fear that the social security problem. The invariance of the natural supply and the limitation of economic supply of land determine the necessity of rural-urban land conversion. Farmers as the vulnerable groups in the process of land conversion, the welfare state needs to pay special attention. The huge number of farmers also makes its welfare become the core issue to ease the land requisition conflict. Welfare measure Criteria experience the dispute about "cardinal utility theory" and "ordinal utility theory", the discussion on the importance of "economic welfare" and "Non-economic welfare", and also the game of whether it can be compared in interpersonal. Besides the economic source functions, the social security functions of farmland for farmers are known by people gradually. Then how to measure the comprehensive welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for peasant household? At present, the research about the change of economic output function and the social security function of farmland before and after rural-urban land conversion are more, the impact of land use after land requisition on farmers’ welfare is less discussed. In fact, the land use after land requisition not only affect the farmers’ living environment that affect farmers’ health objectively, but also cause the difference of comparative advantage before and after land conversion that affect farmers’ fair judgment for compensation subjectively. So, how is the household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for the public purpose or non public purpose? This article is divided into four parts to study.(1)The first two chapters of this article, first of all to introduce the selected topic background, research purpose and significance, research ideas and methods of the full text, and also to sort out the train of thought for later writing. Second to generalize the research progress of welfare issues in rural-urban land conversion and welfare measurement methods at home and abroad, and then review the theoretical basis of this article which include welfare economics, new institutional economics, externality theory and family function theory.(2)In the third chapter of this paper, we analyzed the positive and negative welfare effects of rural-urban land conversion theoretically from the connotation of rural-urban land conversion and welfare effect. We try to measure peasant household welfare of rural-urban land conversion for different object based on Sen’s capability theory. Considering the situation of China’s rural, peasant household was taken as the basic research unit. In capability theory we think that welfare is fuzzy, and is closely related with the target features, therefore non fixed functional activities list was advocated. Functional activity list in welfare measure using capability method at home and abroad is summed up, combined with the feature of Chinese peasant household, as well as the theoretical analysis of the welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion, based on the function of family, the framework of peasant households’capability in rural-urban land conversion including8capabilities and19evaluation indexes was built. Capability theory also emphasizes that goods and services are welfare only if they transfer into capability, the conversion factors are which influence the transformation efficiency. Considered classification to conversion factors by Sen and choice to influence factors by domestic scholars such as Gao Jinyun, combined with the special object of study, we choose the influence factors from the family characteristics, regional social and economic environment and land use.(3) The fourth, fifth and sixth chapters of this paper is the empirical part. Jiangxia district in Wuhan and Xianan district in Xianning are selected as the sample area because their similar social and economic development situation. By interview survey method we finally obtain398valid questionnaires. Grey fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is used:1) With the results of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as the results of subjective values measure method, with the results of grey correlation analysis method as the results of objective values measure method, take the average weights of two as the values results of fuzzy evaluation method;2) By setting the fuzzy function and membership function of farmers’welfare, extracting welfare measure data from valid questionnaires, calculate the membership values of each index of the farmers;3) Using the calculation of weight and the membership value to aggregate overall membership degree of individual and the overall farmers. The fourth chapter has carried on the empirical research in peasant household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion; Household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion for the public purpose and non public purpose were measured empirically in Chapter5; Household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion under the other conversion factors were measured empirically in Chapter6.(4) The seventh chapter is conclusions and discussion part of this research. We concluded that:1) Rural-urban land conversion makes the total welfare membership of peasant household flow from0.423before the conversion down to0.363after the conversion. The effect direction and degree of rural-urban land conversion to different functional activities of household is different. Land conversion makes the level of peasant households’functional activities of production organization, social security, living conditions and the environment, and social equity decline. It makes the level of functional activities of income, health and leisure, social participation, and children’s education rise.2) Although the effect direction of household welfare effect of rural-urban land conversion under different conversion factors is consistent, the degree of welfare effect is different. The impact on each functional activities of peasant household is also not identical.3) Peasant households’welfare effects of public purpose and non public purpose land conversion vary. The public purpose land conversion influence farmer total welfare more. The negative effects of non public purpose land conversion on peasant households’functional activities of production organization, living conditions and the environment are greater than the public purpose one; the negative effects on social security and social equity are less. The positive influence of non public purpose land conversion on peasant households’functional activities of income, health and leisure is greater than the public purpose one; The positive influence on children’s education is less. Only on the functional activities of social participation of peasant household, the influence direction of land conversion for public purpose and non pubic welfare is opposite. Land conversion for public purpose make the membership degree of peasant households’functional activities of social participation increased by66.67%, land conversion for non public purpose make it reduced by9.09%. To improve the welfare of land-lost farmers, need to be targeted to enhance the practical capacity of peasant households. Specifically, first of all, do propaganda work of public purpose and non public purpose land acquisition respectively and make sure the land acquisition process is transparent and fair; Then link up the new compensation standard with old and adjacent area’s compensation standard, and try to be detailed and humanization; finally ensure the continuity of compensation and track management to land-lost farmers. In the end of this article, pointed out the deficiency in aspect of theory method, data acquisition and empirical measure, in order to discuss and improve in future research. |
PDF Full Text Request