The Researches On Governmental Process In The Land Expropriation In Transition Period

June 11, 2005, Dingzhou City in Hebei Province had taken place in the case of violence which was shocked the world. The origin of the case was Guohua which was key project of National Power Plant confiscated the Shengyou village of Dingzhou construction land a gray market item. In project's implementation, villagers of Shengyou had different views of land compensation's payments and due to self-organized large-scale collective action, and the government of Dingzhou through lawful means could not calmed down the village's collective action, that collusion businessmen and finally selected triads and adopted violent means to protest the expulsion of the villagers and resulted the six villagers were killed and fifteen villagers seriously injured. Even though the media reported case of Dingzhou on time, these reports about the case of Dingzhou lack of comprehensive and systematic description. Some scholars from different angles excavated the case of Dingzhou behind the theoretical case, in particular from the perspective of the government's actions, but such comments only superficial and lack of deep-seated theoretical discussion on this case .At the same time from the political study, to conduct in-depth sociological point of view, a comprehensive theory to explore more of the article are rare.This article in accordance with the "causes - after - the follow-up protest - the status quo" thinking, to set state case to do more comprehensive description of the basis, from the system, outside the system and their relationship to explain the perspective of the causes of the incident Dingzhou. At this point, I intend to use Mr. Huntington Research Overview issue and political changes in the variables, namely, political and cultural factors, political, structural factors, policy factors, the political leadership factors, factors of social groups as the analytical framework of this article.The case of Dingzhou was beginning at contradictory statements, the villagers consider the procedures for land acquisition and compensation under the law, while the Government claimed that the land in accordance with the relevant policies and regulations for the compensation of the villagers. People in this contradiction with the Government, had also become a case of follow-up "time bomb", and finally the "off" after the people were actors with the rounds of "bite" due to propulsion. Initially, people took to prevent the construction "that want" the benefits by means of expression, and the Government's response was to give people a "dual character": side sent a work team to the implementation of People First policy, the other side of the police to take deterrence of illegal detention and even "take the lead in trouble "the people. Duplicity of the government response, the people stirred up to greater discontent. The villagers began to build shacks at the site, and organizations at various levels petition. September 2004, 10 months to two higher authorities in Beijing, has been set and the Baoding City Government intercept Dingzhou city government after the implementation of the petitioners a "policy of education" and illegal detention. Baoding in November 2004 the leadership of the Government's petition for people to make instructions to re-set city back, "People First" policy. Under the guidance of the policy, the Government's job to persuade and achieved certain results, but the emergence of a number of messages had not been completely re-ignited the public's resistance to calm down. Back at their site, in which case, in addition to the plant engineering group acceptance inspection time is approaching, the Government has made Baoding forced "to break the working mechanism of instructions, and since then had taken place in April 2005 and June of violent expulsion of the two led to the escalation of violent conflict.I believed that through research, the development of Dingzhou case violent conflict, its impact had the following main factors: (a) political opportunity for the occurrence and continuation of the case provided the conditions; (b) the deepening of a sense of relative deprivation to make it possible to resist; (c) "obstinate residents" of the political culture was the key variable; (d) the last factor to violence - and collusion between government officials and businessmen. Four factors of the internal structure of simple: the government's actions "deviated from the" - lead to public discontent - the government's actions to stimulate the further deviation from the - to upgrade people's resistance - a result of the government's actions deviated from the legal bottom line, eventually taking the means of illegal violence.Could be seen from this study: domestic academics on government behavior "deviated from the" study of the reasons more fully explained in the government's actions "deviated from" the problem, but many of these studies are from a single perspective of the system to explore starting to do, and outside the system ignores the the impact of the interaction between factors. At Dingzhou incident, the government's actions deviated from the start, you can use existing research to explain, but the deviation from the back once again with people outside the system acts to stimulate, business requirements and factors such as the survival instinct, and therefore, it is necessary to explain the government's actions the "deviation from the" must also be considered within the institutional structure of the interaction between the dual factors.In short, the case of Dingzhou was a series of interrelated factors. At one of "obstinate residents," the impact of political culture was the core variables of the case. With another twelve villages of cases compared villages could be seen that the same variables in other circumstances, in the village, but because "obstinate residents," the existence of political culture, with the result that the village people would be able to twist relative deprivation and the output policy through feedback mechanisms to express benefits in order to influence government actors to amend the government's actions, while the other twelve villages were not in such a situation. This conclusion indicated that Mr. Huntington explained the use of the framework to study China's political problem, it should be conducted in accordance with local adaptation. At the same time, this study also showed that political reforms to speed up the urgency and importance.This study had three innovations: This article described the case information was used by some of the most comprehensive to date; through a comparative study made use of Mr. Huntington explained the framework to study China's political problem, it should be conducted in accordance with local adaptation conclusions. I believed that government action to explain the "deviation from the" must also be considered within the institutional structure of the interaction between the dual factors.However, because of the existence of access and in-depth investigate problems, the truth of the part of literature could not make the field survey verification. At the same time, because of personal knowledge and research capacity reserve constrainted, the remaining part of case analysis at the depth and breadth of the problem, for the case could not fully explain the desired effect.