Some capital going to the countryside changes agricultural land use, skating close to the line on land policy

In recent years, well-regulated urban capital going to the countryside has driven the transformation and upgrading of agriculture and improved quality and efficiency. At the same time, however, some capital-to-countryside projects have gone astray, skating close to the line on land policy. Under the guise of building agricultural ancillary facilities, they have changed the use and nature of farmland, facing not only considerable policy and legal risks but also latent conflicts of interest with farmers.

Capital going to the countryside "has gone astray"

High risk of illegal land use

In the suburbs of one place, a capital-to-countryside project was first built in 2011, and the owner has invested more than 30 million yuan cumulatively, focusing on specialty high-benefit agriculture as the foundation and developing leisure tourism as a supporting business.

But when the owner Zhang Tianxin (pseudonym) was interviewed, he told reporters that he always felt uneasy and anxious inside, and the reason was that in order to solve the project's land use problem, the project was built in the name of temporary production buildings and agricultural ancillary facilities, while what was actually built were themed restaurants and commercial operating facilities. This crossed the land-use red line, carrying great risk.

It is understood that although this capital-to-countryside project signed a land transfer contract, the owner built houses on the contracted land. Zhang Tianxin said: "The land used to be left fallow. Because the rent was relatively high, the farmers tacitly accepted the house-building, but land leases have a time limit, and changing the use of farmland is also illegal. When the contract expires, what should we do if the farmers demand the land be returned to its original state? If the land law enforcement department comes to investigate and orders the houses demolished, what should we do then? We have no idea about any of this."

It never rains but it pours. Another capital-to-countryside project that reporters interviewed was also "wearing" the hat of building agricultural ancillary facilities, while actually carrying out permanent commercial construction. Project owner Liu Hai (pseudonym) said that his company runs leisure fishing and sightseeing agriculture, and if it wants to make money, kitchens, dining rooms, and accommodation facilities are also necessary supporting facilities. But nowadays it is difficult to secure land for agricultural projects, and construction land quotas are basically impossible to get approved, so they can only "skate close to the line."

Some grassroots officials said that some capital-to-countryside projects resort to workarounds to break through land-use restrictions. For example, they build cement pillars and elevate buildings off the ground so that the project appears to meet the policy requirement that structures not damage the plow layer; some build so-called sunlit restaurants while retaining a certain amount of green space and ponds, so it looks as if the land use has not been changed; others build wooden cabins that can be demolished at low cost if investigated... These are all common practices for evading regulation.

Land use needs cannot be met

Capital going to the countryside has concerns

During interviews, reporters found that in some areas, the frequent occurrence of illegal land use by capital going to the countryside is related both to irregular project investment and to deliberately crossing the land-use red line for profit. At the same time, reasonable supporting construction land needs cannot be met, which also forces some projects to "work around policy."

In rural areas on the outskirts of cities, land resources are even scarcer. Many agricultural enterprises and specialized cooperatives report that developing urban agriculture requires building supporting commercial and service facilities such as rural tourism and farmhouse restaurants, but currently supporting construction land for agriculture is in short supply, affecting the interactive effect of the "primary and tertiary industries."

"To develop specialty high-benefit agriculture, you cannot talk about agriculture in isolation. You need to bring into play agriculture's leisure, sightseeing, and tourism functions, extend the industrial chain, and tap added value, all of which require supporting buildings and facilities. But agricultural construction land is strictly controlled, and if you cross the red line, the risk is great," said Liu Mu (pseudonym), general manager of an agricultural enterprise in western China.

In a major county for flower cultivation, a specialized cooperative transferred nearly 200 mu of land to grow flowers. In order to extend the flowers' freshness period and sell them out of season, the cooperative had planned to build a standardized cold storage facility and ancillary buildings covering 2 mu. But when applying for land use, it found that these facilities could not obtain property rights certificates. Worried that the capital investment had no policy guarantee, the cooperative terminated the project construction.

Reporters learned that according to relevant regulations, agricultural structural adjustment may allow a certain number of temporary production buildings to be built on farmland without property rights certificates. But what counts as temporary? How long is the temporary period? There are no clear provisions, and all localities are "crossing the river by feeling the stones." As the scale of agricultural investment grows larger and larger, land-use conflicts may be exposed more and more.

Strengthen agricultural land management

Break through legal and policy obstacles

Industry insiders believe that supervision and risk prevention should be strengthened for industrial and commercial enterprises leasing farmers' contracted land. Localities should be required to set clear upper limits on industrial and commercial enterprises leasing farmers' contracted land for long periods and on a large scale, establish and improve qualification review, project review, and risk guarantee fund systems, and set rules on land leasing conditions, business scope, and penalties for violations. There should be clear upper limits on industrial and commercial capital leasing farmers' contracted land, and qualification reviews and project reviews should be carried out. In particular, it is necessary to prevent industrial and commercial capital from arbitrarily changing the agricultural use of land after going to the countryside to lease contracted land, engaging in "non-agriculturalization" or "enclosure without use," and damaging comprehensive agricultural production capacity.

At the current stage, it is very necessary to issue dedicated policies for urban capital going to the countryside. On the one hand, this highlights the "regulation and guidance" role of policy, sets bottom lines for farmland protection, industrial access, environmental protection, and distribution of farmers' interests, requires urban capital to follow the requirements of industrial development planning, clarifies business direction, and avoids capital squeezing small farmers. On the other hand, it is also necessary to create conditions in land, taxation, finance, and other areas for urban capital to go to the countryside in a well-regulated way, link urban and rural industrial development, and realize joint building, sharing, and common development between urban capital and farmers.

In terms of specific policy measures, it is possible to strictly enforce the policy of use control for collective construction land, strictly approve use according to planning, and conduct strict land-use reviews to prevent capital going to the countryside from using this as an excuse to occupy fields, enclose land, and build houses, or engage in disguised real estate development and sales. At the same time, promote full coverage of urban and rural planning, coordinate agricultural industrial development, urban and rural construction, and land use planning, clarify reasonable space for urban capital going to the countryside to participate in various types of construction, appropriately consider the reasonable supporting land needs of agricultural project construction, allocate reasonable supporting construction land quotas, and support the development of urban agriculture.