How to Break Through the Institutional Obstacles to Rural Development

The past decade has been the period in which our country's agriculture developed fastest, the rural landscape changed the most, and farmers gained the most tangible benefits; it has also been the “golden decade” for our country's rural economic and social development. However, with the in-depth advancement of industrialization, urbanization, marketization, informatization and globalization, agricultural and rural economic development is facing new difficulties and problems, especially the contradiction between small-scale dispersed operation and large-scale industrialized modern agriculture, the contradiction between rapid urbanization and the protection of farmland resources, farmers' rights and interests, and rural culture, the contradiction between the mobility of farmers and the rights and interests of migrant workers on the one hand and the current household registration system and social security system on the other, the contradiction between the non-equalization of basic public services in urban and rural areas and people's expectations for equal civil rights and urban-rural integration, the contradiction between urban-rural separation and village-group closure on the one hand and urban-rural integration and community and social integration on the other, and the contradiction between the traditional quantity-safety-oriented agricultural production, which focuses on guaranteeing supply, and people's strong demand for the ecological environment and for the safety of agricultural products and food. These urgently require further emancipation of the mind, deepening of comprehensive reform, and a firm determination to break through institutional and mechanism obstacles, so as to inject new and strong momentum into our country's agricultural production increase, farmers' income growth, and rural prosperity.

Reform and opening up are the fundamental driving force for the development and progress of our country's rural areas and the entire country. Over the past decade, rural reform and innovation have been ongoing, whether at the central or local level. In October 1998, the Third Plenary Session of the Fifteenth Central Committee adopted the "Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Several Major Issues Concerning Agriculture and Rural Work," and the central government put forward the six-character guideline of “give more, take less, and loosen control” for solving the “three rural issues.” The central government successively implemented tax and fee reform and comprehensive reform in rural areas, abolished the agricultural tax, and increased investment in rural public services. It can be said that the focus of reform was concentrated on “taking less” and “giving more,” or in other words, “reducing burdens” and “increasing income.” There is no doubt that a series of major policies benefiting the people, such as abolishing the agricultural tax and increasing rural investment, brought farmers tangible benefits. However, we also see that the problems currently facing rural areas are no longer merely those that can be solved by “taking less” and “giving more”; there are also some deep-seated institutional and mechanism problems. Agriculture, farmers and rural development still face many institutional obstacles, and these are the fundamental factors hindering the development of agriculture, rural areas and farmers. If “taking less” is the premise and “giving more” is the focus, then “loosening control” is the foundation and the key. The core and theme of the current comprehensive rural reform is to further deepen institutional reform and release the economic and social vitality of rural areas. Only by breaking through all institutional obstacles hindering agricultural modernization, urban-rural integration, and equalization of services can economic and social vitality be stimulated and sustainable momentum and institutional guarantees be provided for agricultural and rural economic development.

Deepen reform in important areas without delay with greater political courage and wisdom

⟦NL> On July 23, 2013, Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, President of the country, and Chairman of the Central Military Commission, presided over a symposium of responsible persons from some provinces and municipalities in Wuhan, Hubei Province, and particularly stressed, “We must, with greater political courage and wisdom, deepen reform in important areas without delay, overcome the chronic and stubborn illnesses in systems and mechanisms, break through the fences of entrenched interests, further liberate and develop the social productive forces, and further stimulate and gather social creativity.” In particular, he explicitly required that we “further enhance the vitality of economic development and provide inexhaustible momentum for achieving sustained and healthy economic development”: “further enhance the vitality of social development and promote social harmony and stability.” The issues of agriculture, rural areas and farmers are the top priority in our country's economic and social development. In the new historical period, how to further deepen rural reform and stimulate the vitality of rural economic development and social development is the core of the current rural reform and opening up.

From the surveys conducted under the author's leadership, the most urgent reform at present is to further deepen reform of rural land, property rights, household registration, finance, as well as the collective operation system, public service system, and social management system, with greater determination, courage and wisdom; to liberate farmers from the rural household registration system, liberate land from rural collectives, liberate collectives from the integration of economy and society, liberate the government from all-encompassing management, liberate social organizations from administrative control, clarify the boundaries among politics, government, market and society, invigorate the rural land, property rights, capital and resource markets, and release the vitality of individual farmers, collectives, communities and social organizations.

From the survey results, the current reform should focus on the following aspects:

First, accelerate reform of the rural collective property rights system and forms of operation, clarify the property rights of farmers' collectives and their members, establish a rural collective property rights system with clear ownership, complete powers and functions, smooth circulation and strict protection, explore multiple effective forms of realizing the collective economy, straighten out the relationship between rural collective economic organizations and villagers' self-governance organizations, and, while effectively safeguarding the property rights of farmers and farmers' collectives, allow collective resources to be rationally allocated, move toward the market, and release vitality. It is suggested to accelerate the work of confirming, registering and issuing certificates for rural collective land; accelerate the work of confirming, registering and issuing certificates for rural land contractual management rights; accelerate the shareholding reform of rural collective economies; and implement the separation of village and community, village and economy, and politics and economy. In this way, truly complete the rural property rights reform that could not be completed over the past 30-plus years.

Second, accelerate the construction of rural land circulation service platforms, formulate and improve mechanisms for land circulation, incentives for farmland exit, compensation and storage, encourage and support the circulation of contracted land to specialized large households, family farms and farmers' cooperatives, and create conditions for rural land circulation and appropriately scaled operation. It is suggested to build rural land circulation trading platforms with counties and cities as the center, and establish rural land circulation registration information platforms in townships, villages and groups; implement reward policies for elderly farmers and those with stable non-agricultural jobs to exit farmland; implement subsidy policies for land circulation by specialized large households, family farms, farmers' cooperatives and large-scale agricultural enterprises; and promote the industrialized, large-scale and standardized operation of agriculture.

Third, accelerate reform of the urban-rural dual public service system and promote the equalization of basic public services in urban and rural areas. At present, the difficulty in urban and rural basic public services lies not only in the relatively large gap in public services between urban and rural areas, but more importantly in the “dualized systems and policies” and “unequal service provision.” The different industrial structures and different levels of economic development and fiscal capacity between urban and rural areas will also lead to de facto differences in urban and rural public services. The essence of equalizing urban and rural public services is to achieve the integration and equalization of basic public services such as compulsory education, basic medical care, public health, public culture, social security and public safety, so that all citizens can equally share public resources, and urban and rural residents can enjoy equal rights, opportunities and the same level of basic public services. To this end, it is necessary to further abolish the systems and policies that create urban-rural dualization, first achieve the unification of the urban and rural basic public service systems, then gradually eliminate the de facto gaps in the provision of basic public services, and ultimately achieve identical standards and equal treatment.