中国耕地规模化流转租金的分异特征及其影响因素

删除或更新信息，请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

本站小编 Free考研考试/2021-12-29

徐羽^,¹^,², 李秀彬^,¹^,², 辛良杰¹

1.中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所中国科学院陆地表层格局与模拟重点实验室,北京 100101

2.中国科学院大学,北京 100049

Differentiation of scale-farmland transfer rent and its influencing factors in China

XU Yu^,¹^,², LI Xiubin^,¹^,², XIN Liangjie¹

1. Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China

2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

通讯作者: 李秀彬(1962-), 男, 河北固安人, 研究员, 博士生导师, 主要从事土地利用变化研究。E-mail: lixb@igsnrr.ac.cn

收稿日期:2019-09-29修回日期:2020-11-26网络出版日期:2021-03-25

基金资助:

国家自然科学基金项目.41930757
国家自然科学基金项目.41571095
中国科学院重点部署项目.ZDBS-SSW-DQC

Received:2019-09-29Revised:2020-11-26Online:2021-03-25

Fund supported:

National Natural Science Foundation of China.41930757
National Natural Science Foundation of China.41571095
Key Deployment Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences.ZDBS-SSW-DQC

作者简介 About authors
徐羽(1991-), 男, 江西信丰人, 博士生, 主要从事土地利用变化研究。E-mail: xuy. 17b@igsnrr.ac.cn

摘要
通过土地流转实现规模化经营是农地利用变化的重要趋势,土地规模化流转市场的租金关乎规模经营主体的形成及其可持续发展,但目前对全国层面耕地规模化流转租金的研究还较为欠缺。基于土地流转信息发布平台的2万余宗规模化流转地块,论文揭示了中国耕地规模化流转租金的总体水平与区域差异,并采用分位数回归方法识别地块属性特征对耕地租金分化的影响及异质性。结果表明：全国耕地平均租金为11339.10元/hm²,租金介于≤ 7500元/hm²、7500~15000元/hm²、15000~22500元/hm²、> 22500元/hm²区间的地块数量比例分别为38.93%、37.97%、14.52%和8.59%;云贵高原区和黄淮海平原区租金较高,比全国平均值分别高出32%和23%,而北方干旱半干旱区租金较低,租金约为全国均值的一半。地块质量特征、地块规模化特征、地块区位特征、地块产权特征对耕地租金具有显著的影响;对低租金地块而言,灌溉条件、土地平整度、道路质量的边际效应更大,而邻近高速公路则对高租金地块具有更强的增值效应。为降低农业生产的土地成本,政府应努力降低土地规模化流转过程中的交易成本、减少农业补贴对农地租金的干预、加强农田基础设施建设与农地流转租金的常态化监测。
关键词： 耕地租金;土地流转;规模经营;分位数回归;影响因素;中国

Abstract

Developing large-scale farm management through farmland transfer is an important trend of agricultural land use change in China. The farmland rents regarding large parcels have profound impacts on the establishment of large farms and their sustainable development, however, there is still a lack of systematic monitoring and research on the rent of large consolidated land at the national level. Based on more than 20000 farmland parcels collected from the most influential land transfer information releasing platform (www.tuliu.com) in China, this paper reveals the overall picture and regional differences of farmland transfer price, and employs the quantile regression method to identify the impacts of parcel attributes on farmland rent differentiation and their heterogeneity. The results show that the average and median of scale-farmland rent are 11339.10 yuan per hectare and 9511.95 yuan per hectare, respectively. The farmland rents were further divided into four levels, namely, ≤ 7500 yuan per hectare, 7500~15000 yuan per hectare, 15000~22500 yuan per hectare and > 22500 yuan per hectare. According to this classification, the proportions of parcels in different rent ranges are 38.93%, 37.97%, 14.52% and 8.59%, respectively. Regarding regional difference, the farmland rents in the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau and Huang-Huai-Hai Plain are relatively high, 32% and 23% higher than the national average respectively, while the rent in the arid and semiarid regions of northern China was relatively low, which was about half of the national average. Quantile regression results show that land quality, land suitability for large-scale farming operation, land location and land property attributes exert significant impacts on farmland rent. In particular, for lower-rent parcels, the marginal effects of irrigation availability, land flatness and road quality are stronger. However, expressway proximity has a stronger value-added effect on these higher-rent parcels. To reduce the farmland cost of agricultural production in China, the governments at all levels should continue to reduce transaction costs, set up market-based land rent mechanisms, strengthen the construction of farmland infrastructure, and establish a price monitoring system for large-scale land circulation.

Keywords：farmland rent;farmland transfer;scale farming operation;quantile regression;influencing factor;China

PDF (2433KB)元数据多维度评价相关文章导出EndNote|Ris|Bibtex 收藏本文
本文引用格式
徐羽, 李秀彬, 辛良杰. 中国耕地规模化流转租金的分异特征及其影响因素. 地理学报[J], 2021, 76(3): 753-763 doi:10.11821/dlxb202103018
XU Yu, LI Xiubin, XIN Liangjie. Differentiation of scale-farmland transfer rent and its influencing factors in China. Acta Geographica Sinice[J], 2021, 76(3): 753-763 doi:10.11821/dlxb202103018

1 引言

为提高农业劳动生产率、增加农民收入及保障粮食安全,促进农地规模化经营是现阶段中国农地利用转型的重要方向^[1,2,3]。历年中央1号文件多次提出要加快发展多种形式适度规模经营,培育专业大户、家庭农场、农业企业等新型农业经营主体的意见。据农业农村部数据,2007—2017年全国农村家庭承包耕地流转率由5.2%上升至37.0%,年均增长3.2%;截至2015年,全国已有350万户经营规模在3.33 hm²以上的规模经营主体,经营耕地面积达2333万hm^{2 [4]}。随着土地规模经营的发展,土地租金占农业生产成本的比重显著上升。2008—2018年全国3种主粮的流转租金由151元/hm²增至619元/hm²,增长了3倍^[5];全国性的家庭农场监测数据显示,2014年平均约67.4%的家庭农场土地来自转入土地,转入土地租金占总生产成本的比重达到30%^[6]。地租成本显化进一步抬高了农业生产成本,势必对农业规模经营稳定性尤其是粮食生产带来严峻挑战^[7,8]。因此,探讨耕地规模化流转价格的分布特征及其影响因素对中国农业政策的完善具有重要意义。

农地流转市场的发展吸引了学术界对土地流转租金问题的高度关注。研究内容涵盖农地流转租金差异、时空分异特征及其影响因素等;就研究尺度和数据来源而言,多数是基于局部地区的样本村庄开展研究,主要采用农户抽样调查方式获取土地流转价格信息。这类调查反映的租金水平呈现出显著差异,如因流转方向^[9]、交易对象^[10]、流转规模^[11]等不同而具有明显的租金差别;同时,熟人间流转、口头协议、低租金等非正式交易特征普遍存在^[12,13,14]。在影响因素方面,这些研究从土地特征、农户家庭特征、区域社会经济特征及政策制度等多个维度分析了土地流转租金差异的形成原因,主要包括家庭劳动力与耕地资源禀赋、地块质量、交通条件、经济发展水平、合同约定等重要变量^{[11, 15-18]}。总体而言,受调查范围所限,基于案例区的调查无法揭示出全国精细尺度的土地流转租金信息,对国家土地流转相关政策的决策支持相对有限。

目前,针对全国层面的土地流转价格空间格局研究仍然较少,认识相对薄弱。全国层面具有代表性的研究如王亚辉等^[19]利用2003—2013年农业部固定观察点数据库考察了中国土地流转租金的省际差异,发现各地区总体租金水平位于3000~6000元/hm²,且零租金流转率超过50%,这提供了对中国农地流转租金的基础性认识。但是,这一研究的数据样本主体仍是普通农户,普通农户间零散化流转大都不以形成规模化经营为核心目标,其低租金特点有可能低估规模经营农户的实际土地成本。鉴于规模经营主体在农业发展中的重要作用,亟待增强对中国农地规模化流转市场租金的研究。

土地流转信息平台在耕地规模化流转价格信息获取方面具有突出优势。土流网（www.tuliu.com）于2009年开始在线发布土地交易信息,积累了丰富的规模化流转地块数据,样本覆盖全国327个地级单元,其中约73%的地块面积达到3.33hm²以上,地块流转面积中位数达到13.33 hm²。土地流转大数据平台可为刻画全国层面农地规模化流转的租金格局提供有力数据支持。

本文利用土流网的规模化流转地块数据,首先从全国层面揭示出中国农地规模化流转市场的租金格局及区域差异;其次,区别于既有研究对租金影响因素均质化的设定,本文采用分位数回归方法探索不同租金水平下影响因素的复杂异质性。研究有助于拓展对中国农地市场租金分异规律的认识,其结果可为降低农业生产成本及农业政策调整提供决策参考。

2 数据来源与研究方法

2.1 数据来源与样本分布

本文所用耕地地块数据获取自土地流转信息平台。土流网是全国最大的农村土地互联网交易平台,占据土地流转互联网市场90%的份额。土流网流转耕地数据具有两个突出特点：① 相比于通过线下农户抽样调查方式获取的数据,土流网数据区域覆盖度更广,样本量更大,具有全国代表性;② 传统的农户调查数据,侧重于关注农户转出土地的情况,对规模化流转土地的租金情况不能充分观测,土流网数据以大规模的合并整理地块为主,地块面积较大,有助于充分反映大规模土地流转的租金分布情况。土流网平台上耕地信息包括土地价格、土地用途、流转类型、流转年限、地块位置、土地面积、配套设施、周边环境等详细信息。借助Python语言编写程序在线获取了全网发布的37515宗流转地块的详细信息,构建了全国规模耕地流转数据库。数据采集时间为2018年10月。

数据采集完成后,需要对数据进行清洗。首先剔除流转价格缺失的样本;其次对租金异常样本进行处理,参考多个全国性涉农调查数据库,并结合课题组实地调研数据,决定将租金小于150元/hm²或大于45000元/hm²的地块样本视为异常值并剔除,异常值比例为1.3%。最后获得有效样本共20762个,分布于全国30个省级行政单元（不含西藏、香港、澳门、台湾）。为便于区域差异比较,本文引入农业区划方案,全国划分为九大农业区^[20]（图1）。

图1

新窗口打开|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
图1各农区地块样本量及其占比

注：基于自然资源部标准地图服务网站审图号为GS(2016)1569号的标准地图制作,底图无修改。
Fig. 1Spatial distribution of sample parcels

2.2 耕地流转租金的年期修正

约80%有效样本发布于2017年和2018年,为便于不同年份数据的比较,根据土地价格时序变化规律,采用年期修正系数将早期年份的租金调整至2018年的价格：

（1）

K_{i} = P_{2018} / P_{i}, R_{2018} = K_{i} \times R_{i}

式中：K_i为i年土地租金修正到2018年的系数;P₂₀₁₈为2018年地价指数;P_i为i年的地价指数,地价指数采用国家发改委价格司发布的全国3种主粮平均土地租金成本计算;R₂₀₁₈为修正至2018年的土地租金;R_i为i年的实际租金。

2.3 耕地流转租金影响因素回归分析

2.3.1 分位数回归由最小二乘法发展而来的绝大部分回归模型,侧重于度量自变量对因变量条件期望

E (y | x)

的影响,其本质上是均值回归,仅仅反映了条件分布

y | x

的集中趋势^[21]。但实际上多数数据不满足完全正态分布的经典假设,条件期望

E (y | x)

很难反映整个条件分布的全貌。Koenker等^[22]提出“分位数回归”（Quantile Regression）力求改进这一不足。分位数回归方法能够在不同分位数下用被解释变量对解释变量进行回归,获得解释变量对整个条件分布的影响。并且,分位数回归采用残差绝对值的加权平均作为最小化的目标函数,故其估计结果不易受离群值影响。此外,分位数回归对误差项的分布假设条件更为宽松,应用于非正态分布数据时估计结果更为稳健。

就本文而言,作为被解释变量的耕地租金不服从完全正态分布,故分位数回归适用于本研究。为此,首先采用OLS方法,估计各解释变量对耕地租金影响的平均效应,进而选取经典的5个分位数（10%、25%、50%、75%、90%）,运用分位数回归方法考察耕地租金在不同分位点下其影响因素的异质性。

2.3.2 耕地租金影响因素的变量选取耕地地租本质上是土地资源用于农业生产获得的经济报酬,它是单位面积上的农业产值减去生产成本后归属于土地要素的剩余额^[23],属于农业超额利润的转化。由地租定义可知,地租高低主要受土地产出能力和农业生产成本（物质投入成本和劳动力成本）的影响,因此,对土地产出和生产成本的影响可作为影响因素指标选取的主要依据。由于劳动力价格的上涨,地块对规模化和机械化经营的适宜性正变得愈加重要^[24,25]。此外,受到农业政策的复杂影响,土地的产权属性也会影响租金^{[16, 26-27]}。综合地租理论和当前中国农业的实际情况,本文从地块质量属性、地块规模化属性、地块区位属性、地块产权属性4个维度选取指标探究耕地租金的影响因素（表1）。

Tab. 1
表1
表1变量定义及描述性统计
Tab. 1Definition and statistical summary of variables

	变量名称	定义	均值	标准差
被解释变量	土地租金	流转土地的租金(元/hm²)	11074.95	6661.94
地块	土地类型
质量	水田	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.19	0.4
属性	水浇地	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.62	0.48
	旱地	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.18	0.39
	土壤质地
	壤土	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.74	0.44
	砂土	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.14	0.34
	黏土	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.13	0.33
	土地肥力	低= 1,中= 2,高= 3	2.34	0.6
	灌溉条件	无灌溉条件= 1,一般满足= 2,基本满足= 3,充分满足= 4	3.63	0.78
地块	地块面积	流转的地块面积(hm²)	68.82	423.92
规模化	地块形状	不规则= 1,一般= 2,规则= 3	2.77	0.48
属性	平整程度	不平整= 1,一般= 2,平整= 3,非常平整=4	3.4	0.71
	道路质量	简陋土路= 0,机耕道或水泥路= 1	0.81	0.39
地块	距国道距离	0~10 km = 1,10~50 km = 2,> 50 km = 3	1.32	0.53
区位	距高速距离	0~10 km = 1,10~50 km = 2,> 50 km = 3	1.63	0.63
属性	农民年纯收入	< 1000元= 1,1000~3000元= 2,3000~5000元= 3,5000~10000元= 4,> 10000元= 5	3.63	1.06
	农民主要收入来源	在家种养= 0,外出务工= 1	0.57	0.5
地块	流转年限	流转合同年限(a)	16.44	13.06
产权	权属类型
属性	个人承包土地	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.47	0.5
	未分包集体土地	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.51	0.5
	国有土地	虚拟变量(是= 1,否= 0)	0.02	0.13

新窗口打开|下载CSV

具体而言,① 地块质量属性,选取土地类型、土壤质地、土地肥力、灌溉条件4项指标来表征。② 地块规模化属性,通过地块面积、地块形状、平整程度、道路质量4项指标来刻画。同时,为了捕捉因规模持续扩大可能导致的规模不经济效应,在模型中加入了地块面积的平方项。③ 地块区位属性重点关注了交通区位和经济区位。其中,交通区位包括距国道距离和距高速距离2个指标。④ 地块产权属性选取土地流转年限和产权类型来刻画土地产权的稳定度和明晰度。

综上所述,耕地租金影响因素回归模型可表达如下：

（2）

\ln R = a_{0} + \sum a_{i} X_{i} + ε_{i}

式中：

\ln R

为耕地租金的自然对数;X_i为涵盖地块质量属性、地块规模化属性、地块区位属性、地块产权属性的变量向量;a_i

(i = 1,2, ?, n)

为待估参数;ε_i为随机误差项。

3 结果分析

3.1 耕地地块面积分布特征

根据样本地块面积分布情况,将地块面积划分为4个组别：≤ 6.67 hm²、6.67~33.33 hm²、33.33~66.67 hm²、> 66.67 hm²（图2）。从全国来看,地块面积的平均值和中位数分别为84.54 hm²和13.33 hm²,分属不同面积区间的地块数量比例为≤ 6.67 hm²（38.62%）、6.67~33.33 hm²（32.96%）、33.33~66.67 hm²（13.76%）、> 66.67 hm²（14.67%）。地块面积呈现出显著的区域差异。北方干旱半干旱区、东北平原区和黄淮海平原区流转地块面积较大,平均值均在66.67 hm²以上;华南区和云贵高原区耕地地块规模相对较小,均不足33.33 hm²。大规模流转地块（33.33 hm²以上）主要分布于北方干旱半干旱区、东北平原区、长江中下游地区和黄淮海平原区,上述4个地区大于33.33 hm²的地块数量占所在区域样本的比例分别为47.30%、33.49%、29.37%和27.20%,基本上高于全国总体的平均水平（28.42%）。综上可知,区域的流转地块规模与土地资源禀赋和人地关系密切相关,地形平坦、耕地资源丰富、人口稀疏的区域地块流转规模越大。

图2

新窗口打开|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
图2不同面积区间地块的分布格局

注：

\overset{ˉ}{S}

为各农区地块面积均值(hm²);青藏高原区样本量较少,未呈现该区域的结果,下同。
Fig. 2Distribution pattern of parcels of different sizes

3.2 耕地地块租金分布特征

依据耕地租金的总体分布特征和取整原则,本文将地块租金分为4个组别（图3）。耕地租金的全国平均值为11339.10元/hm²,中位数为9511.95元/hm²。耕地租金分布在≤ 7500元/hm²、7500~15000元/hm²、15000~22500元/hm²、> 22500元/hm²区间的地块数量占比分别为38.93%、37.97%、14.52%和8.59%。耕地租金也表现出显著的空间异质性。云贵高原区和黄淮海平原区耕地租金水平较高,分别达到14997.15元/hm²和13906.35元/hm²,比全国平均水平高出32%和23%。北方干旱半干旱区租金则较低,仅为6078.00元/hm²,相当于全国平均租金水平的一半（54%）。东北平原区、黄土高原区、华南区、四川盆地及周边地区和长江中下游地区等农区租金水平较为接近,都介于9000~12000元/hm²。高租金地块主要分布于黄淮海平原区、云贵高原区和长江中下游区,3个区域中租金水平在15000元/hm²以上的地块数量占比分别达到33.02%、42.61%和14.24%。

图3

新窗口打开|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
图3不同租金区间地块的分布格局

注：

\overset{ˉ}{R}

为各农区地块租金均值(元/hm²)。
Fig. 3Distribution pattern of parcels of different rents

鉴于农区内自然地理和社会经济条件仍存在较大差异,进一步从地级尺度揭示中国耕地租金的分布格局（图4）（为避免估计偏误,仅呈现地块样本大于10的253个地级单元）。类似地将地区耕地平均租金水平划分为3个等级：低租金区（3450~7500元/hm²）、中租金区（7500~15000元/hm²）、高租金区（15000~21750元/hm²）。低租金区、中租金区和高租金区的数量占比分别为20.95%、62.05%和17.00%,说明多数地区耕地租金介于7500~15000元/hm²的水平（图4a）。高租金区集中分布于黄淮海平原地区、长三角地区、云南省东中部及珠三角地区;中租金区分布范围最广,东北、西北、华南、西南均有分布;低租金区主要分布在内蒙古东部及东北平原西部、新疆、江西及湖南等地。地级尺度上耕地租金存在显著的空间关联特征,全局Moran's I指数为0.33并且在1%的显著性水平上拒绝了耕地租金随机分布的原假设。进一步采用局域Moran's I指数来刻画耕地租金集聚分布的具体类型和区域分布。由图4b可知,地级尺度上耕地租金存在4种集聚分布的模式,区域分布范围较广的主要是低—低集聚和高—高集聚。具体而言,低—低集聚区主要位于内蒙古东部及东北地区西部、新疆北部与江西—湖南地区;高—高集聚区集中分布于黄淮海平原区和云南省。

图4

新窗口打开|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT
图4地级尺度耕地租金的区域差异和集聚格局

注：基于自然资源部标准地图服务网站审图号为GS(2016)1569号的标准地图制作,底图无修改。
Fig. 4Regional differences and cluster pattern of farmland rent at city level

本文数据来源于线上土地交易平台,为了验证本文数据的可靠性,选取具有代表性的全国性农户调查数据进行对比。《经济日报》于2018年发布的《新型农业经营主体土地流转调查报告》显示,农业龙头企业、家庭农场、专业大户三类主体平均经营耕地规模分别为52.21 hm²、11.82 hm²、6.81 hm²,其经营规模较大,与本文以规模化地块为主的样本较为接近。该调查表明,新型农业经营主体的土地流转租金平均值为12870元/hm²,中位数为9750元/hm²,这一结果与本文的统计结果较为接近。

3.3 耕地租金影响因素回归结果

在报告回归分析结果前,首先检验解释变量是否存在多重共线性问题,结果显示方差膨胀因子平均值仅为1.57,最大值不超过3,说明解释变量的共线性问题可以忽略。表2同时呈现了基于OLS和分位数回归的估计结果。

Tab. 2
表2
表2OLS和分位数回归估计结果
Tab. 2Ordinary least squares and quantile regression estimates

解释变量		被解释变量：耕地租金自然对数
解释变量		(1) OLS	(2) Q10	(3) Q25	(4) Q50	(5) Q75	(6) Q90
地块	土地类型(水田)
质量	水浇地	0.130^***	0.263^***	0.192^***	0.177^***	0.100^***	0.022
属性	旱地	-0.185^***	-0.446^***	-0.316^***	-0.112^***	-0.024	-0.007
	土壤质地(黏土)
	壤土	0.013	0.137^**	0.101^***	0.056^**	0.01	-0.007
	砂土	-0.397^***	-0.360^***	-0.381^***	-0.400^***	-0.403^***	-0.308^***
	土地肥力	0.081^***	0.027	0.064^***	0.088^***	0.064^***	0.037^**
	灌溉条件	0.085^***	0.144^***	0.119^***	0.022	0.040^***	0.050^***
地块	地块面积	-0.105^***	-0.046^**	-0.101^***	-0.101^***	-0.114^***	-0.158^***
规模化	地块面积平方项	-0.020^***	-0.052^***	-0.050^***	-0.027^***	0.006	0.028^***
属性	地块形状	0.024	0.004	0.05	0.029	0.025	0.077^***
	平整程度	0.052^***	0.148^***	0.083^***	0.097^***	0.059^***	0.023
	进入道路质量	0.126^***	0.223^***	0.215^***	0.180^***	0.048^***	-0.024
地块	距国道距离	-0.092^***	-0.143^***	-0.129^***	-0.107^***	-0.059^***	-0.046^**
区位	距高速距离	-0.077^***	-0.012	-0.045^**	-0.087^***	-0.086^***	-0.098^***
属性	农民年纯收入	-0.065^***	-0.042^**	-0.049^***	-0.051^***	-0.047^***	-0.055^***
	农民主要收入来源	0.240^***	0.574^***	0.392^***	0.170^***	0.075^***	0.037^*
地块	流转年限(1~5年)
产权	5~10年	0.219^***	0.052	0.173^***	0.200^***	0.242^***	0.248^***
属性	10~20年	0.203^***	0.01	0.159^***	0.228^***	0.269^***	0.255^***
	20~30年	0.118^***	-0.046	0.123^***	0.125^***	0.159^***	0.123^***
	>30年	0.024	-0.471^***	-0.058	0.140^***	0.272^***	0.203^***
	权属类型(个人承包土地)
	集体未分包土地	-0.055^***	0.017	-0.012	-0.050^***	-0.044^***	-0.062^***
	国有土地	0.058	-0.119	-0.284^***	-0.162^***	0.045	0.119
	常数项	5.424^***	3.569^***	4.358^***	5.480^***	6.208^***	6.721^***
	样本量^※	6846	6846	6846	6846	6846	6846
	R²/Pseudo R²	0.297	0.271	0.246	0.204	0.154	0.126

注：^***为p < 0.01, ^**为p < 0.05, ^*为p < 0.1;括号内类别为该变量的参照组;^※部分地块因有指标缺失未纳入回归模型。

新窗口打开|下载CSV

首先关注地块质量属性对租金的影响。① 土地肥力能够显著地提升耕地的租金率。除了10%分位点的系数,均值回归和其他分位数回归系数均在5%以上的显著性水平为正,且系数在50%分位点下达到最大。这说明作为影响土地产出能力最为重要的指标之一,土地肥力水平在提升耕地租金总体水平上具有关键作用。② 灌溉条件促进了耕地租金的提高,估计系数随着分位点的减小而增大,但在50%分位点上并不显著。这说明对低租金地块来说,灌溉条件不足是租值较低的主要原因。③ 土地类型和土壤质地也显著地影响地块租金。具体而言,水浇地租金要高于水田,而旱地租金要低于水田;以黏土地块为参照,壤土地块租金要高于黏土地块,而砂土地块租金要低于黏土地块。

进一步考察地块规模化属性对租金的影响。① 既有研究发现农户转出土地的面积与租金呈正相关关系^{[11, 28]}。地块规模化带来的租金溢价主要源自两方面原因。一方面,土地集中连片降低了地块的细碎化程度,有助于提升机械化耕作效率和降低农业生产成本,加之规模经营相关的政策补贴,进而推高了土地租金^[29,30];另一方面,在既定农地制度下,土地大规模流转需要与众多小农户商谈,这必然带来较高的交易成本,这也间接抬升了土地流转价格^[31]。实证结果表明,均值回归和分位数回归（75%分位数除外）均显示地块面积的一次项和二次项均显著为负,说明地块面积和耕地租金存在倒“U”型关系。这意味着租金随着地块面积的增大而上升,在地块面积达到一定程度后,租金将随着地块面积的增大而下降。② 地块形状也是影响耕地租金的重要因素。在90%分位点上地块形状系数显著为正,说明地块形状越规则,租金水平越高。③ 平整程度能够显著的提升耕地租金率,且其估计系数随着分位点的减小而增大,仅在90%分位点上不显著。这表明对耕地租金较低的地块而言,地块平整程度的改善能够更明显地提升租金率。④ 田间道路质量是实现农业机械化生产的基础条件。本文的结果表明,除在90%条件分位数下不显著外,道路质量对地块租金具有显著的正向作用,且估计系数随着分位点的增大而减小,说明改善田间道路质量对低租金水平地块的增值效应更为明显。

地块区位属性方面。从交通区位来看,距国道距离和距高速距离均与租金呈显著的负向关系。即距道路距离越远,租金相应更低。值得注意的是,二者在分位数回归系数的变化趋势上存在显著差异。其中,距国道距离估计系数绝对值随着分位点的增大而减小,而距高速距离的系数绝对值变化趋势则相反。该结果表明不同租金水平的地块对交通区位的需求具有显著的异质性,对低租金地块而言,邻近国道对租金的提升作用更强;而对高租金地块来说,邻近高速公路的区位优势带来的土地溢价更为明显。对此可能的解释为：低租金的耕地主要从事传统的粮食作物种植,一般的国道即可满足产品运输需求;而高租金耕地流转之后有较大比例的土地用于蔬菜等高附加值的经济作物生产,产品对快速交通条件具有更高的要求。从经济区位来看,均值回归和分位数回归系数均显示农民年纯收入显著的负向影响耕地租金。这主要因为农民收入水平越高的地区劳动力价格也更高,这导致农业生产中劳动和资本要素的报酬较高,从而压低了土地要素的报酬。农民的主要收入来源与耕地租金正相关,即相比于以在家种养为主要收入来源的地区,以外出务工收入为主的地区耕地租金更高。

最后,从地块产权属性来看,更长的流转期限有助于提高土地租金,仅在10%分位数上不显著,这一结果印证了土地产权稳定度的提升对土地价值的正向促进作用^[16,17];就地块的权属类型而言,相对于个人承包土地,未分包集体土地或国有土地租金要更低。本文数据表明,个人、集体、国家3种权属类型的耕地平均租金分别为11894.40元/hm²、10381.50元/hm²、9178.20元/hm²。

4 讨论与结论

4.1 讨论

与已有农地流转租金相关研究相比,本文采用土地流转大数据,在全国和地区层面呈现了中国耕地规模流转的租金分布特征,弥补了现有研究在规模化流转租金空间分异方面的不足。与王亚辉等^[19]的研究不同,本文发现规模化流转地块总体具有更高的租金,这意味着随着流转规模的增加,交易摩擦、规模经济效应及规模经营补贴均可能助推租金升高。土地既是生产资料,又是农户重要的家庭生计资产,因此规模化流转引发的租金上涨现象需要辩证全面的看待。从承包地农户角度看,租金上涨提高了农户转出土地的积极性,增加了农户的财产性收入;从转入土地的规模农户角度看,租金上涨增加了农场扩张的成本压力,对其获取合理的利润、维持农业的可持续发展均会产生不利影响。2003年以来,中国的劳动力价格上升非常之快,这是中国农业缺乏竞争力的最主要原因。未来一段时期,在劳动力成本继续上升和规模化经营趋势的双重背景下,高额地租势必进一步推高中国农业尤其是粮食的生产成本,这需要引起各界的重视。

促进农业适度规模经营是提升中国农业尤其是粮食生产效率的必由之路。目前我国户均经营规模仅为0.5 hm²,根据农业部的标准,适度经营规模需要达到当地户均承包地面积的10~15倍,过高的地租显然不利于这一目标的实现。本文的研究结论对农地政策完善具有如下启示：① 应努力降低土地规模化流转过程中的交易成本。较高的交易费用是规模化流转租金高企的重要原因。为此,需要发挥村集体宣传组织作用,通过建立村级土地流转中介中心,引导流转双方形成长期稳定的租赁关系,规范土地流转合同签订,最大程度降低流转过程中的交易摩擦。② 减少政府对农地租赁市场的干预。为了发展规模经营,政府针对规模农户出台了一系列补贴政策,然而这些补贴相当一部分都转化成了地租,抬高了土地租赁价格。并且,由于能够获得补贴的规模农户占比较少,多数普通农户难以获取补贴扩大经营规模,影响了土地流转市场的公平性。③ 加强农田基础设施建设。改善道路、水利等基础设施有助于提高农业生产效率和降低农业生产成本,以缓解地租上涨带来的成本压力。④ 强化农地规模化流转租金的监测。高租金地块的比例的增加意味着土地“非粮化”甚至“非农化”利用增多,如黄淮海平原等粮食主产区约33%的地块在15000元/hm²以上。从维护“粮地粮用”的角度出发,亟需建立覆盖全国的规模化流转租金监测制度,防范农地的过度资本化。

4.2 结论

本文基于土流网发布的2万余笔规模地块数据,揭示了中国规模化流转耕地的租金分异特征及其影响因素。全国规模化流转耕地平均租金为11339.10元/hm²,中位数为9511.95元/hm²,76.90%的地块租金处于15000元/hm²以下。其中云贵高原区和黄淮海平原区租金较高,比全国平均水平分别高出32%和23%;北方干旱半干旱地区租金较低,约为全国平均租金的一半。从行政区尺度来看,耕地租金呈现显著的空间集聚分布模式,黄淮海平原和云南地区是两个高值集聚区。耕地租金受到地块质量属性、地块规模化属性、地块区位属性、地块产权属性的综合影响。总体上,地块质量更好、更适宜规模化耕作、区位更优、产权明晰和稳定的地块具有更高的租金;其中,地块面积与租金为倒“U”型关系。同时,研究还发现因区域种植结构的差异,不同租金水平的地块影响因素具有显著异质性,对低租金地块,改善灌溉条件、平整程度、道路质量对土地租金的提升作用更为明显;而对高租金地块而言,邻近高速公路则具有更显著的土地溢价效应。

参考文献原文顺序
文献年度倒序
文中引用次数倒序
被引期刊影响因子

[1]

Chen Y

, Li X

, Liu

. Increasing China's agricultural labor productivity: Comparison and policy implications from major agrarian countries
Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2018,9(6):575-584.

DOI:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2018.06.001 URL [本文引用: 1]

China’s low agricultural labor productivity has become the key weakness of its agricultural competitiveness and sustainable development, and strategies for improving China’s agricultural labor productivity lack clear and consistent theory and empirical support. To address this issue, the current study uses the methods of convergence index, correlation coefficient, and nonparametric test, to analyze the characteristics and influencing factors of agricultural labor productivity among 32 major agrarian countries during 1961-2013. This analysis shows that the development gap among countries has been narrowing. The USA takes the leading position among all the countries, while some countries with scarce land like Japan have succeeded in achieving transcendence, and other countries like India have experienced relatively slow speed. The agricultural labor productivity is significantly driven by agricultural labor surplus, agricultural product processing, and agricultural industrial structure. The effects of land resource endowment, agricultural mechanization, and biochemical inputs have been declining and in some cases are no longer even significant. It is therefore necessary to shift attention to marketization, diversification, and high quality, instead of the former focus on agricultural intensification, concentration and large-scale operations, and this shift is probably more closely aligned with current practices. There are more people and less land in China, and the agricultural labor force in China still accounts for nearly 30% of the total population. Considering these national conditions, it is very important to simultaneously improve the efficiency of agricultural production of small farmers and promote the successful urbanization of the agricultural labor force. In the medium and long term, it is imperative to improve the competitiveness of Chinese agriculture by adopting related policy arrangements such as induced agricultural technological innovation, production factor substitution, and multifunctional agriculture development.

[2]

Otsuka

, Liu Y

, Yamauchi

. The future of small farms in Asia
Development Policy Review, 2016,34(3):441-461.

DOI:10.1111/dpr.2016.34.issue-3 URL [本文引用: 1]

[3]

Chen

Xiwen

. It is urgent to establish new types agricultural management system
Qiushi, 2013(22):38-41.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 陈锡文. 构建新型农业经营体系刻不容缓
求是, 2013(22):38-41.]

[本文引用: 1]

[4]

Rural Cooperative Economic Management Center of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Department of Policy and Reform of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. Annual Report on Rural Management Statistics of China (2018)
Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2019.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 农业农村部农村合作经济指导司, 农业农村部政策与改革司. 中国农村经营管理统计年报(2018)
北京: 中国农业出版社, 2019.]

[本文引用: 1]

[5]

Department of Price of National Development and Reform Commission. China Agricultural Production Costs and Returns Compilation (2000-2018)
Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2019.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 国家发展和改革委员会价格司. 全国农产品成本收益资料汇编(2000-2018)
北京:中国统计出版社, 2019.]

[本文引用: 1]

[6]

Gao

Liangliang

, Du

Zhixiong

. Educational level, intergeneration relation and multiple factors of the evolution of family farm
Reform, 2016(9):48-58.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 郜亮亮, 杜志雄. 教育水准、代际关系与家庭农场演进的多重因素
改革, 2016(9):48-58.]

[本文引用: 1]

[7]

Quan

Shiwen

, Hu

Lifang

, Zeng

Yinchu

, et al. The overcapitalization of land resources in rural China
Chinese Rural Economy, 2018(7):2-18.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 全世文, 胡历芳, 曾寅初, 等. 论中国农村土地的过度资本化
中国农村经济, 2018(7):2-18.]

[本文引用: 1]

[8]

Fan

Chuanqi

, Fan

Dan

. The high farmland rent: Cause analysis and policy implication
Journal of Sichuan Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), 2016,43(6):114-120.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 范传棋, 范丹. 高额耕地租金: 原因解析与政策启示
四川师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2016,43(6):114-120.]

[本文引用: 1]

[9]

Wang

Yayun

, Cai

Yinying

. The effect of the function of cultivated land use on their land rental behavior of rural household in different main function zones
China Population, Resources and Environment, 2017,27(7):128-138.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 王亚运, 蔡银莺. 不同主体功能区农户家庭耕地利用功能对土地流转行为的影响
中国人口·资源与环境, 2017,27(7):128-138.]

[本文引用: 1]

[10]

Qiu

Tongwei

, Luo

Biliang

, He

Qinying

. Market transition of agricultural land transfer: Theory and evidence based on the relationship between transaction partners and land rents
China Rural Survey, 2019(4):128-144.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 仇童伟, 罗必良, 何勤英. 农地流转市场转型: 理论与证据: 基于对农地流转对象与农地租金关系的分析
中国农村观察, 2019(4):128-144.]

[本文引用: 1]

[11]

Yueqing

, Gu

Tianzhu

, Chen

Yishan

, et al. Agricultural scale-up management from the perspective of land parcels: Discussion on the relation between circulation rent and plot size
Management World, 2017(7):65-73.

[本文引用: 3]

[ 纪月清, 顾天竹, 陈奕山, 等. 从地块层面看农业规模经营: 基于流转租金与地块规模关系的讨论
管理世界, 2017(7):65-73.]

[本文引用: 3]

[12]

Hong

Mingyong

, Gong

Lijuan

, Hong

. Empirical research on farmers' contract selection and its mechanism of agricultural land transfer: Evidence from 3 counties in Guizhou
China Land Sciences, 2016,30(3):12-19.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 洪名勇, 龚丽娟, 洪霓. 农地流转农户契约选择及机制的实证研究: 来自贵州省三个县的经验证据
中国土地科学, 2016,30(3):12-19.]

[本文引用: 1]

[13]

Wang

, Riedinger

, Jin S

. Land documents, tenure security and land rental development: Panel evidence from China
China Economic Review, 2015,36:220-235.

DOI:10.1016/j.chieco.2015.09.005 URL [本文引用: 1]

[14]

Wang Y

, Xin L

, Zhang H

, et al. An estimation of the extent of rent-free farmland transfer and its driving forces in rural China: A multilevel logit model analysis
Sustainability, 2019,11(11):3161. DOI: 10.3390/su11113161.

DOI:10.3390/su11113161 URL [本文引用: 1]

[15]

Lin

Tong

, Song

, Qiao

Yuanbo

. Influence factors on price of farmland transfer organized by farmers in main grain-producing region of Northeast China
Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2017,33(18):260-266.

URL [本文引用: 1]

[ 林彤, 宋戈, 乔元波. 东北粮食主产区农户主导型农村土地流转价格影响因素
农业工程学报, 2017,33(18):260-266.]

[本文引用: 1]

[16]

Cheng

Lingguo

, Zhang

, Liu

Zhibiao

. Does land titling promote rural land circulation in China?
Management World, 2016(1):88-98.

[本文引用: 2]

[ 程令国, 张晔, 刘志彪. 农地确权促进了中国农村土地的流转吗?
管理世界, 2016(1):88-98.]

[本文引用: 2]

[17]

Wang Y

, Li X

, Li

, et al. Land titling program and farmland rental market participation in China: Evidence from pilot provinces
Land Use Policy, 2018,74:281-290.

DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.07.030 URL [本文引用: 1]

[18]

Ting

, Zhu

Daolin

. Studies on the spatio-temporal evolution and macromechanism of land circulation price in China
Resources Science, 2018,40(11):2202-2212.

DOI:10.18402/resci.2018.11.07 URL [本文引用: 1]

In recent years, the studies of land circulation are frequently seen in research field, but, up to now, there is still no general judgement on the basic situation of land circulation price in China. Based on the land circulation price data at the provincial level of 2009 and 2017, this paper adopts ESDA method and space econometric model to carry out the analysis of the spatio-temporal evolution and macro differentiation mechanism of land circulation price in China. The results show that land circulation price overall rose 33.28% between 2009 and 2017, but the growth rates were uneven among provinces. In general, the superposition area of the eastern developed regions and the main grain producing areas increased greatly, while the southeast coastal areas and the northwest hinterland increased slowly. Besides, the land circulation price was decreasing from east to west, and presented inverted u-shaped structure from north to south. Moreover, Land circulation price showed a significant "HH-LL" clustering structure among provinces, and with the development of land circulation market, the spillover effect is further strengthened. Finally, spatial econometric analysis shows that the differentiation of land circulation price among provinces in China is mainly affected by regional economic factors. With the development of land circulation market, the role of natural factors is decreasing, while the influence of regional economic factors and cultivated land resources endowment is further strengthened. Based on this study, this paper suggests that we should follow the objective law of spatial differentiation of land circulation price in China, avoid blind price comparison, timely regulate the land circulation price and restrain excessive capitalization of cultivated land.

[ 杜挺, 朱道林. 中国土地流转价格时空演化与宏观机制研究
资源科学, 2018,40(11):2202-2212.]

[本文引用: 1]

[19]

Wang

Yahui

, Li

Xiubin

, Xin

Liangjie

, et al. Regional differences of land circulation in China and its drivers: Based on 2003-2013 rural fixed observation points data
Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018,73(3):487-502.

DOI:10.11821/dlxb201803008 URL [本文引用: 2]

Land circulation is an important measure that can be utilized to enable agricultural management at a moderate scale. It is imperative to explore spatiotemporal changes in land circulation and the factors that drive these variations in order to increase the vitality of land rental market in China. Based on a sample of 169 511 farm households from the rural fixed observation point system between 2003 and 2013, this paper revealed the regional differences in land circulation and used Heckman two-stage models to identify the drivers of regional differences in land circulation. The results of this study show that: (1) the rate of land circulation in China rose from 17.09% to 24.1% over the course of the study period, an average rate of 0.7%. (2) The rate of land circulation in the south of China has been higher than that in the north, the average land rental payment was 283.74 yuan per mu, and 55.05% of farm households did not pay a fee in the process of land circulation. In contrast, the average rent that leasers received was 243.23 yuan per mu nationally even though 52.36% of households did not receive any payments from their tenants. At present, the rate of rent-free land circulation was more than 50% in China's land rental market. In addition, the average rent in developed provinces, such as Jiangsu, Shandong, Guangdong and Zhejiang, was 40% higher than the national average. (3) The results show that land quality, geographic location, transaction costs, and household characteristics have all significantly affected land circulation in different regions of China. The marginal effects of land quality and geographic location were larger in the plain regions, while transaction cost was the key factor influencing land circulation in the hilly and mountainous regions. The essence of rent-free land circulation was a sign of mismatch of land resources, and the marginalization of mountainous regions and higher transaction costs reduced the potential value of land resources. Thus, as the opportunity cost of farming continues to rise across China, the depreciation of land assets will become irreversible and land abandonment will be anabatic in the hills and mountains in the future. The transaction costs in land rental market should be reduced by establishing the land circulation intermediaries at the township level. Also, more attention should be given to the critical issues of farmland abandonment and poverty reduction in the hills and mountains.

[ 王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰, 等. 中国土地流转的区域差异及其影响因素: 基于2003—2013年农村固定观察点数据
地理学报, 2018,73(3):487-502.]

[本文引用: 2]

[20]

Liu

Luo

, Xu

Xinliang

, Liu

Jiyuan

, et al. Impact of farmland changes on production potential in China during recent two decades
Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014,69(12):1767-1778.

DOI:10.11821/dlxb201412003 URL [本文引用: 1]

2, which shows tremendous heterogeneity in spatial pattern. The productivity in eastern China is high, while that of northwestern China is low. High value region of farmland potential productivity is mainly distributed in South China and the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River. (2) The obvious tempo-spatial heterogeneity of farmland change from 1990 to 2010 has a significant influence on the farmland potential productivity in China. The trend shows the farmland potential productivity decreased in southern China and increased in northern China. Furthermore, the gravity of the growth of farmland potential productivity moves gradually from northeastern to northwestern China. The net decrease of farmland potential productivity is 2.97 billion tons, which occupies 0.29% of the national total productivity. (3) There is a huge difference of the farmland potential productivity in response to farmland change between two periods from 1990 to 2000 and from 2000 to 2010. During the first decade, net increase in the cultivated land areas is 10.11 billion tons, which primarily spread across Northeast China Plain and arid and semiarid regions of North China. During the next decade, net decrease in the cultivated land areas is 13.08 billion tons, primarily distributed in the middle and lower Yangtze River region and the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. In general, during the last two decades, the reason for the increase of the farmland potential productivity may contribute to the reclamation of grassland, woodland and unused land, and the reason for the decrease of the farmland potential productivity may result from the urbanization that occupies the cultivated land and Green for Grain Project that returns farmland to forests and grasslands.]]>

[ 刘洛, 徐新良, 刘纪远, 等. 1990—2010年中国耕地变化对粮食生产潜力的影响
地理学报, 2014,69(12):1767-1778.]

[本文引用: 1]

[21]

Chen

Qiang

. Advanced Econometrics and Stata Application
Beijing:Higher Education Press, 2014.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 陈强. 高级计量经济学及Stata应用
北京:高等教育出版社, 2014.]

[本文引用: 1]

[22]

Koenker

, Bassett

. Regression quantiles
Econometrica, 1978,46(1):33-50.

DOI:10.2307/1913643 URL [本文引用: 1]

[23]

Barlowe

..Gu Shuzhong trans. Land Resources Economics:The Economics of Real Estate
Beijing: Beijing Agriculture Press, 1989.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 雷利·巴洛维.谷树忠, 译. 土地资源经济学: 不动产经济学
北京: 北京农业大学出版社, 1989.]

[本文引用: 1]

[24]

Huang Z

, Guan L

, Jin S

. Scale farming operations in China
International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 2017,20(2):191-200.

DOI:10.22434/IFAMR2016.0018 URL [本文引用: 1]

[25]

Yamauchi

. Rising real wages, mechanization and growing advantage of large farms: Evidence from Indonesia
Food Policy, 2016,58:62-69.

DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.11.004 URL [本文引用: 1]

[26]

Huang

Jikun

, Ji

Xianqing

. The verification of the right to use farmland and farmers' long-term investment in farmland
Management World, 2012(9): 76-81, 99, 187-188.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 黄季焜, 冀县卿. 农地使用权确权与农户对农地的长期投资
管理世界, 2012(9): 76-81, 99, 187-188.]

[本文引用: 1]

[27]

Xinyan

, Luo

Biliang

. Farmland rights confirmation and farmland transfer: Evidence from Guangdong and Jiangxi Province
Reform, 2016(4):85-94.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 胡新艳, 罗必良. 新一轮农地确权与促进流转: 粤赣证据
改革, 2016(4):85-94.]

[本文引用: 1]

[28]

Wang

Chengliang

, Chen

Meiqiu

, Lu

Yanfei

, et al. Farmers' willing price for farmland transfer and its influencing factors
Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018,46(3):294-298.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 王成量, 陈美球, 鲁燕飞, 等. 农户的耕地流转意愿价格及其影响因素分析
江苏农业科学, 2018,46(3):294-298.]

[本文引用: 1]

[29]

Tan S

, Heerink

, Kruseman

, et al. Do fragmented landholdings have higher production costs? Evidence from rice farmers in Northeastern Jiangxi province, P. R. China
China Economic Review, 2008,19(3):347-358.

DOI:10.1016/j.chieco.2007.07.001 URL [本文引用: 1]

AbstractLand fragmentation is generally seen as an obstacle to agricultural productivity improvements, but it can also facilitate labor smoothing and risk diversification. In this paper we examine the impact of land fragmentation on the variable production costs of rice farmers in three villages in Jiangxi Province, P.R. China. We find that changes in the number of plots and plot size distribution, as measured by the Simpson index, do not affect total production costs per unit output, but cause a shift between cost categories. Farmers with more and smaller plots tend to use more labor and fewer modern technologies as compared to farmers with fewer and larger plots. Other aspects of land fragmentation, however, do affect total production costs. A reduction of the average distance to plots and an increase in farm size decrease the total production costs per ton. We conclude that land consolidation programs can only contribute to the joint policy goals of increasing agricultural production capacity and reducing the rural labor surplus, if such programs are accompanied by measures aimed at creating alternative market opportunities and at providing appropriate off-farm employment opportunities.]]>

[30]

Zhang

, Mishra A

, Hirsch

, et al. Factors affecting farmland rental in rural China: Evidence of capitalization of grain subsidy payments
Land Use Policy, 2020,90:104275. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104275.

DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104275 URL [本文引用: 1]

[31]

Wang

Jiayue

, Li

Xiubin

, Xin

Liangjie

. Spatial-temporal variations and influential factors of land transfer in China
Journal of Natural Resources, 2018,33(12):2067-2083.

DOI:10.31497/zrzyxb.20171215 URL [本文引用: 1]

[ 王佳月, 李秀彬, 辛良杰. 中国土地流转的时空演变特征及影响因素研究
自然资源学报, 2018,33(12):2067-2083.]

[本文引用: 1]