| 摘要: |
| 随着中国乡村振兴战略的深入推
进，农村土地制度经历了从集体所有到家庭
联产承包责任制的变迁。在该过程中，土地
确权和流转过程中因产权不明晰、经济利益
驱动等因素而引发了与传统村落保护之间的
冲突。为应对农村土地权属引发的传统村落
保护问题，本研究梳理了目前乡村土地转型
过程中出现的土地所有权使用权分离、土地
流转与产权模糊相关问题对传统村落保护的
影响，提出明晰土地权属以减少纠纷、结合
土地整治提升传统村落土地利用效率、提高
农民和地方政府在文化保护中的参与度以及
建立多方协调机制，确保政府、村集体、个
人的共同参与与合作，最终实现土地合理利
用与文化遗产有效保护的双赢局面。本研究
旨在对农村土地权属与传统村落保护协调机
制进行研究，实现中国式现代化的乡村土地
合理转型，促进乡村经济发展与文化保护的
协同推进。 |
| 关键词: 农村土地权属 传统村落 文化遗
产 协调机制 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20250121005 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:2022 年教育部人文社科项目（22YJC760067） |
|
| Research on the conflict and coordination mechanism between rural land tenure andtraditional village protection |
|
Wu Yao,MIAO Mingrui,WU Yonglan,DING Zirong
|
| Abstract: |
| With the ongoing implementation of China’s rural revitalization strategy, rural land
institutions have undergone significant structural transformations—from collective ownership to
household contract responsibility systems. These changes, while promoting economic modernization,
have also triggered profound conflicts between land tenure reforms and the protection of traditional
villages. This study investigates the underlying causes, manifestations, and coordination mechanisms
of conflicts between rural land tenure arrangements and traditional village preservation, with the aim
of contributing to both theoretical exploration and policy innovation.The paper begins by outlining the
historical evolution and current characteristics of China’s rural land tenure system. It emphasizes the
legal and institutional roots of “ownership-use separation,” whereby village collectives retain
ownership of rural land while individual farmers hold use rights. This dual-rights system, while
beneficial for agricultural production, introduces complications in cases where land is earmarked for
development or circulation. Problems such as blurred ownership, ambiguous boundaries between
rights holders, and inconsistencies in regulatory implementation frequently emerge—issues that are
particularly acute in traditional village contexts where land carries both economic and cultural values.
Through a systematic review of land tenure conflicts, the study identifies key tension points,
including: 1) the ambiguous delineation of rights in the land certification process; 2) deficiencies in
land circulation agreements, especially the absence of clauses protecting cultural heritage; 3) weak
enforcement capacity at the grassroots level. Case studies—such as those from Fujian’s Yongding
Tulou, Anhui’s Yixian ancient dwellings, and Guangdong’s Yongshan Village—demonstrate how
failures in land governance directly lead to the degradation or loss of historical structures, village
spatial patterns, and intangible heritage assets. In Yongding, for example, market-oriented land
circulation after incomplete certification led to inappropriate commercial conversions of protected
Tulou buildings. In Yongshan Village, oversight focused only on iconic landmarks, neglecting the
interconnectedness of surrounding earthen houses, which ultimately collapsed due to long-term
neglect and unregulated demolition.In analyzing these conflicts, the study frames rural land as more
than a production factor—it is a carrier of identity, history, and social cohesion. The failure to
integrate land tenure policy with cultural preservation imperatives reflects deeper institutional
misalignments between economic development goals and heritage conservation ethics. The study
explores the institutional fragmentation across government departments—namely culture, natural
resources, housing and urban-rural development—and highlights the urgent need for an interdepartmental
coordination mechanism to prevent administrative gaps. To reconcile economic
development with cultural preservation, the paper proposes a multi-tiered coordination mechanism.
First, it suggests enhancing legal protection for cultural properties in land law by classifying heritage
land under special-use zones with strict regulations on use changes and development intensity.
Drawing on provincial precedents (e. g., Sichuan’s Traditional Village Protection Ordinance), it
proposes introducing composite property rights that recognize both land use and heritage protectionrights. Second, the study recommends refining land circulation agreements by embedding enforceable clauses on building integrity, visual coherence, and
construction limits within cultural zones. The paper also argues for the institutionalization of cultural oversight in land-use change approvals, supported by realtime
digital platforms for monitoring building modifications and land-use conversions. At the governance level, the paper advocates for strengthening the
enforcement capacity of grassroots insti慴瑵楴潩湯?s. It identifies personnel shortages, fiscal constraints, and a lack of professional training as the main barriers to
effective heritage-land governance. Solutions include dedicated training programs for village-level cadres, earmarked financial transfers for cultural protection,
and the formation of interdisciplinary heritage management teams embedded within rural governance structures. Moreover, the study proposes leveraging
blockchain and big data to digitize land tenure and conservation records, thus improving transparency, traceability, and accountability in land-based decisionmaking.
Beyond governance structures, the study emphasizes the centrality of local residents—especially farmers—as stewards of both land and culture. By
establishing benefit-sharing mechanisms that allow villagers to participate in and profit from heritage protection, the study calls for the alignment of individual
incentives with collective conservation goals. Models such as village-owned cooperatives, cultural tourism dividends, and performance-based subsidies are
explored as potential instruments to motivate resident participation. Furthermore, the study highlights the role of public education in fostering cultural
awareness and empowering communities to advocate for their own heritage. In conclusion, the paper argues that conflicts between rural land tenure and
traditional village protection stem from institutional fragmentation, legal ambiguities, and incentive misalignments. Addressing these issues requires not only
technical legal reforms, but also a systemic rethinking of governance, participation, and interdepartmental coordination. The proposed coordination mechanism
—combining legal innovation, grassroots capacity-building, technological support, and participatory governance—offers a roadmap for harmonizing land use
and cultural preservation in the era of rural revitalization. By advancing such integrative solutions, this research contributes to the broader discourse on China’s
path toward culturally sustainable rural moderniz |
| Key words: 南宁学院艺术设计学院,中国—葡萄牙文化遗产保护科学“一带一路”联合实验室南宁研究基地,讲师 |
