打印

作者

Han Wang;Peng Cheng;Pupu Liang;Ke Liu;Xin Nie

来源

HABITAT INTERNATIONAL,Vol.99,P.102159

语言

英文

关键字

Spatial regulation;MFOZ;Windfalls and wipeouts;Land-lost farmers;Welfare;China

作者单位

School of Public Administration of Guangxi University, No 100, Da Xue Road, Nanning, 530004, China;Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA;School of Environment, Education & Development, University of Manchester, Arthur Lewis Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK;National School of Development, Peking University, Yiheyuan Road 5, Beijing, 100871, China;School of Public Administration of Guangxi University, No 100, Da Xue Road, Nanning, 530004, China;Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA;School of Environment, Education & Development, University of Manchester, Arthur Lewis Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK;National School of Development, Peking University, Yiheyuan Road 5, Beijing, 100871, China

摘要

Spatial regulation produces different advantages in areas with different land resource endowments. It also affects the welfare of stakeholders in different regions. Existing studies mainly focus on the “visible” welfare “windfalls” and “wipeouts” caused by spatial regulation, yet pay little attention on the “invisible” effects. This article selects Tianyang County (a key development zone) and Tiandong County (a restricted development zone) as its principal research areas. These areas have been divided as part of China's major function oriented zone (MFOZ) planning. The MFOZ represents the most significant and broad exercise in spatial regulation. These regions located in Baise City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China. After applying Sen's feasibility capability theory as the foundation on which to build a theoretical framework, this article calculates and compares the changes in farmers' welfare before and after losing land in the key development zones (weak spatial regulation) and the restricted development zones (strong spatial regulation) by using a fuzzy mathematics method. The impact of spatial regulation on the “invisible” welfare of land-lost farmers is then analyzed. The results show that: (1) differences in spatial regulation produce “windfalls” in the total welfare of land-lost farmers in the key development zones, but “wipeouts” in the restricted development zones; (2) the “visible” welfare of economic income for land-lost farmers are “windfalls” in the key development zones, but are “wipeouts” in the restricted development zones; (3) the “invisible” welfares of social security, development opportunities, living conditions and psychological conditions are “windfalls” for land-lost farmers in the key development zones, but are “wipeouts” in the restricted development zones; (4) the “invisible” welfare of living environments for land-lost farmers are “wipeouts” in the key development zones, but are “windfalls” in the restricted development zones. This study thereby provides evidence-based insights which can enable countries to formulate spatial regulation systems that promote balanced development among regions, and to fully consider the “invisible” welfare compensation of land-lost farmers as part of land expropriation compensation policies.