浙江财经大学金融学院邹静讲师、上海交通大学国际与公共事务学院陈杰教授（通讯作者）、英国谢菲尔德大学东亚研究系陈瑜讲师共同合作在土地管理领域国际权威期刊Land Use Policy发表论文“Hometown Landholdings and Rural Migrants’ Integration Intention: The Case of Urban China”。该文剖析了家乡土地持有情况对农村流动人口在城市融合意愿的影响，并探讨了其政策含义。Land Use Policy为环境类SSCI一区期刊，2021年影响因子为6.189。

概要：本文探讨了农村进城流动人口在所流入城市融合意愿与其家乡土地持有情况之间的关系。文章发现，农村移民的城市融合意愿最高的情形是，在家乡只拥有承包地而没有宅基地，其次是没有任何土地，第三是承包地宅基地都有，最低的是只有宅基地没有承包地。作者认为，这说明承包地由于逐步可以市场化流转，能通过资产效应对农村进城流动人口的城市融合意愿起到支持性的拉力效应(pull effect)，而宅基地由于还相对难以资产化，就主要通过保障效应和情感效应，对城市融合意愿起到阻碍性的反向拉力效应。文章的政策含义是，为了提高农村进城流动人口融入城市的意愿，支持采取或加快推动以下政策：扩大农地使用权租赁市场，增加其租金收入或资产价值；将闲置宅基地纳入城乡一体化的住房土地市场，并通过某种形式的市场主导国有化，将宅基地可以实现退出机制；允许闲置农村住房出租，或在宅基地集中整理后建造为城市居民服务的租赁住房社区，加快构建城乡一体化住房体系的改革，并进而由此推动城乡资源要素整合和城乡一体化发展展。通过进一步研究，文章还发现社保纳入可以降低家乡土地对城市融合意愿的抑制效应，但具有区域和代际异质性。

文献目录信息：

Zou, Jing, Jie Chen*, and Yu Chen. 2022. “Hometown Landholdings and Rural Migrants’ Integration Intention: The Case of Urban China.” Land Use Policy 121 (October): 106307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106307

Abstract: This paper investigates the association between hometown landholdings and rural migrants’ intentions to integrate in their destination societies in Chinese cities. We argue that hometown landholding affects rural migrants’ integration intention through the asset effect, security effect and emotional attachment effect. The empirical work based on a large national micro-level data extracted from the 2017 China Migrants Dynamic Survey (CMDS) shows that, rural migrants who possess contracted farmland but no homestead land in hometown have the highest level of integration intention, followed by those without any land, those with both types of land, and finally those with homestead land only. Such findings suggest that the possession of farmland tends to boost rural migrants’ integration intention while the possession of homestead land appears to have a depressing effect. However, the depressing effect of homestead land on average dominates the boosting effect of farmland. Further analysis shows that, the positive effect of farmland is strengthened when the asset function of contracted farmland is strong, while the negative effect of homestead land is reduced when migrants have purchased housing in the host cities. The paper also identities the mediating effect of local social security insurance in the impacts of hometown landholding on rural migrants’ integration intentions as well as the heterogeneity of such impacts across age-cohorts and subgroups associated with different connection levels to hometowns.

Highlights:

•Hometown landholding affects Chinese rural migrants’ integration intentions in the host cities.

•This impact is through asset effect, security effect and emotional attachment effect.

•Rural migrants possessing contracted farmland but no housing land have strongest integration intentions.

•Those without any land, with both types of land, and with housing land only have lower integration intentions.

•Farmland tends to boost rural migrants’ integration intention while housing land depresses.