房地权利结构制度研究综述

A Review on the Structure of Housing and Land Rights Research

表面上看,我国学界对房与地之间的物权结构关系形成了“房地一体”通说,但学界对“房地一体”的内涵、房地权利间的应然结构及如何建构该结构问题,尚未形成共识。由于房、地在物理上不可分离、房权对土地权源的需求、维持房地整体的经济效益、便于交易以及符合社会习惯等因素,诸多学者主张房、地不可分离的观点。但房地二者在理论上的权利结构,形成了一体处分说等五种学说。而“房地一体”与房权独立性、房权人权益保护和房、地要素流通间矛盾,使“房地一体”主义自诞生之日起就备受质疑。应然分离说针对为房权提供土地权源这一核心问题,提出了权能分离、权利束和认可租赁权三条权利结构重置路径,但并未消弭应然一体说的争鸣。未来应从提高不动产要素市场配置效率出发,建构房地权利结构,区分永续房权和有期房权、永续权源和有期权源,此为有实践价值的研究方向。

On the surface,China has formed a general“integrarianism theory”on the structure of property rights between housing and land,but academics have not yet reached a consensus on the connotation of“integration ofhousing and landrights”,the idealrelationship between these two rights,and how to construct these structure.Due to factors such as the physical inseparability,the demand for land rights sources of housing rights,the maintenance of the overall economic benefits of real estate,the convenience of transactions,and the conform to social customs,many scholars advocate the view that housing and land are inseparable,but have formed five theories on the theoretical power structure of the two,including the theory of integrated disposition.However,the contradiction between the“integrarianism theory”and the independence of housing rights,the protection of the rights and interests of housing rights holders and the cireulation of housing and land elements have made the“integrarianism theory”doctrine questioned since its birth.Aiming at the core issue of providing land rights sources for housing rights,the“separatism theory”puts forward three rights structure reset paths:separation of powers,bundle of rights and recognition of lease rights,but it has not eliminated the controversy of integrators.In the future,we should start from the actual needs of China's economic development to construct the structure of housing and land rights,and distinguish between perpetual housing rights and future-term housing rights,perpetual right sources and option sources,which may be meaningful research directions.