农村宅基地制度改革可以参照农地吗?——基于两种“三权分置”改革的比较分析

Can the Rural Homestead System Reform Refer to the Farmland System Reform?——Based on the Comparative Analysis of the Two“Three-Rights Separation”Reforms

农村宅基地和农地制度改革是全面推进乡村振兴战略实施的重要改革任务,对于增强农村发展的动力和活力具有重要的作用。当前农地"三权分置"改革的实践经验较为成熟,而宅基地"三权分置"改革则相对滞后。中央和地方在完善宅基地制度设计的过程中,尽管可以大致参照农地制度改革的基本框架,但亟需厘清两者在改革的目标、内容和风险方面的本质差异。本文通过对以上三个层面进行系统深入的比较分析,认为宅基地制度改革应在坚持"一户一宅、户有所居"的公平底线的基础上,结合试点经验积极探索宅基地使用权的处分和收益权能的实现形式,同时应防范多种风险以避免改革异化,从而有效盘活农村大量闲置的宅基地及农房。

The reforms of rural homestead system and farmland system are important tasks in the comprehensive promotion of the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy,which play an important role in enhancing the power and vitality of rural development.The current practical experience of the"three-rights separation"of the farmland is mature,while the reform of the"three-rights separation"of the homestead is relatively lagging.In the process of improving the design of the homestead system,although the central and local governments can roughly refer to the basic framework of the farmland system reform,it is urgent to clarify the essential differences between the two in terms of reform objectives,content and risks.Based on the systematic and thorough comparative analysis of the above three levels,this article points out that the reform of the homestead system should be based on the fair bottom line of"one household,one house,or each household has its own residence",combined with pilot experience to actively explore the realization form of the disposition and income rights based on the use rights of homesteads.At the same time,we should guard against various risks to avoid reform alienation,so as to effectively revitalize the large number of idle homesteads and houses in rural areas.