Personally, I have a strong concern for China, that's why I read this article, and I felt that writer's argument doesn't make sense. I regard the writer doesn't have an in-depth understanding on China's present situation. According to the article, it said China should authorize for peasants to get the private ownership of their land.
I'm calling into question that the collective land should be privatized.
Now, I am going to explain why it isn't appropriate for China's current circumstances.
Below is the main argument of writers why the government should authorize the private ownership.
Pros
0. right to mortgage their land ->raise money to boost its productivity
1. right to sell their land -> sufficient capital to start life anew in urban areas
2. accumulation of land in the fewer hand -> boost its productivity
3. Boost urban consumption
4. Encourage the migration of unproductive rural labour into the cities
This is my argument against the writer's statement.
Cons
0. Even though they have money to boost its productivity, which can buy up-to-date agricultural facilities, it is no use under small-scale farming.
1. Can they really start a new life in urban areas?
- Of course not, most of them are in serious poverty.
-
They coudn't get enough capital by selling their land for urban life, because of the huge gap of the cost of living between city and country.
-
Migrants typically work long hours for low pay in dirty, difficult or dangerous jobs, endure dingy accommodation without essential services.
2. Can it boost consumption?
- When it comes to their poor living condition, it is not likely. They dan't have economic ability to purchase expensive goods.
3. Accumulation of land doesn't guarantee production efficiency.
It depends on who owes the land. If the owners don't have proper experience and know-how on large-scale farming, the result can be reverse because they couldn't handle huge land.
4. Because of high unemployment rate, cities couldn't accommodate the mass migration of rural labour.
This is the latest figures
- Urban joblessness, now averages around 8-9%, according to scholars at the Beijing-based Development Research Center, a government think tank.
- Reliable numbers aren't available, but some estimate there are at least 19 million Chinese who are out of work.
- In the next 10 years, it is predicted that 150 million farmers will move to cities looking for work; that means China must create 17 million jobs a year just to maintain its current unemployment rate.
Under these conditions, if the authorization of ownership of land foster the migration of peasants, the result will be devastating for the country.
Accumulation of farm land in fewer hands would need to be offset by growth of non-agricultural jobs, and employment figures suggest that growth is not happening at the requisite rate. Already, 50 million peasants have become landelss and they couldn't get the job in the city. If these people, who have nowhere to turn, would increase more and more, they could one day rise up in open revolt.
Then, what is a realistic solution to this?
In favor of the magnitude of Chines population, it really requires step-by-step stage to reform the rural area.
Suggestion
- For the foreseeable future, therefore, the best bet for rural China lies in the promotion of diversified, smallholder agriculture that provides an adequate living-even if most farm families also supplement their incomes with local off-farm work.
- Allow and encourage the development of autonomous farmers’ associations that can play a role in bulk buying of inputs, marketing of produce, spreading of technical knowledge, and improving access to credit for productive investments.