文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：宅基地“三权分置”改革的路径选择:变“政策主导”为“法律主治”

英文题名：The Path Choice of the Reform of“Separation of Three Rights”in Homestead:From“Policy Leading”to“Legal Treatment”

作者：董新辉[1]

机构：[1]绍兴文理学院商学院法律系,浙江绍兴312000

年份：2020

期号：4

起止页码：149

中文期刊名：贵州师范大学学报：社会科学版

收录：国家哲学社会科学学术期刊数据库

基金：浙江省教育厅科研计划成果“乡村振兴背景下宅基地‘三权分置’改革的基本理念”(Y201941048);国家社科基金一般项目“三权分置下农地经营权入典问题研究”(18BFX155);绍兴市哲学社会科学智库专题项目“绍兴市宅基地制度改革立法研究”(135573)的阶段性成果。

语种：中文

中文关键词：宅基地;三权分置;政策;法律

外文关键词：homestead;separation of three rights;policy;law

中文摘要：通过政策文件提出的“三权分置”改革方案由于与传统物权法理论存在难以调和的矛盾而无法与现行法律衔接,使得改革陷入僵局。其根本原因在于宅基地改革一直坚持“政策主导”,未能正确处理政策与法律之间的关系。政策虽然具有一定的探索试错属性,亦可以作为法律的重要补充,但“政策主导”的改革存在着边际收益递减严重、制定程序相对简单、不稳定性较大以及规范性和强制力均较弱等诸多弊端。在宅基地改革中坚持“法律主治”是历史的必然选择,应遵循“法律为主,政策为辅”的基本原则,将“三权分置”改革后各权利的名称、属性、内容以及相互关系等基础问题在《民法典物权编》中予以明确规定,实现从“政策主导”向“法律主治”的转变。

外文摘要：In the policy document, the reform plan of "separation of three rights" cannot be connected with the law because of the in reconcilable contradiction with the traditional property law theory, which makes the reform deadlock. The fundamental reason is that the reform of homestead has always insisted on "policy leading" and failed to correctly handle the relationship between policy and law. Although the policy has a certain nature of exploring trial, it can also be an important supplement to the law, but the reform of "policy leading" has many disadvantages, such as the serious decline of marginal income, the relatively simple formulation procedure, the large instability and the weak normative and coercive force. In the reform of homestead, it is the inevitable choice of history to insist on "legal treatment", which should follow the basic principle of "the law is the main one, the policy is the secondary one", and the basic issues such as name, attribute, content and the relationship of each right after the reform of "separation of three rights" should be clearly stipulated in the Civil Code on Property Rights, so as to realize the transformation from "policy leading" to "legal treatment".