Abstract:  Land development rights transfer (LDRT), centered on the variation of urban and rural construction areas, is an important policy to promote rural development through the redistribution of land increment income. However, local governments exhibit different rural development outcomes during implementation of LDRT. In this study, how LDRT affects rural development under differentiated local governance was explored from the perspective of extractive and inclusive institutions. Regions which have established inclusive institutions can realize long-term sustainable development. Politically, inclusive institutions maintain legal order and form extensive distribution of power. Economically, inclusive institutions demonstrate clear security of property rights and market-oriented allocation of resource elements. However, extractive institutions have the opposite characteristics. In this study, the influences of LDRT on rural development were investigated through case study comparison of Dezhou and Chengdu from the perspective of extractive and inclusive governance traits of local governments. Under extractive governance, local governments promote LDRT coercively, monopolize the transaction market, and exhaust the property rights of collective construction land by catering to land finance. Due to the absence of a transaction mechanism, the rural collective construction land quota benefits the city, but no capital investment is attracted to rural areas. Finally, this causes impairment of rights and interests of villages and peasants. The poor interaction between governance and rights and interests hinders rural development. This manifests in the governments’ fast and mandatory promotion of village integration when it benefits the city, and governments' monopoly over the land market harming countryside social capital. Under inclusive governance, local governments establish villager councils to promote grassroots democracy and give full autonomy to villagers by centering urban-rural development. Moreover, inclusive governments clarify property rights, confirm the rights to households, build market transaction platforms of development rights, and maintain market operation. Under such institutional design, rural areas can attract urban capital with land resources, realize multi-subject sharing of land value-added revenues through market mechanisms, and facilitate the growth of rural incomes and rural development. The interaction between governance and rights and interests promotes rural development. This not only guarantees villagers' rights and interests by confirmation and certification of property rights and establishment of villager councils in the city quota stages, but also by establishing licenses for use and price protection mechanisms in the stage of countryside capital. The essence of different local governance paths lies in the differences of government and market strength between the institutional and cultural environments of South and North China. Therefore, more attention should be given to institutional reform of market-oriented institutional environments during promotion of rural development with LDRT. On this basis, the comprehensive confirmation of rights of collective building land should be promoted to protect the rights and interests of villagers. Moreover, a transaction platform should be established and the transaction scope gradually expanded to clarify the value of development rights and realize sharing of value-added revenues. 

Key words: collective construction land, land development rights transfer, extractive and inclusive institutions

摘要： 土地发展权转移是通过土地增值收益的再分配来推动乡村发展的重要政策。然而，地方政府对该政策的实施呈现出不同的结果。从汲取与包容性治理视角出发，采用案例比较法，分别以德州与成都为典型案例，分析不同地方治理路径下发展权转移对乡村发展的差异化影响。在汲取性管制路径下，地方政府以土地财政为导向，主导发展权转移并垄断了土地交易，指标进城却并未引入资本下乡，最终造成农民权益受损。而在包容性治理路径下，地方政府以统筹城乡发展为导向，发挥村民的自主性，明晰产权、搭建交易平台并维护市场运行，乡村凭借土地资源撬动城市资本下乡，并通过市场机制推动土地增值收益的多主体共享。以土地发展权转移助推乡村发展，更应注重治理路径选择，推进集体建设用地全面确权，并建立市场化交易机制显化土地发展权。

关键词: 集体建设用地, 土地发展权转移, 汲取与包容性制度