Second Round Land Lease Extension Pilot 'Construction Plan' Released

Source: 21st Century Business Herald Author: Li Sha

Recently, the “Opinions of the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council on Doing a Good Job in the Second Round of Land Contract Extension Pilot Work for 30 Years After Expiration” (hereinafter referred to as “Opinions”) was publicly released, outlining specific arrangements for the second round of land contract extensions, with a total of 15 detailed measures.

The pilot work for the second round of land contract extensions is progressing in an orderly manner, gradually expanding. This year, comprehensive provincial pilots will be carried out in 29 provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities) except Guizhou and Tibet. The “Opinions” emphasize the need to conduct the extension pilot work prudently and in an orderly fashion, strengthen the protection of farmers’ land contract rights, improve the management of rural land contract agreements, and enhance organizational leadership. In the extension pilot, the principle of extension must be upheld, adhering to the policy of “large stability, small adjustments,” strictly managing “small adjustments” according to laws and regulations, standardizing extension procedures, and properly resolving prominent conflicts.

Chen Ming, a researcher at the Institute of Political Science, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told 21st Century Business Herald that the “Opinions” are clear in their provisions, specific in their requirements, and highly operational, making it easier for local authorities to implement and providing strong guidance and relevance for the second round of land extension pilot work.

Qian Long, a researcher at the Institute of Resources, Environment, and Development, Nanjing Agricultural University, and a professor at the College of Grain and Materials, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, told 21st Century Business Herald that the “Opinions” have four major features: strong principles, guidance, operability, and foresight. They are not only a blueprint for implementing the major decisions of the Party Central Committee on maintaining stable and long-term land contract relationships but also an important foundation for further consolidating and improving China’s rural basic management system, safeguarding farmers’ land rights, and ensuring rural social stability under new circumstances.

Strictly managing “small adjustments” according to laws and regulations

The second round of land extension pilot work has been underway for several years. The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China explicitly stated the need to maintain land contract relationships stable and unchanged, with a 30-year extension after the expiration of the second round of land contracts. On November 26, 2019, the “Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Maintaining Stable and Long-Lasting Land Contract Relationships” was issued, clarifying the importance, overall requirements, policy content, and implementation of maintaining stable and long-term land contract relationships.

Chen Ming believes that the document issued in 2019 mainly contains principles, and there are issues such as inconsistent understanding of concepts and unclear operational basis at the local level. After years of exploration in the second round of land extension pilot work and interaction between central and local governments, this “Opinions” issued in the name of the General Office of the State Council and the Central Office of the Communist Youth League fully incorporates grassroots practical questions and pilot experience, providing precise guidance for the comprehensive extension of rural land contracts across provinces.

The “Opinions” clearly state that extensions should be carried out on a household basis to ensure that the vast majority of farmers’ original contracted land remains stable, avoiding complete re-tendering or re-distribution, and preventing illegal adjustments or reclamation of farmers’ land under the guise of extension.

Chen Ming believes that the “Opinions” specify that land contract relationships should be based on households, not re-tendered or redistributed, and formalize many detailed aspects of the second round of land extension pilot work through central policies.

Qian Long said that the “Opinions” emphasize unwavering adherence to collective ownership, household contracting management, and farmers’ dominant position, defining red lines for reform. It is made clear that the original collective land ownership boundaries must not be broken, that equal contracting within the village is prohibited, and that land cannot be illegally adjusted or reclaimed under the pretext of extension, fundamentally protecting farmers’ existing rights. At the same time, the “Opinions” leave room for exploration within legal and policy boundaries, allowing and encouraging collectives to explore specific extension paths based on local conditions. For example, it makes strict definitions for “small adjustments,” and carefully manages methods such as confirmation of rights, land, and shares, to prevent “one-size-fits-all” approaches while granting necessary autonomy to grassroots levels.

In fact, on February 4 this year, Han Wenshou, Deputy Director of the Central Finance Office responsible for daily work and Director of the Central Rural Office, stated at a State Council Information Office press conference that the overall principle of the second round of land extension pilot work is “large stability, small adjustments.” “Large stability” means ensuring that the vast majority of farmers’ original contracted land remains stable and is smoothly extended, with no complete re-tendering or redistribution, and no illegal adjustments or reclamation of farmers’ land. “Small adjustments” refer to necessary, law-abiding, and strict management of special cases requiring adjustments, with appropriate adjustments among individual farmers within rural collective economic organizations.

The “Opinions” further clarify that “small adjustments” must be strictly controlled according to laws and regulations. The premise of “large stability” is maintained. “Small adjustments” refer to minor, limited adjustments of contracted land among individual farmers within rural collective economic organizations, only in cases of natural disasters or other special circumstances with broad community demand.

Chen Ming states that previous central emphasis on “large stability, small adjustments” is further refined in the “Opinions,” limiting “small adjustments” to specific, rare cases that meet certain conditions. Future work should also combine local realities to further clarify what constitutes “special circumstances,” facilitating better implementation.

Qian Long said that “large stability” is the prerequisite and foundation, meaning most farmers’ contracted land must remain stable, which helps consolidate land rights, protect farmers’ interests, maintain social stability, and support modern agricultural development. This is a deep summary of past experience and a continuation of the existing reform path, giving farmers confidence.

He further pointed out that to prevent abuse of “small adjustments,” the “Opinions” impose strict restrictions: defining the conditions for special cases, requiring broad community support, and prohibiting minority or officials from pushing adjustments. Procedures must be strictly followed, including democratic consultation among farmers, public disclosure for at least 15 days, compliance with laws and regulations, and approval by township and county agricultural and rural affairs departments. Additionally, alternative solutions such as collective benefit sharing and employment in public welfare posts are encouraged to help farmers facing difficulties due to land shortages. Multiple measures are taken to prevent “small adjustments” from being misused.

Strengthening farmers’ land contract rights protection

The “Opinions” clearly state the need to safeguard the land contract rights of members of rural collective economic organizations. Household members who are members of the collective economy organization have legal rights to land contracts, while non-members do not participate in extensions.

Chen Ming believes that defining members of rural collective economic organizations is a prerequisite for protecting farmers’ land rights. The December 2016 “Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Steadily Promoting Rural Collective Property Rights System Reform” explicitly called for scientifically confirming member identities and resolving unclear boundaries. After years of reform practice, many local policies have clarified member identification.

The “Opinions” emphasize fully protecting the rights of women who marry out, divorce, or are widowed, as well as in-laws, and coordinating cross-regional work to prevent “two ends empty” or “two ends occupied,” maintaining legal land contract rights according to laws such as the Rural Land Contract Law and the Rural Collective Economic Organization Law. It also ensures the legal land rights of farmers who move to cities and settle there. Exploring ways for farmers to voluntarily and compensatedly exit land contracting rights is also encouraged.

Qian Long said that the arrangements to protect the land rights of women who marry out, divorce, or are widowed are highlights of the “Opinions.” The core is to uphold the uniqueness of member status and rights, and to strengthen cross-regional coordination to prevent “two ends empty” or “two ends occupied.”

The “Opinions” require strict management of mobile and newly cultivated land. The area of mobile land must not exceed 5% of the total cultivated land of the collective, and no new mobile land is allowed. Newly cultivated land through legal reclamation, re-cultivation, or land consolidation must be strictly managed, with land ownership clarified by higher-level governments. Land confirmed as rural collective land is included in collective assets management. Under respect for farmers’ wishes, land can be contracted to households through rights confirmation, and various ways such as profit sharing can be used to develop production, with income mainly used for dividends, ensuring collective economic benefits.

Chen Ming pointed out that after the third national land survey, northern provinces like Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang have some newly added cultivated land, some of which are designated as mobile or new cultivated land for future paid contracting. The “Opinions” clarify management standards for mobile and new cultivated land, providing clear guidelines for local regulation.

The “Opinions” also emphasize ensuring stable land transfer operations. It is necessary to legally protect the rights of both parties, leverage the role of rural collective economic organizations, and guide contracting parties and transferees to negotiate and specify land lease extensions through contracts, stabilizing expectations. Land transfer supervision should be strengthened, large-scale long-term transfers discouraged, and “non-agriculturalization” of transferred land strictly prevented.

In fact, the Central No. 1 Document this year explicitly called for regulating land contract rights transfer and strengthening risk monitoring of long-term large-scale transfers.

Chen Ming believes that large-scale, long-term land transfers pose certain operational risks, especially involving industrial capital or enterprises. If problems occur, they could impact farmers’ interests and threaten national food security.

Qian Long said that the “Opinions” further reaffirm and strengthen relevant policies, considering three aspects: first, safeguarding risk bottom lines by preventing risks from industrial capital entering rural areas, such as operational, social, or land non-agricultural risks; second, protecting farmers’ autonomy to prevent loss of income or land return issues due to long-term transfers; third, aligning land transfer periods with the capacity of operating entities and agricultural industry characteristics, allowing flexibility rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Chen Ming stated that moving forward, local governments should better implement the “Opinions,” tailoring detailed guidance and implementation plans based on local conditions, and establishing negative lists to clearly define illegal and policy-violating activities. Outside the negative list, case-by-case research and regulation should be conducted to ensure grassroots work is directed and within bottom-line boundaries.