China may have a new property law – what might that mean? According to the Times and other commentators, this is part of an epic struggle between the rightists and leftists in the upper echelons of the CCP. In 2004, the Chinese constitution was changed to state that private property is “not to be encroached upon”, but this is hard to reconcile with other clauses which state that “all land belongs to the state”. (Xinhua via eNorth)

This law doesn’t address that directly, but apparently attempts to side step the issue by offering expanded compensation for land expropriation. This is really the key issue, because rural people have been left behind in China’s development, and the Party is now placing increasing emphasis on showing that it cares (primarily through Wen Jiabao’s statements). “Mass incidents” (riots) have become commonplace in the last few years, with the government itself openly acknowledging that

nearly 200,000 hectares of rural land are taken from farmers every year for industrial purposes, and more than 65 percent of “massive incidents”, or petitions and protests that involve a large group of people, in rural areas are attributed to land expropriation. (Xinhua, March 9, 2007)

The new law proposes to expand and standardize compensation farmers will receive for the loss of their land, but apparently remains mute about who really owns the land. In the part of Inner Mongolia where I do my field work, herding families all have “50-year” leases on their land. These leases give usage rights, and the right to some construction on the land, but are far from ownership. Furthermore, the system of apportioning land between families means that at any moment the local government can re-assign a chunk of land to someone else. This provides a serious disincentive to be a good steward; after all, you don’t even know how long you’ll have it! Here is where I find I have some conservative leanings: private property is likely a good thing for the environment.

p.s.
The Economist put it’s own spin on these event – their tone, as ever, crowing about the imminent demise of Communism and belittling all attempts by the CPC to improve the country as desperate last gasps. A minor note: you may want to think twice about believing what they write, since they mis-translate the literal meaning of the Chinese Communist Party 中国共产党: 产 (chan) here means “production”, not “property”, so the literal translation is the “Producing-Together Party”, not the “Public-Property Party”.