Optimising Land Resources and Social Capital Sources

Land is notorious for increasing complaints and corruption and the ongoing Tien Lang case is a climax. (The Tien Lang case involves farmer Doan Van Vuon acted violently against the district’s withdrawal of his 40-ha aquaculture land, injuring 6 police officers.) The situation does not improve but worsen. To date, we just focus on dealing with technical problems in management rather than with the roots. We are still driven by the perception that land belongs to the entire people’s ownership, which is only suitable to publicly owned economy.

 

According to a report from the General Department of Land Administration under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, land issue is now in an alarming state and is identified via eight major issues: (1) Wastefully use the existing land source and fail to mobilise in the most effective manner to become a driving force for socioeconomic development; (2) Land fragmentation, effective users cannot accumulate land; (3) reduced land rotation coefficient; (4) planning is overlapped, short-termed and broken frequently; (5) Inequality in granting land rights; land use rights of the people are narrowed; (6) Farmers’ life is unstable after their land is reclaimed: Inappropriate reclamation policies harbour the risk of social unrest; most land reclamation projects do not take into account long-term livelihoods of the land-lost people; (7) Excessive resource exploitation; and (8) Serious environmental pollution.

 

Multi-ownership of land includes private ownership, public ownership and community ownership (mass organisation, religion, clan, etc.) The existence of multi-ownerships is in reality results from the long evolutionary history of human race. In most developed countries in the world today, none applies the entire-people ownership of land.

 

According to participants at the conference on "International experience for revision of Land Law 2003”, when multi-ownership is applied, many long-standing burning issues like and allocation, lease, reclamation and valuation are surprisingly disappeared from working agendas of authorities at all levels. State personnel is no longer caught in land scams because they know to negotiate with each other on works assigned to organizations, to individuals and to the market. They also do not worry that the State will not have land for projects of national interests. Multi-ownership institution does not preclude the State’s rights of expropriation and compulsory acquisition of land (and other assets) for the sake of national interests but the procedure must be transparent and non-abusive. This has been done in developed countries and we can totally do it. We should not also fear that if the private ownership will facilitate the rich to accumulate and dig up the gap between the rich and the poor. In reality, in the Mekong Delta and other places, only people with sufficient capital, true interest and agricultural business knowledge can accumulate the land. And, indeed, they will use the land more efficiently, create more jobs, and increase the incomes of land-lost people.

 

In the market economy, we must adopt land multi-ownership institution to strengthen the public confidence in long-time land ownership rights, bring to an end to abusive land reclamation performed by all-level authorities for every legitimate and illegitimate reasons, causing class litigation - a headache to any level of government and branch. With their peace of mind, the people will invest more on their land to increase benefits. It also ensures the realisation of transfer rights, bequeath rights, mortgage or capital contribution as stated by the law.

 

In essence, land policies help attract investment capital into the real estate market - a process that transforms land from a natural resource into a social resource, a valuable asset and the destination of social capital source.

 

Delivering a closing address to the meeting of the Central Party Committee, General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong said “[We must] urgently study amendments and supplements to the Land Law to overcome existing weaknesses and limitations, better meet the requirements of rational allocation, use the land purposely, economically and efficiently, ensure short-term and long-term benefits, and protect the ecological environment. [We must] improve the quality and protect agricultural land, ensure national food security, and maintain social and political stability and sustainable development. [We must] healthily develop the real estate market, including land use rights, ensure the harmony of interests of the nation, the people and investors."

 

Nguyen Minh Quang, Minister of Natural Resources and Environment, said his ministry was assigned to coordinate with other ministries, branches and localities to review the enforcement of the Land Law 2003 and the amended Land Law 2003. To make land a resource for social and economic development, we must first renew and improve land planning to ensure the rational utilisation of land resources and other resources suitable to the country’s and locality’s socio-economic development strategies. Good planning boosts land utility value and profitability, creates a favourable and open environment to encourage and assure domestic and foreign investors to do long-term business in Vietnam. Another solution that the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment will have to do is to continue perfecting financial instruments, such as taxes and fees, to deal with speculation, accumulation and fallowing.

 

Ton Gia Huyen from Vietnam Soil Science Society said we must overcome drawbacks in rampant industrial zone development to ensure full occupancy. Waste treatment and environmental protection must be prerequisite conditions for industrial zone development and operation. He said land database - an important "input" for planning and approving land use - must be consistently established and managed. This requirement is closely related to land registration and statistics. This is the condition for socialising land-use planning.