1. Laws and policies related to ecological compensation for soil and water conservation in the United States
The United States has formulated and implemented a series of agricultural protection plans, such as the protective returning farmland plan, to protect agricultural cultivated land and restore its ecological function. During the period of 1956, the U.S. government implemented a protective plan of returning farmland to encourage farmers to return part of their land in the short or long term and "deposit" it in the soil bank. The bank pays a certain subsidy, subsidizes the price of agricultural products for farmers who return farmland as planned, and guides farmers to use returning farmland for soil protection. 1965 implemented the paid conversion plan, which further refined the ecological subsidy for returning farmland to grassland. 1985, the U.S. government formulated and implemented the "protective reserve plan", the main content of which is to lay fallow or permanently return farmland to grassland for 0/0 years under the supervision of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and at the same time, as compensation, the Ministry of Agriculture pays a certain amount of subsidies to the participants of the plan every year.
The American Agricultural Safety Act of 1985 is a landmark legislation, which set a sample for the later American Farmland Acts of 1990, 1996 and 2002. Beginning with 1985, the US Congress changed the prices of some necessities and matching loan funds into farmland protection funds, and continued to increase the protection funds in the subsequent 1990, 1995 and the 2002 American Farmland Act.
Since 1994, with the US Department of Agriculture's Soil and Water Conservation Bureau paying equal attention to wetlands, water quality and soil quality, the generalized fund project and land fallow protection plan implemented since 1985 have been changed into some new plans, such as the protected area safety plan and the wetland protection plan, and the level of fund support for these plans has been gradually improved. The objectives, methods and requirements of each plan are different, but they are all managed by the United States Department of Agriculture. These plans provide development potential for ecological plans in the agricultural sector.
American Soil and Water Conservation Administrative Regions Act provides a set of mechanisms for establishing soil and water conservation administrative regions, thus protecting water, soil and related resources. In the process of soil and water conservation, the American government usually adopts the way of cost sharing and introduces loan projects to make up for the cost of resource protection activities of farmers and land users.
Many States in the United States have enacted farmland protection laws and provided various mechanisms to protect farmland. For example, in order to effectively protect farmland, the California government requires authorities to collect contract fees, development rights, land service taxes and other income from land in coastal areas to prevent soil erosion of agricultural land, and to gather these agricultural land into plots of appropriate scale to facilitate the sustainable agricultural production. When obtaining the benefits of agricultural land, the authorities should give priority to urban fringe areas, because urbanization has the greatest impact on agricultural land in urban fringe areas.
In order to protect the mining land, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Maryland, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin have all enacted open-pit mining laws. The open-pit mining laws of these states set up open-pit land reclamation funds to protect and preserve natural resources and reclamation areas affected by open-pit mining activities. The open-pit mining method in Maryland has two additional clauses to solve the dehydration problem of karst terrain. These regulations protect the affected property owners in Baltimore, Carroll, Frederick and Washington counties located in karst terrain. The Open-pit Mining Law requires relevant institutions to establish dehydration-affected areas around open-pit mines in karst areas, and take plans to make licensees in these counties reduce or compensate for the impact on property owners.
Second, the legal policy of ecological compensation for soil and water conservation in New Zealand
As early as 1893, New Zealand promulgated the Land Drainage Act, which provided a basis for the Drainage Committee to formulate the drainage scheme for the drainage area. The drainage plan is funded by charging local landowners and government support.
By 1940, the land of New Zealand 10% was seriously eroded, and a large amount of sediment flowed from the land into rivers or oceans every year. In order to cope with the deterioration of the ecological environment, New Zealand promulgated the Law on Soil and Water Conservation and River Control on 194 1 to prevent and reduce soil erosion caused by deforestation and uneconomical farming methods, promote soil and water conservation, and regulate water flow in affected areas. The law stipulates that "the river basin committee should establish a tax collection area, collect land tax from the occupiers who benefit from the project, and determine the tax proportion according to the degree of benefit", which obviously means ecological compensation.
New Zealand Water Rights Rules, based on 1967 New Zealand Soil and Water Conservation Law, established the nationalization (national ownership) of water resources, and specifically stipulated that a person needs to obtain a water resource permit to take water, transfer water, build dams, use water or discharge wastewater.
199 1 year, New Zealand promulgated the Resource Management Law, which basically recognized that the goal of sustainable development is an important condition for the future survival of the earth, intra-generational equity can be achieved through welfare redistribution, and future people can benefit from maintaining the viability of the ecosystem, thus achieving intergenerational equity. The purpose of the bill is to maintain environmental potential to meet people's needs in the foreseeable future; Ensure the life carrying capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystem; Avoid, remedy or mitigate the negative impact of any behavior on the environment.
The Regional Committee of New Zealand has also actively formulated regional policy documents and plans on soil and water conservation. These policies, rules and guidelines all recognize the necessity of protecting water and soil resources under the principle of sustainable management, and some policies and plans require taking measures to protect rivers and soil. For example, it is required to set up buffer zones to reduce the inflow of chemical fertilizers into lakes and rivers. These requirements have been strongly supported by the association and financial support from local authorities. The cost of ecological restoration projects is generally borne by local councils. Where funds are obtained from the central government, they will be allocated to the approved projects fairly according to the policies of the relevant ministries (commissions) (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry). Otherwise, the remediation project funds can be paid by the landowner as a voluntary contribution, or by land tax through the district or district council, or by a specific proportion of the profit cost of restoring all or part of the service. Therefore, local authorities' rates (land tax) can include annual maintenance of dams, flood control works, costs, erosion control and reduction of runoff into waterways.
Three. Legal Policy of Ecological Compensation for Soil and Water Conservation in Australia
For more than 70 years, Australia has adopted various technologies, systems, laws and strategies to achieve the purpose of soil and water conservation. In recent 20 years, great changes have taken place in the political policy and legislation of soil and water conservation, and the main structure of soil and water conservation in Australia has been completed nationwide. Up to 1950, laws and regulations on soil and water conservation have been established in most parts of Australia, and some soil and water conservation institutions have been established, some of which are famous for their highly comprehensive soil and water conservation methods.
The Australian Constitution has subsidy policy, tax policy and preferential interest rate policy for banks and insurance industry. The compensation policy established by the constitution is mainly aimed at agriculture and soil and water conservation projects. Under the background of soil and water conservation and land degradation control, Article 96 of the Australian Constitution is an important source of federal influence. The federal parliament can assure the country that it can show an overwhelming advantage in raising public funds, whether through direct or indirect taxes or loans. The funds mentioned in Article 96 have been used in agricultural areas for a long time. As early as 1930, they were used to subsidize wheat growers. During the period of 1974- 1975, funds will also be allocated for soil and water conservation construction projects, and states with conditions will participate in the national cooperative research on soil and water conservation. The state has also established a national fund for soil and water conservation projects, which is an important achievement of cooperative research. In Australia, compensation is now generally replaced by another way, that is, the financial assistance plan for resource protection and engineering.
Starting from 1940, the tax power of the Constitution (Article 5 1 (2) of the Constitution) stipulates that tax deduction is allowed for soil and water conservation. This power can be more actively used to formulate differential tax rates and impose high tax rates on activities that lead to soil degradation. The legislative power (Article 565438 +0 (3) of the Constitution) on the amount of reward can also play the same role in tax deduction or tax refund. The reward amount can be used to pay for equipment or other inputs used to promote soil and water conservation. The Constitution also stipulates that banks (as a specific type of financial company, Articles 5 1 (13) and 5 1 (14) of the Constitution) and insurance companies may consider providing loans for soil and water conservation or giving preferential interest rates to land users to help control the effects of soil degradation, drought and floods.
There are provisions on compensation for environmental public interest litigation in Victoria Water Law. In normal environmental public interest litigation, it is unlikely to claim damages, because the applicant will not suffer compensable losses. If someone suffers property loss or damage due to some form of land degradation that violates the environmental protection law, he is entitled to the expenses incurred by taking actions to prevent or reduce losses, which may include preventive protection expenses, environmental damage reduction expenses and restoration expenses. When the crime is successfully prosecuted, you can apply for such compensation without the need for the injured party to conduct another civil lawsuit.
Fourthly, the relevant laws of ecological compensation for soil and water conservation in Germany.
German water law, soil protection law and other laws have provisions on ecological compensation for soil and water conservation. 1987, the third paragraph of Article 8 "Approval" of the German Waters Law stipulates: "According to the law, when the use of waters will cause other adverse effects and the opposition of relevant personnel, the license can only be issued after the adverse effects are avoided and the facilities are compensated. If the above conditions cannot be met, but in order to meet the public interest, it can also be approved and the relevant personnel can be compensated. " Article 18 "Compensation of ownership and authority" stipulates: "When the number and attributes of water areas can not meet the requirements of full utilization, or will endanger public interests, especially public water supply, you can apply to the competent authority for compensation procedures, and adjust or limit the type, scale and time of implementation of permission, approval, original ownership and authority."
Chapter 10 "Other Provisions" of the German Soil Protection Law promulgated in 1998 stipulates: "The competent authorities shall issue land management regulations on restricting agricultural and forestry land to fixed land owners and residents according to regulations. If the land use restriction regulations cause burdens and difficulties to the relevant parties, the competent authorities should make adjustments and formulate corresponding economic compensation systems on the premise of observing the laws of each state. " Chapter 25 "Value Compensation" stipulates: "If the market value of a plot increases due to restoration measures, the different values of the plot should be distinguished, that is, the value without implementation measures (initial value) and the value after restoration measures are completed (final value). Compensation shall be paid after the safety and restoration measures are completed, and the amount shall be determined by the competent authority. If the amount of compensation has not been determined by the end of the fourth year after the completion of safety and restoration measures, the obligation of compensation for value shall be terminated. "
V. Research results of EU soil and water conservation law
Since the early 1970s, the protection of air and water has been incorporated into European environmental policies. In recent years, soil and water conservation has been paid more and more attention. The EU attaches great importance to the important role of economic means in ecological compensation for soil and water conservation. The European Commission suggested that environmental policy should make more use of market economy means rather than administrative supervision means. Market means include subsidies, taxes, fees, licensing system, etc. Although economic means (except subsidies) have not been used for soil protection, in the next few years, especially under the EU emission permit trading system and the new water resources framework directive, the full cost compensation mechanism for water resources utilization (excluding pollution) may adopt economic means more widely.
In 2006 1 October 26th, 5438+0,1,the European Commission published the Guide to Environmental Assistance, which pointed out that assistance applicable to the provisions of the treaty, such as subsidies, can be used to improve the construction of agricultural water supply and drainage facilities with pollution problems, but we must pay attention to the expected effect of subsidies, otherwise it will be like some subsidies used in forestry and agriculture, because Better soil protection is based on increasing the existing subsidies for information, training, consultation and soil protection in agricultural environment. As long as these measures do not support environmentally harmful behaviors, such actions will be welcomed, and compensation for environmentally sensitive behaviors may also be regarded as this category. The current rural protection policy has always been voluntary, and farmers and landowners can get compensation if they agree to give up part of their interests because of environmental interests. This is sometimes through direct compensation and sometimes through negotiation of management agreements. For example, a management agreement can be reached to protect national natural resources or areas of special scientific value.
Environmental taxes and land use rights transactions are regarded as effective means of ecological compensation in some EU countries. Environmental tax is based on the principle that polluters who directly consume the environment pay. For example, in Britain, the landfill tax is levied according to each ton of garbage treated by landfill, and a special tax on the use of mineral nitrogen fertilizer can also help reduce harmful substances from entering the soil. In addition, the United Kingdom has also established a mechanism to allow the transfer of landfill rights between garbage disposal agencies. Combined with the collection of soil hardening tax, it can effectively prevent land hardening and further reverse the unreasonable utilization trend of land resources.
Legal policy of ecological compensation for soil and water conservation in Japan
Japan's legislation on land expropriation compensation is very perfect. According to Japan's land expropriation law, important public utilities can use the land expropriation system, and the compensation for expropriation losses is mainly paid by individuals, while the property paid is mainly in cash in principle, and the compensation amount is subject to the land rent or rent of the expropriated land or nearby land of similar nature. Japan's land expropriation compensation is determined according to the standard of equivalent compensation, and in most cases, the land compensation fee is determined according to the standard of complete compensation. Specifically, land expropriation compensation in Japan includes expropriation loss compensation, general loss compensation, minority survivors compensation, resignation compensation and career loss compensation. In addition, in addition to cash compensation, there are alternative compensation methods such as cultivated land development, homestead development, relocation agent and engineering agent compensation for land expropriation in Japan.