虽然写出了第一次的草稿，但是在贴在space上之前，自己就已经觉得有好几处不妥当的地方。然而，已然过了deadline，所以没有时间再磨蹭了，就想先发上来以后再改吧。可是，不妥的地方越看越别扭，就在这里提出来：

1.本想起一个attractive一点的题目，想了半天也不知道是正规一点好呢，还是幽默一点好。但是看到教材附录中的几篇文章的题目，都不是很直接、很正规，所以就姑且选用了这个但这感叹号的题目。

2.引用的部分实在是太糟糕了，因为不知道格式，所以都用红色标出，表示待定、以后会改。而work cited的部分也没有写，计划是老师讲了什么格式之后再来写。

3.用词和句式是肯定要改了再改的。

 

挑出来这么多毛病，我都觉得不能算是第一稿完成了。希望老师、同学帮帮我，而自己也再努努力把这篇论文好好改改，make it as perfect as possible.

Watch out, the collectives are going to be separated!

 

Introduction

According to the legislations on Chinese pastures now, both individuals and collectives can contract for pastures. However, if a collective can not operate as a whole, the pasture can be easily over-used. To solve this potential problem, when letting a collective contract for pastures, we should make sure that the collective will operates as a whole in order to use pastures wisely.

 

Background

First, I would like to introduce two concepts in mainland China—land use rights and land ownership. “The definition of land use rights in contemporary laws in China actually belongs to the on land right in traditional rights law. Therefore in the rights law in our nation, the form of the on land right should be used directly to confirm the rights on using other’s lands to construct and preserve the buildings. Moreover, the on land right is the right to use the lands owned by the nation or groups because of buildings or other things for work.” (Civil Law P.258) “The definition of the land ownership making lands as its res, is the right of occupying the land by its owner uniquely. Occupying, using, benefiting from and operating their lands, the land owners can obviate interferences from others within the law limits.” (Civil Law P.233) As Lai L.W.C. pointed out: In China, what distinguishes ‘transferable “land use rights” and inalienable “land ownership”’ is “a reversion to the private property rights system abolished by the communist revolution”. (Lai.)

Besides, according to <The Pasture Law of People’s Republic of China>, “the pastures, owned by groups or the nation, however given to the collective economic organizations ensured by laws, can be contracted by the families or collectives inside the organization.” (Chapter 2 Number 13)

 

The tragedy of the commons

In one famous research of Hardin, he illustrate why the commons is always easily overused. First, Hardin assumed that each herdsman is a rational being so that he seeks to maximize his gain. Therefore each herdsman began to ask what is the utility to each of them of adding one more animal to the herd? “This utility has one negative and one positive component. Since the herdsman receives all the proceeds from the sale of the additional animal, the positive utility is nearly + 1. The negative component is a function of the additional overgrazing created by one more animal. Since, however, the effects of overgrazing are shared by all the herdsmen, the negative utility for any particular decision making herdsman is only a fraction of - 1.” As a result, the rational herdsman, without other choices, is compelled to increase his herd without limit -- in a world that is limited. (Hardin) This theory told us from the perspective of the society why the commons is easily over-used.

Although this theory is first published nearly 40 years ago, the problem of over-use of pastures still exists nowadays. There is a research shows that in the, which lies in Sub-Saharan Africa, the rangeland-based lifestyle is under threat, due to the over-grazing by the two pastoral groups who prefer communal land tenure where resources are shared. (E. Abule,  H. A. Snyman,  G. N. Smit) If we do not pay more attention and figure out an efficient way to solve the problem as soon as possible, our lives rather than lifestyle may under threat in the near future.

According to Hardin’s theory, both groups in this middle Awash Valley of Ethiopia area being rational will certainly choose adding herd without limit, which is actually the truth. Now let’s assume that these two groups of the herdsmen become one single group. If adding one more herd will cause over-grazing, it adds one more herd or not dose not make any difference, because if it does not add one more, its utility is 0, while if it adds one more, its utility is still +1+(-1)=0. The point is that decisions will not be influenced by other groups.

Therefore, when we form a collective to contract for pasture in China, we should make sure that it will operate as a whole, can we avoid pasture-over-used.

 

The Proposal

When we put this proposal into practice, how can we make sure that one collective will operate as a whole? As I see it, there are two specific aspects we should pay more attention to.

The first is that one collective should not include two or more ethnic groups.

Assume that one Ethnic A village and one Ethnic B village combining as one collective when contracting for one area of pasture. One of their incomes is from digging for one certain kind of rare herds. They made an agreement that they will dig for 100 kilograms which is the optimum quantity this year. If Ethnic A village dig for 60 kilograms, by the agreement the Ethnic B village should only dig for 40 kilograms. However, the Ethnic B village will at least dig for 60 kilograms because they don’t want Ethnic A village have more income than them. Thus they totally dig for 120 kilograms this year, more than the optimum quantity, so we can say that the pasture is over-used.

Actually, there was a real example in Ningxia: digging for medical herbs resulted in serious conflict between Han and Hui Muslim Chinese who shared communal range management systems, during which several farmers had been killed. (Ho P.) This is a case in a research paper published in 2002. We can see how urgent this problem is. It is not only the problem with the over-use of the pastures, but also the killing of innocent people. In a word, it is important for us to divide varied ethnic groups within one collective immediately.

Secondly, we should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective.

Before I interpret my own proposal, I would like to introduce a certain conclusion of a research. It is about a confusing situation, in which some herdsmen still over-grazed when they owned their own rangeland in Uganda. (Sserunkuuma, Dick, Ph.D.) However, according to the classical “the tragedy of the commons”, pastures will not be over-used when they are owed by individuals. The researchers gave out their conclusion that whether the herdsmen will over-graze or not depends on the economic environment via precise investigations and deductions. Their conclusion means that if the family is extremely poor, they will choose over-grazing in order to survive. According to this conclusion, we should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective.

Assume that there are several families forming one collective. There must be three situations. One is all of them are families above poverty line. Second one is some of them are above while some of them are under poverty line. The last one is all of them are under poverty line.

Situation 1:

The whole collective will easily reach out an optimum quantity at which the pasture will not be over-grazed.

Situation 2:

Families under poverty line may want a quantity of herds more than the optimum, while the families above the line do not. Therefore there are two forces within one collective. This will lead to two kinds of results.

One is that they can not decide the quantity of herds and there are serious conflicts between this two kinds of families. According to <The Pasture Law of People’s Republic of China>, the controversial arguments on the land ownership and land use rights of pastures should be solved by consultations among the persons involved. If it can not be solved by persons involved themselves, it has to be solved by relevant governments. (Chapter 2 Number 16) The legislation gave them rights to reform the collective. However it costs deadweight loss, because it is a waste of scarce resources for people to expend time and efforts to solve problems which may be avoid beforehand, instead of putting time and efforts to more productive use.

The other result which is more likely to take place is that they do not reform the collective and all the families start to over- graze. This conclusion can be seen from the tragedy of the commons.

In a word, these two results are both undesirable.

Situation 3:

The whole collective will act again. However this time it is necessary for the government to raise their welfare via certain aid programs and make sure they do not need to over-graze in order to survive.

Concluding from these three situations, we have to separate families under poverty line and those who are not.

 

Only by following these two aspects, can we avoid over-use of pastures as possible as we can.

 

Weaknesses

However, when put the proposal into use, we may find that to say is one thing, to do is another.

If we only separate those villages from different ethnic groups may not help, because once one collective includes two or more villages (forces), no matter they belong to one ethnic or not, there might be conflicts and the pasture might be over-used. As a result, we have to consider further, for example, to limit the quantity for each village beforehand.

How to define a family is extremely poor? This is another main question when we carry out the proposal. Under poverty line is just one way to define. In fact, not all the families under the poverty line will choose to let the pasture over-grazed.

Although it is hard to decide the standard when we carry out the proposal, the goal that to make the collective work as a whole is very clear.

 

Conclusion

If we don’t include two or more ethnic groups and don’t mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective, which is going to contract for pastures, we can make sure that to some degree the collective will operates as a whole, the pastures thus can be used as properly as possible.

Task 8 Midterm: A research proposal

1) Refined topic:

  Paying attention when forming a collective contracting for pastures

2) Refined thesis statement:

  When we let a collective contract for pastures, we should make sure that the collective will operates as a whole in order to use pastures wisely.

3) Keywords:

land use rights, legislations of Chinese pastures now, proposal, attentions when forming the collectives, the tragedy of the commons, use pastures wisely

4) Map of rough outline:

  I’ve already send it by E-mail to Prof. Zhang, because it is impossible to see it clearly on my space.

5) Detailed outline in complete sentences:

  I. Introduction

A. According to the legislations on Chinese pastures now, both individuals and collectives can contract for pastures. However, if a collective can not operate as a whole, the pasture can be easily over-used.

B. To solve this potential problem, when letting a collective contract for pastures, we should make sure that the collective will operates as a whole in order to use pastures wisely.

II. Body

A. By introducing concepts and legislations, the audiences can get more background information of the situations now

  1. Introducing two concepts—land use rights and land ownership

    a. Definitions: (a)

      The definition of land use rights in contemporary laws in China actually belong to the on land right in traditional rights law. Therefore in the rights law in our nation, the form of the on land right should be used directly to confirm the rights on using other’s lands to construct and preserve the buildings. Moreover, the on land right is the right to use the lands owned by the nation or groups because of buildings or other things for work.

      The definition of the land ownership making lands as its res, is the right of occupying the land by its owner uniquely. Occupying, using, benefiting from and operating their lands, the land owners can obviate interferences from others within the law limits.

    b. In China, what distinguishes transferable “land use rights” and inalienable “land ownership” is a reversion to the private property rights system abolished by the communist revolution. (b)

  2. Introducing part of the legislations: (c)

           In Chapter2 Number13, the pastures, owned by groups or the nation, however given to the collective economic organizations ensured by laws, can be contracted by the families or collectives inside the organization.

B. By introducing the tragedy of the commons and an example with analyzing, the audiences can know how my proposal is mainly relied on this theory.

  1. The tragedy of the commons is mainly a fable which explains from the perspective of the society why the commons is easily over-used. (d)

  2. There is a research shows that in the middle Awash Valley of Ethiopia, which lies in Sub-Saharan Africa, the rangeland-based lifestyle is under threat, due to the over-grazing by the two pastoral groups who prefer communal land tenure where resources are shared. In other words, if there is only one group, according to the tragedy of the commons, the rangeland will not be over-used. (e)

  3. Therefore, we should make sure that the collective will operate as a whole in China to avoid over-used.

C. To make the collective operates as a whole we should pay attention to two specific aspects

1. One collective should not include two or more ethnic groups.

   a. Analyze it using an example I made up:

    Assume that one Ethnic A village and one Ethnic B village combining as one collective when contracting for one area of pasture. One of their incomes is from digging for one certain kind of rare herds. They made an agreement that they will dig for 100 kilograms which is the optimum quantity this year. If Ethnic A village dig for 60 kilograms, by the agreement the Ethnic B village should only dig for 40 kilograms. However, the Ethnic B village will at least dig for 60 kilograms because they don’t want Ethnic A village have more income than them. Thus they totally dig for 120 kilograms this year, more than the optimum quantity, so we can say that the pasture is over-used.

b. Actually, there was a real example in Ningxia:

  Digging for medical herbs resulted in serious conflict between Han and Hui Muslim Chinese who shared communal range management systems, during which several farmers had been killed. (f)

2. We should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective.

a. Introduce a research (g)

This research is about a confusing situation, in which some herdsmen still over-grazed when they owned their own rangeland in Uganda. The author’s conclusion is that whether the herdsmen will over-graze or not depends on the economic environment, meaning that if the family is extremely poor, they will choose over-grazing in order to survive.

b. According to this theory, we should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective. Again, according to the tragedy of the commons and Chinese legislations now (h), the pasture will be over-used or there will be unnecessary cost.

     D. The weakness of my proposal.

       1. When put the proposal into use, we may find that to say is one thing, to do is another.

a. If one collective includes two or more villages, no matter they belong to one ethnic or not, there will be conflicts and the pasture will be over-used. So if we only separate those villages from different ethnic groups may not help. We have to consider further, for example, to limit the quantity for each village beforehand.

         b. How to define a family is extremely poor? Under poverty line is just one way. In fact, not all the families under the poverty line will choose to let the pasture over-graved.

       2. Although it is hard to decide the standard when we carry out the proposal, the goal that to make the collective works as a whole is very clear.

III. The conclusion

      If we don’t include two or more ethnic groups and don’t mix those families under poverty line into normal ones in one collective, we can make sure that to some degree the collective will operates as a whole, the pastures thus can be used as properly as possible.

 

 

6) Annotated bibliography with a summary of source evaluation for each source:

(a)**** is a print source about definitions on two concepts in Chinese legislation——land use rights and land ownership. Guiding by a professor teaching Civil Law in Peking University, I found the definitions on the textbook of students in law faculty. Although I don’t believe that what in textbooks is 100 percent right, I have the feeling that the definition of these two concepts are accurate. The publishers of the textbook are Peking University press and Higher Education press, which are authoritative at least in China. Besides, the concepts are of China. Although, it is first published in 2000, I noticed that the textbook was print the 17^th time in November 2005. It could count as a current source.

(b)** is a source from database Ingentaconnect and could be use when introducing two concepts (“land use rights” and “land ownership”) because it shows what distinguish these two. The Author is a lecturer in the Department of Surveying, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and a visiting fellow at the Ian Buchan Fell Research Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. That is to say he is one of my professors in the future, which is sort of interesting. I am “compelled” to trust him. Although it is not up-to-date, more than 10 years ago, as I see it, this information about some political ideas are accurate and can still be approved nowadays.

(c) (h)**** is a source from database chinainfobank. Since I want to put forward a proposal or an advice to those who carry out on part of the legislations of the pastures, I certainly have to study that part of the legislations first. In fact, the legislations might be the most authoritative documents in the world. Besides, it must be accurate and current because it has been revised in December 2002.

(d)**** is a source from World Wide Web and is the most important theory which I am going to base on in order to support my proposal. The author was graduated from the University of Chicago with the bachelor of zoology and later got the Ph.D. of Microbiology from Stanford University. This article is so essential to social scientists especially those economists that although the website providing it is not well-known we can still consider this article to be authoritative and accurate.Obviously, it is not up-to-date. However, it is classical.

(e)*** is a source from database Academic Research Library. I noticed in the abstract that “Data were collected from 90 Oromo and 55 Afar households.”, so it can be considered as an accurate case, at least. What I am going to use is only the case in this research. It is current enough, published a year ago.

(f)**** is a source from database Ingentaconnect and is a research on pastures using, especially in China. There is not much sources concerned China in this area in those databases I searched, so I was really glad to find this research article. The Author is called Ho P.. Judging from the spell of the name, I guess he/she must be a Chinese. Although I don’t know the author, I think a Chinese can get exact information about Chinese affairs easier than other people. The case in this research happened four years ago is certainly not news anymore. But I just want this story to support one aspect of my proposal, being historical is enough.

(g)** is a source from database Academic Research Library and is about the confusing situation, in which some herdsmen still over-grazed when they owned their own rangeland in Uganda. I agreed with the author’s conclusion that whether the herdsmen will over-graze or not depends on the economic environment, meaning that if the family is extremely poor, they will choose over-grazing in order to survive. This article itself is an opposing viewpoint of the traditional theory that people will not overgraze if they own the rangeland by themselves, because there is an instance in Uganda. After reading the abstract of this article, I realized that their conclusion is based on two sensible hypotheses. This article is not that up-to-date, published in 1998.

 

(e) is a source from database

·Search strategy:

  Keywords: rangeland, pasture, tenure

  Operator: with “or” and “w/3”

  Database: Academic Research Library

·Bibliographical information:

  Author name: E. Abule,  H. A. Snyman,  G. N. Smit

  Date of publication: April 2005

  Title of the article: Comparisons of pastoralists perceptions about rangeland resource utilisation in the middle Awash Valley of Ethiopia

  Name of the journal: Journal of Environmental Management

  Name of the database: Academic Research Library

  Date of retrieval: 10^th April 2006

  The URL:

http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=815063971&sid=3&Fmt=2&clientId=3490&RQT=309&VName=PQD

·Source evaluation:

1. Relevance:

It is also a research on pastures using.

2. Authority:

·The database is called Academic Research Library, which is one of the databases connected in Peking University’s library. Therefore, I have reasons to trust it.

·I don’t know much about the authors and the journal is not familiar to me neithier.

3. Accuracy:

Because I can’t get the full text without paying, I don’t know whether their final conclusion is reasonable or not. Fortunately, I noticed in the abstract that “Data were collected from 90 Oromo and 55 Afar households.”, so it can be considered as an accurate case, at least.

4.  Currency:

It is current enough, published a year ago.

·Summary:

  In the middle Awash Valley of Ethiopia, which lies in Sub-Saharan Africa, the rangeland-based lifestyle is under threat, due to the over-grazing by the two pastoral groups who prefer communal land tenure where resources are shared.

·Use of the source:

I will use their case as an example to support the theory of “Tragedy of the commons”. Moreover, I will use it to help me to connect the theory to my analyses.

 

(f) is a source from database

·Search strategy:

  Keywords: rangeland, pasture, China

  Operator: with “or” and “and”

  Database: Ingentaconnect

·Bibliographical information:

  Author name: Ho P.

  Date of publication: March 2002

  Title of the article: China’s Rangeland under Stress: A Comparative Study of Pasture Commons in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region

  Name of the journal: Development and Change

  Name of the publisher: Blackwell Publishing

  Date of retrieval: 10^th April 2006

  The URL:

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/search/article?title=China%27s+Rangelands+under+Stress+and+Ningxia&title_type=tka&year_from=2001&year_to=2006&database=1&pageSize=20&index=1

·Source evaluation:

1. Relevance:

This is a research on pastures using, especially in China. There is not much sources concerned China in this area in those databases I searched, so I was really glad to find this research article.

2. Authority:

·The publisher is called Blackwell Publishing, which I know nothing about. However the database is Ingentaconnect.

·The Author is called Ho P.. Judging from the spell of the name, I guess he/she must be a Chinese. Although I don’t know the author, I think a Chinese can get exact information about Chinese affairs easier than other people. Therefore, I think I don’t need to doubt the authority about it.

3. Accuracy:

Getting the abstract only, I can’t tell whether this research is accurate. However, I just need the case narrated in this article to be my example. Maybe I can ignore the accuracy this time.

4. Currency:

A story happens four years ago is certainly not news anymore. But I just want this story to support one aspect of my proposal, being historical is ok.

·Summary:

  Digging for medical herbs resulted in serious conflict between Han and Hui Muslim Chinese who share communal range management systems, during which several farmers have been killed.

·Use of the source:

  This conflict is going to be cited as an example to support one aspect of my proposal.

 

(g) is a source from database

·Search strategy:

  Keywords: rangeland, pasture, tenure

  Operator: with “or” and “w/3”

  Database: Academic Research Library

·Bibliographical information:

  Author name: Sserunkuuma, Dick, Ph.D.

  Date of publication: 1998

  Title of the article: Privatization of property rights and rangeland resource use: An empirical assessment of private farms in Nyabushozi County, Western Uganda

  Name of the journal: University of Minnesota

  Name of the database: Academic Research Library

  Date of retrieval: 10^th April, 2006

  The URL: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=736914351&sid=4&Fmt=2&clientId=3490&RQT=309&VName=PQD

·Source evaluation:

1.      Relevance:

This article is about the confusing situation, in which some herdsmen still over-grazed when they owned their own rangeland in Uganda. I agreed with the author’s conclusion that whether the herdsmen will over-graze or not depends on the economic environment, meaning that if the family is extremely poor, they will choose over-grazing in order to survive.

2.      Authority:

·The database is called Academic Research Library, one of the databases connected in Peking University’s library. Therefore, I have reasons to trust it.

·The Author is a Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota. Although I don’t want me to sound rashly, I do not have reasons to doubt this author’s authority.

3.      Accuracy:

This article itself is an opposing viewpoint of the traditional theory that people will not overgraze if they own the rangeland by themselves, because there is a counter-instance in Uganda. After reading the abstract of this article, I realized that their conclusion is based on two sensible hypotheses.

4.      Currency:

This article is not that up-to-date, published in 1998.

·Summary:

  This article is about the confusing situation, in which some herdsmen still over-grazed when they owned their own rangeland in Uganda. The author’s conclusion is that whether the herdsmen will over-graze or not depends on the economic environment, meaning that if the family is extremely poor, they will choose over-grazing in order to survive.

·Use of the source:

  This conclusion will be the base of my hypothesis when I try to explain why we should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones when forming the collective.

 

(h) is a source from database

·Search strategy:

  Keywords: 草原法

  Operator: /

  Database: Chinainfobank

·Bibliographical information:

  Author name: 全国人民代表大会常务委员会

  Date of publication: on 28^th December 2002

  Title of the article: 中华人民共和国草原法

  Name of the journal: /

  Name of the publisher: 全国人大

  Date of retrieval: 10^th April 2006

  The URL:

http://www.chinainfobank.com/IrisBin/Text.dll?db=FL&no=93541&cs=4929815&str=草原法

·Source evaluation:

1.  Relevance:

Since I want to put forward a proposal or an advice to those who carry out on part of the legislations of the pastures, I certainly have to study that part of the legislations first. 

2.      Authority:

   In fact, the legislations might be the most authoritative documents in the world.

3.      Accuracy:

The legislations must be accurate.

4.      Currency:

   The latest modification is made on 28^th December 2002, so I think it is current enough. After all, it is legislation.

·Summary:

  (I have to translate it, so it might not be accurate this time. However, I will let it be accurate, when I complete my essay.)

  Chapter 2 Number 16, the controversial arguments on the land ownership and land use rights of pastures should be solved by consultations among the persons involved. If it can not be solved by persons involved themselves, it has to be solved by relevant governments.

·Use of the source:

  I will analyze the other aspect of my proposal basing on this legislation.

 

Topic: Paying attention when forming a collective contracting for pastures

Thesis Statement: When we let a collective contract for pastures, we should make sure that the collective will operates as a whole in order to use pastures wisely.

Key words: land use rights, legislations of Chinese pastures now, proposal, attentions when forming the collectives, the tragedy of the commons, use pastures wisely

 

The Outlines of my Mind map on Essay’s Structure:

Thesis Statement (central idea): When we let a collective contract for pastures, we should make sure that the collective will operates as a whole.

I. Introduce two concepts (a) (b)

A.    land use rights (c)

1.   Individuals

2.   Collectives

B.     land ownership

II. Why attentions when forming collectives are important?

A.    Tragedy of the commons (d)

B.     An example in Africa (e)

III. Two specific aspects

A.    Should not include two or more ethnic groups in one collective

1.   Analyze it using an example I made up

2.   Support it with an example in Ningxia (f)

B.     Should not mix those families under poverty line into normal ones

1.   Introduce a research (g)

a. Case

b. Conclusion

2.   Analyze with hypotheses (h)

IV. Conclusion

   To make sure that the collective will operates as a whole.

 

The sources have been marked as (a) to (h) in red above, in order to describe their positions in my essay. Besides, on my mind map, I put illustrations where I will cite works from others.