作者：宋志红
作者介绍：中央财经大学法学院教授
出版日期：2026年6月9日
内容提要 《农村集体经济组织法》仍未肯认农民集体的民事主体地位，但确认了农村集体经济组织与农民集体在成员和财产上的同一性，从而确立了农村集体经济组织与农民集体的实质同一性。农村集体经济组织的本质是成员集体，农村集体经济组织成员集体所有即为农村集体经济组织所有；农村集体经济组织对农民集体的代表，是作为组织之整体对组织之全体成员的代表，农村集体经济组织是成员形成并执行集体决策的组织工具；农村集体经济组织所有并不替代农民集体所有，二者辩证统一，前者为私法表达和组织形式，后者为宪法表达并决定前者的经济本质和制度底色。《农村集体经济组织法》通过具体规定将抽象的农民集体所有落实为特定农村集体经济组织所有，创新了集体所有制和集体所有权的实现机制，在彻底解决集体所有权主体虚化问题的同时，也有效落实了集体成员权。以本质论检视可以发现，农村集体经济组织与集体企业为“母子”而非“姊妹”关系，与村民委员会则分属两套系统且非同一层级，村民委员会的代行权为没有本权的代理权。
关键词 农村集体经济组织 农民集体 集体所有制 集体企业 村民委员会
Abstract: The Rural Collective Economic Organizations Law denies the civil subject status of peasant collectives and confirms the identity of rural collective economic organizations and peasant collectives in terms of members and property, and thus establishes the substantive identity between rural collective economic organizations and peasant collectives. The essence of a rural collective economic organization is the collective of its members. The collective ownership of members of rural collective economic organizations means ownership by the rural collective economic organization. The rural collective economic organization represents the peasant collective in its entirety as the representative of all collective members. The rural collective economic organization is the organizational instrument through which members formulate and implement collective decisions. Ownership by the rural collective economic organization does not replace ownership by the peasant collective. The two are dialectically unified: the former is the expression of private law and an organizational form, while the latter is the constitutional expression and determines the economic nature and institutional tone of the former. The Rural Collective Economic Organizations Law transforms the abstract concept of ownership by the peasant collective into the specific ownership by the rural collective economic organization through specific regulations, which innovates the implementation mechanisms of collective ownership, thoroughly resolves the issue of the virtualization of collective ownership subjects and effectively realizes the rights of collective members. Examining the relationship between rural collective economic organizations and related organizations through the lens of essential theory reveals that their relationship with collective enterprises is one of ‘parent-child’ rather than ‘sisters’. Whereas with villagers’ committees, they belong to two distinct systems and are at different hierarchical level. The villagers’ committee’s power of representation is a type of agency power without inherent authority.