台灣糧食自給率偏低，近年來，政府以提升糧食自給率為目標，以維護國家的糧食安全。若要提升糧食自給率，應重視農地農用，惟現行農地卻出現了許多非農業使用的情形，影響糧食生產和農業生產環境。現行農地利用誘因制度尚有不足之處，故政府無法透過經濟誘因的提供，以引導農地所有權人進行農地農用。因此，本研究欲探討有助於促進農地農用之誘因策略，並檢視現行農地利用誘因制度之執行成效，以政府的角度提供適當的經濟誘因策略，改善或補強現行制度的不足，建立農地利用誘因機制，搭配配套措施，以促進農地農用。 本研究回顧國內外促進農地農用之相關文獻，以誘因理論為基礎，探討促進農地農用之正向及負向誘因策略，並整理現行制度具有的制度誘因，以及檢討現行農地利用誘因制度之執行成效。期望以促進農地農用之誘因策略，補強現行農地利用誘因制度之不足，並以該誘因策略作為問卷調查內容之基礎。本研究以從事農地資源規劃、農地利用法規、農地政策及農業政策等相關領域研究或實務之專家學者為問卷調查之對象，並以次數分配法進行問卷分析，以問卷分析的結果納入建立誘因機制之考量。 依據國內外文獻回顧及問卷調查之結果，本研究研擬「農地利用誘因機制」，透過政府提供「正向誘因」及「負向誘因」，並配合相關配套措施，來達到「促進農地農用」之目標。正向誘因分為「農地農用免徵地價稅」、「農業補貼」及「農業獎勵」。農業補貼除了延續現行「有機及友善耕作補貼」、「農業生產成本之補貼」及「小地主大專業農企業化經營補助」之外，也將現行「休耕補貼」及「轉（契）作補貼」經調整後，納入機制之中。農業獎勵包含「農地農用獎勵金」、「委託代耕獎勵金」及「長期出租或承租農地農用獎勵金」，為本研究研擬之措施。負向誘因分為「農地非農用課徵地價稅」、「閒置不用之農地課徵荒地稅」及「違規使用處以罰鍰」，違規使用處以罰鍰係針對國土計畫法之罰鍰進行調整。此外，本研究也研擬多元的相關配套措施，以利誘因機制之執行，包含「農業用地作農業使用認定證明」、「將非農業的容許使用項目自都市土地農業區及非都市土地農牧用地上移除」、「加強非農業使用稽查並獎勵民眾檢舉」、「違規使用禁止買賣移轉」、「違規使用之刑責」、「違規使用之處理方式」、「照價收買」、「有助於促進農地農用之農業補貼或獎勵提高其預算」及「修正相關法規」等。期望透過建立上述誘因機制，讓政府能夠透過提供適當的經濟誘因，來引導農地農用，也讓農地所有權人基於政府所提供的誘因，積極利用農地，達到政府促進農地農用的目標。

自民國八十九年農業發展條例將農地開放自由買賣，並在農舍興建制度中增加了獎勵集村方式興建農舍的相關措施，藉使農民興建農舍時能捨棄在自有農地上興建農舍而共同參與集村方式以興建其所需之農舍，使消弭個別農舍對農業環境景觀等負面影響，並能夠達到維護農業、農民、環境等多重目標，此為集村興建農舍之緣起。 在本研究以親自探訪集村興建農舍已完工及正在籌備個案，同時對照農地政策之核心意涵是否達成之，期能給予未來法規修訂參考及建議。 然而，在針對全省集村興建農舍個案研究後發現以下問題與結果：因一般民眾難以整合協調以及理解相關法規，目前集村興建農舍多由建商開發、召集、銷售。而在農地政策管地不管人之保護傘下，反而成為建商營利目標以及一般民眾達到入住花園別墅之夢想；既然落為建商營利目標，再加上法規規定可以鄰近鄉鎮之農地為配套地，與興建集村農舍使用基地，合併計算加總面積之因素。故造成建商購入偏遠且低價配套地，搭配農舍基地湊足法規所需農地總面積，而該配套地因與農舍距離甚遠又毫無耕作環境與價值，實難達到農地農用之目標。 針對以上問題與結果，本研究並提出以下之建議： 一、農民應重新定義，農舍起造人應嚴格限制。 二、集村方式興建農舍應與個別興建農舍審核標準相同。 三、集村個案之農用農地應於適當距離範圍內，以利農業使用，並應嚴格禁止再分割情形，以防農地細分。 四、興建農舍應以農業經營需求為必要者。 五、集村興建農舍應成立社區管理委員會。 六、政府應結合農村社區土地重劃，提供適當之集村農舍建用農地。 / When agricultural development regulations lifted the ban and authorized the sales of farmland freely in 2000, it also supplemented related measures with incentives for farmers to build collective farmhouses so that farmers will give up constructing individual farmhouses on own their land, and jointly build collective farmhouses. This could help to eliminate the negative impact individual farmhouses have on the natural landscape of agricultural environments, and also achieve multiple objectives in upholding agriculture, farmers, environment, etc. And this is how collective farmhouses came about. Site visits were made to completed farmhouses; cases that were being prepared were also visited. At the same time, the research study also refers to the core meaning of policies related to farmlands in the hope that it can act as a reference and also offer suggestions to future legal revision and modification. However, the following problems and results were found after research was done in a province: as most people find it hard to integrate, coordinate, and understand the relevant legal provisions, current collective farmhouses are mostly carried out by construction companies who take on the tasks of development, gathering, and sales. However, as agricultural policies deals with land only and not individuals, such policy has, on the contrary, caused construction companies to view this as a profit target and the general public to see it as a grand dream. Given with the policy that it has helped construction company to make profit as well as the fact that the laws regulate farmland proximal to neighboring township taken as the supporting land, the site used for the construction of collective farmhouses can combine that of the supporting land to become the aggregate size of construction land. Therefore, it has encouraged companies to purchase remote and inexpensive support to work with the site of farmland in order to make up the aggregate size of the needed farmland as regulated by law. Furthermore, since the supporting land is far from the farmhouse and found without farming environment and value, it is, in fact, hard to achieve any objective of farmland solely for agricultural purpose. As such, this study has put forth following suggestions: 1. redefine the definition of a farmer, and the conditions of builder of a farmhouse should be strictly confined. 2. the construction of collective farmhouses should be given the same severe screening standards as those of individual farmhouses. 3. farmland for agricultural purposes should be limited to a suitable distance to be used for agricultural purposes, and legal provisions should strictly prohibit further partitioning and avoidsub-partitioning. 4. construction of farmhouse should be authorized to those which are found necessary for agricultural operation. 5. community management committees should be established for collective farmhouses. 6. the government should integrate village communities for land re-zoning in order to provide suitable farmland for collective farmhouses.

我國為配合加入WTO，紓緩日後大量農產品開放進口，對本土農地利用管理與農業生產所帶來的衝擊，政府乃大幅度修正農業發展條例（以下簡稱農發條例），以為因應。該條例及配套法案業於民國八十九年一月四日、六日及十三日經立法院三讀通過，並由總統於同年一月二十六日公布施行。本次農發條例之修正要點，在農地政策方面，主要側重於農地合理的利用、有效地管理與適當的釋出，其中最大的轉變在於調整為「放寬農地農有，落實農地農用」原則，不再限制農地移轉承受人之身份與資格，並有條件地許可農企業法人承受農地。這樣的變革，旨在建立更為開放競爭的耕地買賣市場，增進耕地的流動性，以利農業經營者取得耕地，調整農業經營結構，應值贊同。然而，條文內容有無疏漏不妥？仍有待深入檢討；條文原則性的規定能否落實？尚待相關法令的配合修訂，方能儘速建立合理農地利用、管理與釋出機制，以確保我國的農業發展。 　　緣此，本研究乃就農發條例之研修條文內容，深入探析農地政策與移轉規定之轉變，同時藉由實地調查（問卷調查與深度訪談）及拜訪農政等單位，以瞭解移轉制度變遷之實施現況及其對農業經營之影響程度，並訪察農業經營者之意向及博採各方之想法，據以確實地檢視現行農地移轉制度有關之爭議與問題，再提出研修現行條文、修訂行政命令及研議配合措施等改進意見，冀能有助於促進農地合理利用，並供後續法律修正、執行之參考。最後，再綜合本研究之成果，推衍以下結論： 　　一、調整農地農有制度係時勢潮流，農地農用管理機制應詳加落實。 　　二、實證調查發現，受訪者大抵認同目前農地移轉制度之變革規定，惟對促進農地流動及帶動農業升級助益不大。 　　三、引進農企業法人承受耕地之成效不彰，且牽涉法令繁多，亟待整合修訂。 　　四、制度規則未能公平提供誘因，且未能有效減低執行面之不確定性，應儘速檢討改進並確實執行之。 　　五、農民與農企業法人普遍欠缺對相關法令資訊的瞭解，應加強相關人員之專業訓練與宣傳輔導。 　　此外，在研究過程中，發現仍有相關課題有待未來後續研究，以促使農地更有效利用管理，並能確保農業永續發展，建議如下： 　　一、健全農企業法人承受耕地之管理制度。 　　二、建構重要農業區之區分與保護機制。 　　三、進一步研究農業產銷班與農地利用之關聯性。 / For joining WTO and moderating the impact of the import of agricultural products on agricultural lands use and, management and production, our government reacted by revising the Agricultural Development Act (ADA). The ADA has been revised by the Legislative Yuan on January 4 and promulgated by the Presidential Decree on January 26, 2000. The main point of the revision is to emphasis on reasonable farmland uses, effective management and adequate release of the land regulations in the agricultural policy. The main change is to adjust ADA’s principle from “the right to own and use farmland to be limited to the farmer” to “the release of the restriction on farmland transferee and realization of the substantial farmland uses.” The revision does no longer set a limit to the status and qualification of transferees and permits the transferable rights of agribusiness on some certain conditions. It is approved that the revision is to establish a more open and competitive arable land market, to improve the liquidity of arable lands, to facilitate the acquirement of arable lands for agribusiness, and to adjust the agricultural production structure. However, we should review the completeness and realization of the revised ADA after the promulgation in order to assure the agricultural development. 　　Therefore, the main purpose of this thesis is to probe into the change of the agricultural land policy and transfer regulation from the provisions of the revised ADA, examine the exercising of transfer system change and its influence on agricultural operation, investigate the intention of agricultural managers for reviewing the relative debates and issues, and then offer some advice as references of revision in the future. The conclusion is described as follows: 　　1.It is a trend of the times to adjust the transfer system that the right to own and use farmland is limited to the farmer, and the mechanism of assuring the substantial farmland uses should be realized. 　　2.From empirical research, the interviewees almost agree to the new agricultural land transfer system, but think that it is not useful for accelerating the liquidity and promoting the level of agricultural industry. 　　3.It is not significant on introducing agribusiness to be the transferee of arable lands, and it is necessary for our government to integrate too many relative and complicated laws. 　　4.We should review and implement the revised ADA because the rules themselves cannot provide fair incentives and effectively reduce the uncertainty from exercising it. 　　5.Farmers and agribusinesses lack the knowledge of relative laws, so the government should enhance them the professional training and give them consultant service. 　　In addition, from this research, we also found that some issues need to be studied for effective management of agricultural lands and sustainable development of agricultural industry in the future. 　　1.How to sound the management institution when agribusinesses want to be the transferee of arable lands. 　　2.How to designate important agricultural zones and establish protection mechanism. 　　3.Study the correlation between the agricultural product marketing class and agricultural land uses.