Rights adjustment models in the renewal of collective construction land for planning implementation: A case study of Nanhai district, Foshan city

The renewal of collective construction land is fundamentally a process of land development rights restructuring, which may lead to various conflicts of interest and become the major obstacle to planning implementation. The rights adjustment system based on the principle of balancing interests can help mitigate these challenges. Theoretically, the imbalance in rights distribution is caused by the dual effects of market dynamics and planning intervention, which can negatively affect the fairness and sustainability of urban-rural development. To address this issue, a theoretical framework has been constructed that integrates the adjustment mechanisms of land development rights from aspects of scale, type, and standards. Empirical analysis, using Nanhai district in Foshan city as a case study, reveals the mechanism of unequal rights distribution in the formation and development of collective construction land, as well as the government's planning interventions. The study identifies three models of rights adjustment: mixed development, joint redevelopment, and the "three vouchers" system. These models are applicable to different scenarios of collective construction land renewal and exhibit distinct evolutionary characteristics. Mixed development promotes redevelopment through negotiated profit sharing, but it may lead to government concessions and thus reduce the government's capacity for broader rights adjustment. Joint redevelopment links development responsibilities with specific projects, promotes a more equitable distribution of spatial rights and supports the renewal of industrial land. The "three vouchers" system establishes a spatial transaction mechanism for land development rights through the transfer of land use indicators and the reallocation of properties, thereby further enhancing the coordination of development rights across regions. These models exhibit a trajectory towards more scalable, diverse, and clearly defined standards. The study concludes with policy recommendations emphasizing the importance of incorporating rights adjustment mechanisms into the planning process, clarifying standards for rights allocation and adjustment, and establishing a systematic framework for transferring development rights between government and market actors.