矿产资源所有者收益权比较研究.doc

ABSTRACT Mineral resources belong to nation. It equals to belonging to the whole citizens. And this is the fundamental principle insisted by the constitution and the laws of our country. There is an acquisition for value regulation in our mineral laws. But the consideration of mineral is paid by governmental tax and the mineral owner，the nation，cannot obtain the interest of mineral. This paper would adopt the manner of comparative research by studying the laws and regulations of other countries in mineral resources on the basis of our national regulations. There is a focus on the regimes and theories. Finally, the suggestions and enlightenments would be concluded. The mineral resources law can be sorted out into the category of economic law. Furthermore, the economic law possesses more sensitive feelings than other law subjects. The economic law presents the characteristic of mixing the public law and the private law because the intensively expanding of the private law needs the public power to intervene. Thus, the state public power can regulate the social problems caused by the expanding of private right. This paper also has the consciousness of concerning the social problems and the research intention of building our mineral resources institutions for narrowing the gap between the rich and poor, hoping to contribute to our rules of mineral resources usufruct of owners. This paper includes four chapters. The first chapter focuses on the comparative research of Chinese mineral ownership and the foreign mineral ownership. In this section, firstly the comparison of the mineral ownership theories in two legal systems has been analyzed, showing the different theory lines of mineral rights in the two legal systems. Then, illustration of the two legal systems on the mineral ownership presents multi model and solo model. The examples come from America, India, Germany and Brazil. The second chapter compares the difference between China and foreign countries in the mineral