永佃是指支付一定的地租后在他人的土地上长期或永久为农业生产（农耕或畜牧）的一种制度。这种制度在中国和西方的历史上都曾存在过，在中国有所谓的永佃及由其发展出的一田两主制度，在西方则有发源自古罗马的永佃权。晚清变法以来，这两种原本平行发展的制度通过法律继受这一媒介开始发生互动关系。 在分析相关法律草案、判例等诸多史料的基础上，本文认为，永佃权在近代中国的继受主要可分为三个阶段。第一阶段为照搬型继受阶段，其主要发生在清末民初。在这一阶段，《大清民律草案》、《民国民律草案》这两部法律草案的起草者无视中国的固有法制，机械地照搬照抄《日本民法典》中的永佃权规定。第二阶段则为实践型继受阶段，其主要发生在北洋政府统治时期。在此阶段，民初大理院及地方司法机构在没有现代民法法源的情况下，在审理相关案件的过程中，在尊重传统永佃制习惯的基础上，采用“新瓶装旧酒”的方式，创造性地运用西方民法上的概念和原理重新诠释中国固有的传统法资源，并赋予这些传统法以权利的特征。第三阶段则为整合型继受阶段，其主要发生在南京国民政府统治时期。这一阶段的继受也主要表现为立法继受。但此时的立法机关已经开始反思前两部民法草案轻视固有法的立场，转而在“社会本位”思想的指导下，尝试有限度地吸收固有法，并将之与继受法进行整合，其成果主要展现在《民国民法典》这部法典之中。 1949年国共内战后，国民党退据台湾，《民国民法典》在台湾地区继续施行，永佃权也得以继续存在。然而由于台湾当局大力实施土地改革等一系列原因，永佃权在台湾地区的作用日益式微， 2010年其终被新增设的农育权所取代。而与此同时，在大陆地区，随着《六法全书》被废除以及土地改革的进行，永佃权不复存在。改革开放后，出现了同样扮演农业用地使用权角色的土地承包经营权。三权分置后，其之处分权能得到加强。但此时承包权的权能仍弱于永佃权，更遑论一田两主制度中的田面权。

Permanent tenancy refers to the system in which someone can be engaged in agricultural production (farming or animal husbandry) for a long time or permanently on other people's land after paying a certain amount of rent. This system had ever existed in the history of China and the west. In China, there was the so-called permanent tenancy, from which the “one land two owners system” developed. In the west, there was the emphyteusis which originated from ancient Rome. Since the reform of legal system in the late Qing dynasty, these two systems of parallel development began to interact with each other through the medium of the reception of law. Based on the analysis of many historical materials, such as rogations and precedents, this paper argues that the reception of the emphyteusis in modern China can be divided into three stages. The first stage was the stage of copying reception, which mainly occurred in the late Qing dynasty and early Republic of China. At this stage, the drafters of the Draft of Qing Civil Code and the Draft of Civil Code of the Republic of China ignored China's inherent laws, mechanically copying the provisions of emphyteusis in the Japan’s Civil Code. The second stage was the stage of practical reception, which mainly occurred during the period of Beiyang Government. At this stage, in the absence of effective source of modern civil law, the Dali Yuan and local judicial institutions, on the basis of respecting the China's traditional customs of permanent tenancy in the process of hearing related cases, with the method of “old wine in new bottles”, creatively applied the concepts and principles of western civil law to reinterpret China's inherent laws and gave these traditional laws the characteristic of right. The third stage was the stage of integrated reception, which mainly occurred during the reign of the Nanjing National Government. The reception of this stage was also mainly manifested as the legislative reception. However, at this time, the legislature began to reflect on the two drafts’ position that despised the inherent laws, and instead, under the guidance of the “Society-centered” ideology, tried to absorb the inherent laws to a limited degree and integrated them with the received laws. Its results were mainly displayed in the Civil Code of the Republic of China. After the civil war between the Nationalist party and the Communist Party of China in 1949, the Nationalist party retreated to Taiwan, and the Civil Code of the Republic of China continued to be enforced in the Taiwan region. The emphyteusis continued to exist. However, due to a series of reasons, such as land reform by the Taiwan authorities, the effect of the emphyteusis in the Taiwan area was declining, which was replaced by the newly added hereditary lease in 2010. At the same time, in the continental region of China, with the abolition of the Six Codes and the reform of the land, the emphyteusis ceased to exist. After the reform and opening up, there appeared the right to contract land for management which also played the role of the right to use agricultural land. After the separation of three rights, its disposal empowerment has been strengthened. However, the empowerment of the right to contract land is still weaker than the emphyteusis, not to mention the right to the land surface in “one land two owners system”.