农地“三权分置”之下，土地经营权融资担保体系的合理构建与有序运行是促进农业规模经营的必要前提。立法上，《农村土地承包法》第47条赋予了农村土地经营权以融资担保权能，初步建立了土地经营权担保体系。然而，立法上的漏洞与实践中的困境给学界留下了诸多问题亟需研究确定，如土地经营权担保客体范围、法律性质、担保方式不明。本文将所涉问题予以类型化的同时，进一步梳理土地经营权担保体系中的重点学理争议，以期对土地经营权融资担保体系完善和运行完善提供理论供给。在体系完善上，首先，土地经营权担保体系的客体为土地经营权，并包括土地定着物的使用权与土地种养物的收益权，而非土地承包经营权。土地经营权因不涉及身份利益保护而具有纯粹经济属性，承包人可通过担保设立行为为自己设立土地经营权而成为土地经营权的主体，承包人与受让方均可将土地经营权设立担保而达到土地经营权担保客体的明确与统一。其次，土地经营权的法律属性明确为二元性债权，细分为5年以上的土地经营权通过登记成为物权化债权，5年以下土地经营权系具有一定物权效力的债权。两者因处分权能的不同而具有不同程度的物权效力。最后，土地经营权担保路径明确为5年以上土地经营权可抵押可质押，采取登记生效主义，5年以下的土地经营权因无登记能力而不可抵押不可质押，但其收益权可以通过“应收帐款”质押予以补足。在运行完善上，首先，为了加强债权性的土地经营权之物权效力，承包人对受让人流转土地经营权应当保有同意权。其次，因担保客体统一为财产性的土地经营权，登记公示效力应当统一回归为登记生效主义。再次，在债权性土地经营权作为担保客体的体系下，无需引入强制管理制度即可实现权利担保处置。最后，应完善土地经营权担保处置方式，采用不得折价变价等的特殊处理。

Under the "three rights separation" of agricultural land, the reasonable construction and orderly operation of the land management right financing guarantee system is a necessary prerequisite for promoting agricultural scale management. In terms of legislation, Article 47 of the Rural Land Contract Law endows the right of rural land management rights with the right of financing guarantee, preliminarily establishing the land management rights guarantee system. However, the loopholes in legislation and the difficulties in practice have left many problems for the academic circle to study and determine, which are the scope of the object of the guarantee of land management right, the legal nature and the guarantee way are unclear. By classifying the problems involved, the paper further sorts out the key academic disputes in the land management right guarantee system, in order to provide theoretical supplies for the perfection of the land management right financing guarantee system and its operation.In terms of system improvement, first of all, the object of the land management right guarantee system is the land management right, including the right to use the land fixed object and the income right of the land cultivation, rather than the land contract management right. The land management right is purely economic because it does not involve the protection of identity interests. The contractor can set up the land management right for himself and become the subject of land management right through the act of guarantee establishment. Both the contractor and the transferee can set up the land management right guarantee and achieve the clarity and unity of the object of the land management right guarantee. Secondly, the legal attribute of land management right is clearly dualistic creditor‘s right. The land management right subdivided into more than five years becomes the creditor‘s right in real right through registration, and the land management right under five years is the creditor‘s right with certain real right effect. The two have different degree of real right effect because of the difference of disposal power. Finally, the guarantee path of land management right is clear that the land management right of more than five years can be mortgaged and pledged, adopting the registration validity principle. The land management right of less than five years cannot be mortgaged and pledged due to the lack of registration ability, but its usufruct can be made up through the pledge of "accounts receivable".In terms of operation perfection, first of all, in order to strengthen the validity of the creditor‘s real right of the land management right, the contractor should hold the consent right to the transferee‘s transfer of the land management right. Secondly, since the guarantee object is the property land management right, the validity of registration and publicity should be returned to the validity of registration. Thirdly, under the system of creditor‘s right of land management as the guarantee object, the guarantee disposal of rights can be realized without introducing compulsory management system. Finally, we should perfect the way of land management right guarantee disposal and adopt special treatment such as no discount price change.