Can universities sell land to repay debts accumulated in their senseless expansion in the past decade? Two universities are reportedly doing exactly that right now - more will possibly follow suit because they are sinking in heavy debt to banks.

It seems sensible for them to repay their creditors in whatever way they can. But for universities, the solution is not that simple.

Local governments approved of all plans by universities to expand. The land was acquired cheaply from rural villages to be used for public benefit. Rural villagers had no rights in bargaining for higher prices because local governments acquired the land in the name of educational development for the public.

In the case of Yanshan University in North China's Hebei province, the land was bought for 60,000 yuan ($8,820) per 0.06 hectare for the expansion of its campus. Now it has sold the land for the price of 1.3 million yuan per 0.06 hectare, more than 20 times the original price. Now the entire process of buying and selling the land by universities with the aid of local governments turns out to be a speculative business. Rural villagers who have lost their arable land have become the only victims.

It is quite natural for them to feel cheated - indeed they have been. If their lands were purchased by real estate developers, they would have been compensated for much more.

So even if the universities have no other way out of debt except by selling their land, rural villagers who have sacrificed for the universities' expansions should get a share of the benefit from the land sales in one way or another.

But universities are arguing that the rural villagers do not own the lands anymore. Instead the State is in possession of the lands, and the universities have the right to dispose of them on behalf of the State. Local governments share the sentiment.

If universities are allowed to press ahead with their land sale deals, it means that a local government has the right to acquire rural arable lands in the name of public benefit and then sell them for commercial use. Now when many local governments are notorious for fattening their purses through land sales, it would be inappropriate for universities to make a profit by transferring lands for education use to commercial purposes. It would only arouse more public grievances against local governments.

In addition, the terrible financial situation of many universities is a result of their poor expansion plans. Those who lacked vision when they made the plans several years ago should be held accountable for the heavy debt these universities now have. If no one is held responsible for the mistakes, we could hardly expect much from planners who are now making visionary plans for the near future.

Last but not least, we need appropriate ways for universities in heavy debt to clear these debts.