欢迎您访问《智慧农业(中英文)》官方网站! English

Smart Agriculture ›› 2026, Vol. 8 ›› Issue (3): 253-269.doi: 10.12133/j.smartag.SA202603016

• 专刊--数字技术赋能与农业经济范式转型 • 上一篇    下一篇

中国智慧农业政策演进特征与优化策略——基于“工具-主题-目标”三维框架

高群1,2(), 罗银芳2   

  1. 1. 南昌大学廉政研究中心,江西 南昌 330031,中国
    2. 南昌大学公共政策与管理学院,江西 南昌 330031,中国
  • 收稿日期:2026-03-12 出版日期:2026-05-30
  • 基金项目:
    国家自然科学基金项目(72563022); 国家级大学生创新训练项目(202510403097)
  • 通信作者:
    高 群,博士,教授,研究方向为农业经济理论与政策分析。E-mail:

Evolution Characteristics and Optimizing Strategy of Smart Agriculture Policies in China: Based on "Tools-Topics-Objectives" Framework

GAO Qun1,2(), LUO Yinfang2   

  1. 1. Center for Anti-Corruption Studies, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China
    2. School of Public Policy and Administration, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China
  • Received:2026-03-12 Online:2026-05-30
  • Foundation items:National Natural Science Foundation of China(72563022); National College Students' Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program(202510403097)
  • Corresponding author:
    GAO Qun, E-mail:

摘要:

【目的/意义】 智慧农业是农业新质生产力的关键内容,是驱动农业农村现代化的关键抓手。本研究立足于政策文本的前端设计,对中国智慧农业政策文本开展量化分析,为政策的优化完善提供决策参考。 【方法】 基于政策工具理论,构建“工具-主题-目标”三维分析框架,以2013—2025年240份智慧农业中央政策文本为研究对象,运用潜在狄利克雷分配主题模型及内容分析法揭示智慧农业政策演进特征与优化策略。 【结果和讨论】 (1)中国智慧农业政策时序演进趋势显著,分为政策探索期(2013—2015年)、试点示范期(2016—2018年)、战略推进期(2019—2023年)、全面深化期(2024年至今)4个阶段。(2)中国智慧农业政策综合运用了供给型、环境型、需求型3类政策工具,总量使用较均衡,但内部工具构成存在显著失衡。(3)政策目标演进呈现清晰的阶段递进特征,其内在结构尚需优化。(4)政策注意力高度集中于数字转型与智慧升级主题,政策主题与政策工具的适配度有待提升。 【结论】 为实现农业智慧转型与高质量发展,建议推动政策工具内部均衡化,构建供给提质、环境赋能、需求牵引的三元路径;协调政策主题的注意力分配,提升政策工具与政策主题的适配度;推动政策目标均衡化,完善标准引领、制度保障、人才支撑的系统机制。

关键词: 智慧农业, 政策演进, 政策工具, 政策主题, 政策目标, LDA主题模型

Abstract:

[Objective] Smart agriculture serves not only as a critical measure for driving agricultural and rural modernization, but also as a core component of new quality productive forces in agriculture. In recent years, China's smart agriculture has achieved remarkable development. However, it still faces practical challenges in policy implementation, technological application, and industrial coordination, which restricts the high-quality development of agriculture. Against this background, quantitative analysis of the central-level smart agriculture policy system was conducted from the crucial link of policy design. Grounded in practical dilemmas of smart agriculture development and top-level guiding requirements, policy logic and inherent deficiencies were clarified via scientific analytical approaches.The aim of this research is to identify the direction of policy optimization, so as to provide practical references for promoting the quality and efficiency improvement of smart agriculture and advancing the construction of a strong agricultural country. [Methods] From the perspective of policy tools, first, a three-dimensional analytical framework of "tools-topics-objectives" was constructed, which served as the core analytical logic of the overall research. A total of 240 central-level policy documents concerning smart agriculture issued from 2013 to 2025 were selected as the research sample. Systematic coding and quantitative analysis of all collected policy texts were implemented through content analysis with the assistance of NVivo14 qualitative analysis software. To further explore the latent thematic structures of China's smart agriculture policy texts, accurately identify the focal directions of policy content and their long-term evolutionary characteristics, the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic model was further adopted to realize automatic text topic analysis. Through the above integrated research methods and analytical pathways, core characteristics of China's smart agriculture policies were systematically summarized, and targeted optimization strategies were put forward. [Results and Discussions] First, the analysis identified four distinct evolutionary stages: the Policy Exploration Period (2013-2015), the Pilot Demonstration Period (2016-2018), the Strategic Promotion Period (2019-2023), and the Comprehensive Deepening Period (2024 to present). This progression reflected a shift from conceptual introduction and top-level design to concrete technology application, strategic scaling, and finally, systematic institutionalization. Second, in terms of policy instrument deployment, it was found that supply-side, environmental, and demand-side tools were used in a relatively balanced overall proportion. However, significant structural imbalances existed within each category. Supply-side tools were heavily skewed towards infrastructure construction and scientific research support, with relatively less emphasis on direct financial input and talent cultivation. Environmental tools were dominated by publicity and guidance, while financial support mechanisms and standard-setting were underutilized. On the demand side, policy relied heavily on pilot demonstrations, with weaker emphasis on fostering cooperation, industry-research integration, and broader social participation. Thirdly, the evolution of policy objectives exhibited an obvious phased and progressive feature, whereas its internal structure still needed optimization. On the whole, national smart agricultural policies covered five core fields, with the digital and intelligent transformation of production and operation as the primary objective. Technological innovation and data services acted as crucial supporting pillars. By contrast, two guarantee-oriented objectives, namely talent team development and institutional standard improvement, accounted for merely 10.91% and 10.13%, respectively, resulting in a prominent imbalance in the objective system. Furthermore, policy development could be divided into four sequential stages: Initial conceptual guidance and foundational planning, pilot-oriented practical implementation, systematic policy construction, and in-depth quality and efficiency upgrading, forming a clear progressive trajectory. Though digital transformation had long served as the central focus across all stages, the development of talents and institutional mechanisms had witnessed gradual yet relatively slow progress, constantly lagging behind the advancement of core policy objectives. Fourthly, the LDA topic model extracted four core policy themes: Digital transformation and intelligent upgrading, industrial integration and business model innovation, talent cultivation and entrepreneurial support, and technical equipment and intelligent application. A striking finding was the extreme concentration of policy attention, with the digital transformation and intelligent upgrading theme accounting for 57.92% of the thematic focus, significantly overshadowing the other three themes combined, the matching degree between policy themes and policy instruments needs to be improved. [Conclusions] While China has developed a comprehensive policy framework for smart agriculture, its effectiveness is hampered by structural imbalances in instrument use, an over-concentration on a single policy theme, and an inconsistent coordination of policy objectives. To address these challenges and foster a more robust and sustainable development path, three key optimization strategies are proposed. First, promoting the balanced deployment of policy tools by following a tripartite approach: upgrading supply-side tools, empowering environmental-side tools, and driving demand-side tools, so as to enhance synergy and complementarity among different tool types. Second, optimizing the allocation of attention to policy themes and enhance the alignment between policy instruments and policy themes, avoiding over-reliance on individual fields and under-support for key sectors. Third, advancing the coordinated optimization of policy goals, and improving the systematic mechanism led by standards, guaranteed by institutions, and supported by talent teams. Implementing these strategies will be crucial for transforming China's smart agriculture policy system from one focused on quantity and foundational building to one capable of driving high-quality, balanced, and innovative development in the years to come.

Key words: smart agriculture, policy evolution, policy tools, policy topics, policy objectives, Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic model

中图分类号: