欢迎您访问《智慧农业(中英文)》官方网站! English

Smart Agriculture

• •    

数字赋能下生态农产品产业链脆弱性的基模分析与韧性治理

王翠霞1(), 胡涛1(), 李雅琴1, 丁雄2   

  1. 1. 江西财经大学信息管理与数学学院,江西 南昌 330032,中国
    2. 江西财经大学软件与物联网工程学院,江西 南昌 330032,中国
  • 收稿日期:2026-04-16 出版日期:2026-07-07
  • 基金项目:
    国家自然科学基金项目(71961009); 国家自然科学基金项目(72261013); 江西省自然科学基金项目(20242BAB25011); 江西财经大学第二十届学生科研课题(20251212163401413)
  • 作者简介:

    王翠霞,博士,教授,博士生导师,研究方向为智慧农业产业链运营管理。E-mail:

    WANG Cui Xia, E-mail:

  • 通信作者:
    胡 涛,博士研究生,研究方向为智慧农业产业链运营管理。E-mail:

Vulnerability of the Ecological Agricultural Product Industry Chain under Digital Empowerment Research on Archetype Analysis and Resilience Governance

WANG Cuixia1(), HU Tao1(), LI Yaqin1, DING Xiong2   

  1. 1. School of Information Management and Mathematics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330032, China
    2. School of Software and Internet of Things Engineering, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330032, China
  • Received:2026-04-16 Online:2026-07-07
  • Foundation items:National Natural Science Foundation of China(71961009); Jiangxi Provincial Natural Science Foundation Project(20242BAB25011); The 20th Student Research Project of Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics(20251212163401413)
  • Corresponding author:
    HU Tao, E-mail:

摘要:

【目的/意义】 厘清生态农产品产业链脆弱性的结构本源,剖析数字农技、质量溯源与电商平台对其内在反馈回路的调节效应,探究数字技术赋能究竟是消除还是仅缓解了产业链固有的脆弱性,为数字农业与生态农产品产业链治理提供新的理论视角。 【方法】 运用系统动力学基模分析方法,构建生态农产品产业链成长上限结构模型,识别其脆弱性的内生结构根源;在此基础上,分析数字农技平台和专家系统、基于物联网与区块链的质量溯源技术及电商平台对系统反馈回路的调节效应,揭示数字赋能可能激活的新抑制回路。 【结果和讨论】 生态农产品产业链规模扩张、质量提升与溢价增长过程中形成的成长上限基模是其脆弱性的结构根源。数字赋能虽能通过增强正向回路、削弱抑制回路来缓解系统成长制约,但无法消除成长上限的结构性根源,且可能激活新的抑制回路,使脆弱性形态发生转移。 【结论】 生态农产品产业链韧性提升主要依赖于对成长上限的识别与干预,而非单纯依赖技术投入,未来可通过系统动力学仿真与典型区域案例分析,量化关键变量阈值及政策干预效果,为韧性治理提供实践依据。

关键词: 生态农产品, 数字赋能, 脆弱性, 成长上限基模, 韧性治理

Abstract:

[Objective] The ecological agricultural product industry chain is subject to deep-seated vulnerabilities during scale expansion, quality improvement, and premium growth, yet their structural roots remain inadequately understood. Although digital technologies are expected to relieve these vulnerabilities, recent evidence suggests that digitalization may also induce new suppression loops, resulting in smallholder exclusion, profit squeeze, and homogenized competition. Existing studies have largely addressed this subject from isolated perspectives such as brand governance, industrial chain resilience, or policy evaluation, without offering a systematic diagnosis of the evolutionary mechanism of vulnerability. The aim of this study is identifying the operational logic of growth ceiling archetypes under digital empowerment, exploring how digital technologies interact with feedback structures, and proposing resilience governance strategies that move beyond "technological fixes". [Methods] The Limits to Growth archetype was employed as the analytical framework. Variable selection followed a three-stage procedure integrating theoretical deduction, bibliometric analysis, and case validation. First, constraining factors were identified across multiple dimensions, including natural resource endowment, ecological carrying capacity, market saturation, and trust thresholds, grounded in the theoretical proposition that growth processes endogenously activate restraining forces. Second, a systematic literature search was conducted using search terms such as ecological agriculture, agricultural product industry chain, and system dynamics. Candidate variables that appeared with high frequency in relevant empirical studies were screened, yielding an initial pool of over 20 variables. Third, field investigations of typical cases such as Gannan navel orange, Wuchang rice, and Hengzhou digital jasmine were performed to test, consolidate, and refine the initial pool, ultimately producing 14 core variables. Causal linkages among these variables were established upon three forms of evidence, namely theoretical logic derived from established economic principles, literature evidence drawn from prior empirical findings, and case facts observed during field investigations. Loop polarities were determined by the parity of negative causal chains, where even numbers indicating reinforcing loops (R) and odd numbers indicating balancing loops (B). On this basis, and in combination with field data from the typical cases, four reinforcing loops that drive growth and seven balancing loops that constrain growth were identified. The moderating effects of three categories of digital tools, namely digital agricultural technology platforms, quality traceability systems, and e-commerce platforms, on these loops were then separately assessed. [Results and Discussions] The results indicated that the sustained growth of the ecological agricultural product industry chain was underpinned by four positive feedback loops: the scale-income loop, the quality-demand loop, the premium-income loop, and the quality-reputation loop. At the same time, however, the growth process activated seven negative feedback loops that imposed constraints from multiple directions, including cost erosion, quality dispersion, market saturation, homogenized competition, low-price substitute diversion, trust erosion, and reputation damage—thus locking the system into three types of Limits to Growth dilemmas relating to scale expansion, quality improvement, and premium growth. Digital empowerment enhanced the operational efficiency of the industrial chain by reinforcing the positive loops and weakening the negative ones, yet it failed to remove the structural roots of the growth ceiling. More importantly, digitalization unexpectedly triggered three new suppression loops, namely the smallholder exclusion loop, driven by digital and certification barriers, as illustrated by the Hengzhou digital jasmine case where elderly flower farmers were marginalized due to the digital divide; the profit squeeze loop, driven by platform cost transference, as shown in the Shanghai Hema village cooperative case where high equipment costs and loss rates eroded profit margins; and the homogenized competition loop, driven by standardization orientation, as evidenced in the Gannan navel orange case where farmers abandoned flavor-differentiated production practices to comply with platform specifications. These three loops respectively weakened the operational foundations of the scale-income, premium-income, and quality-reputation loops, thereby shifting the locus of vulnerability from traditional constraints to digitally-induced risks. These findings revealed a dual effect of digital empowerment, as mitigating certain existing constraints, digital technologies may simultaneously generate new vulnerabilities through digital divides, cost transference, and standardization pressures. The essential task for resilience governance, therefore, lay in identifying and intervening in the dominant balancing loops that constrained growth, rather than relying exclusively on technological inputs. [Conclusions] First, the three Limits to Growth archetypes, namely scale expansion, quality improvement, and premium growth, constitute the shared structural roots of vulnerability in the ecological agricultural product industry chain. Second, digital empowerment cannot eradicate these structural roots and may give rise to new vulnerabilities. Third, enhancing industrial chain resilience should be grounded in leverage point interventions derived from the system's feedback structure. Corresponding governance strategies for the three types of newly identified risks, namely smallholder exclusion, profit squeeze, and homogenized competition, should include lowering technological entry barriers, establishing benefit-sharing mechanisms, and strengthening differentiated certification and geographical indication protection. Overall, this study provides a system dynamics-based analytical tool and policy leverage points for resilience governance of the ecological agricultural product industry chain in the context of digital empowerment.

Key words: ecological agricultural products, digital empowerment, vulnerability, limits to growth archetype, resilient governance

中图分类号: