Zheng Yangtao: Advancing the Development of New Quality Productive Forces through the New-Type Nationwide System
The new-type whole-nation system represents a major theoretical innovation in the political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics. It is a unique organizational model and operational mechanism in our country for accelerating the advancement of high-level science and technology self-reliance and self-strengthening. In 2023, during an inspection tour of local regions, General Secretary Xi Jinping introduced the concept of "new quality productive forces," emphasizing the need to "integrate scientific and technological innovation resources, lead the development of strategic emerging industries and future industries, and accelerate the formation of new quality productive forces." The proposition of "new quality productive forces" constitutes an enrichment and development of Marxist theory on productive forces. In December of the same year, the Central Economic Work Conference emphasized "leading the construction of a modern industrial system through scientific and technological innovation." "Developing new quality productive forces" and "improving the new-type whole-nation system" are critical measures for driving industrial innovation through scientific and technological innovation and promoting high-quality development of the economy.
A fundamental principle of Marxist political economy is that the relations of production must adapt to the development of the productive forces. General Secretary Xi Jinping has emphasized that "to develop new quality productive forces, we must further comprehensively deepen reform and form new-type relations of production that are compatible with them." In essence, new quality productive forces are advanced productive forces. The development of advanced productive forces urgently requires the transformation and innovation of the relations of production. The new-type whole-nation system is precisely an expression of the superiority of the socialist system in "concentrating strengths to accomplish great things." On the basis of giving full play to the role of market mechanisms, it optimizes the allocation of innovation resources around national strategic needs. This is an emerging form of innovation resource allocation and an important manifestation of new-type relations of production. Through the leadership of the Party and the state over major scientific and technological innovations, the immense kinetic energy of new quality productive forces is released to promote high-quality economic development.
The "Decision of the CPC Central Committee on Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Advancing Chinese-path Modernization" (hereinafter referred to as the Decision), deliberated and adopted at the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, pointed out: "We must thoroughly implement the strategy of regenerating the country through science and education, the strategy of strengthening the nation through talent, and the innovation-driven development strategy. We will coordinate the integrated reform of the institutional mechanisms for education, science and technology, and talent, improve the new-type whole-nation system, and enhance the overall efficiency of the national innovation system." General Secretary Xi Jinping noted: "Changes of a magnitude unseen in a century are accelerating across the world [1]. The technological revolution is intertwined with the maneuvering between major powers. High-tech sectors have become the primary frontier and main battlefield of international competition, profoundly reshaping the global order and development landscape." To build a global leader in science and technology with world-class scientific strength and innovation capacity, we must give full play to the advantages of the new-type whole-nation system to provide strategic support for national technological development and security. At the 27th meeting of the Central Commission for Comprehensively Deepening Reform, General Secretary Xi Jinping further emphasized: "To improve the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies, we must organically combine the government, the market, and society, ensuring scientific coordination, the concentration of strengths, the optimization of mechanisms, and collaborative research." To this end, we must profoundly understand the great significance of the new-type whole-nation system in supporting the development of new quality productive forces from a fresh perspective; analyze the inherent mechanism of the interaction between new quality productive forces and the new-type whole-nation system through academic inquiry; implement the key reform tasks of improving the new-type whole-nation system with a strong sense of mission; and promote the release of innovation and reform dividends through institutional and mechanistic reforms to further accelerate the development of new quality productive forces.
I. Profoundly Understanding the Great Significance of Improving the New-type Whole-nation System for Tackling Key Core Technologies
Science and technology empower development, and innovation decides the future. The new-type whole-nation system is a new organizational system and institutional arrangement under the conditions of the socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics. It aims to better leverage the roles of both the government and the market, fully utilize the institutional advantage of concentrating strengths to accomplish great things, and takes scientific coordination, the concentration of strengths, the optimization of mechanisms, and collaborative research as its basic principles. It is a new achievement in the Sinicization and modernization of Marxist political economy. It possesses major realistic significance and far-reaching historical significance for advancing high-level science and technology self-reliance and self-strengthening and for driving the high-quality development of China’s economy and society.
(1) Improving the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies is an inevitable requirement for leveraging the superiorities of the socialist system and promoting the development of new quality productive forces
The new-type whole-nation system is an affirmation of the achievements of the whole-nation system during the planned economy period and a systemic response to current technological hegemony. In Capital, Marx provided a profound exposition on the question of productive forces: "The productive power of labour is determined by many circumstances, among others, by the average amount of skill of the workmen, the state of science, and the degree of its practical application, the social organisation of production, the extent and capabilities of the means of production, and by physical conditions." As the industrial revolution continues to develop, the degree of socialization and large-scale nature of technological production continues to increase, prominently manifested in the transformation from dispersed, small-scale individual production to concentrated, large-scale social production. After World War II, capitalism gradually shifted from the stage of general monopoly to state monopoly, and the world saw a confrontation between the socialist and capitalist camps. In this context, scientific and technological competition became one of the most important aspects of the confrontation between the two camps. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Western capitalist camp led by the United States dominated the world's technological leadership. The root cause lies in the inevitable trend of capitalist economic development—namely, the general law of the increasing organic composition of capital under private ownership. "Science and technology can generate massive scale effects and cost savings; in the pursuit of surplus profit, enterprises will inevitably comply with the general law of the growth of capital accumulation." In today's world, the technological hegemony circle led by the United States and other Western countries has engaged in multifaceted and long-term suppression and containment of China's technological development.
Against the background of responding to a series of major risks, challenges, and the containment and suppression of external forces, China formed a special model of "concentrating wisdom for key problems" and "working together for construction" under planned economy conditions—the whole-nation system. With continuous breakthroughs in key core technologies such as the "Two Bombs, One Satellite, and One Submarine" [2], it greatly demonstrated the great innovative wisdom of the Chinese nation and the immense superiority of the socialist system. Improving the new-type whole-nation system is an affirmation of the achievements of the traditional whole-nation system, a scientific path to build development advantages and solve current development dilemmas, and a proactive exploration by China to seek breakthroughs in technological development today. It is a powerful institutional response to the technological hegemony and bullying of Western countries.
The key to the transformation of new-type relations of production lies in improving the new-type whole-nation system. As the fundamental driving force of human social development, productive forces are the most revolutionary and active factor, determining the nature and form of the relations of production. "New quality productive forces are led by innovation; they break away from traditional economic growth modes and development paths of productive forces. They feature high technology, high efficiency, and high quality, and constitute an advanced state of productive forces that aligns with the New Development Philosophy." The salient characteristic of new quality productive forces is innovation, manifested in disruptive technological innovation, high-value-added productive services, and the ability to drive profound transformations in industrial organization. These "new features" and "new elements" of new quality productive forces are formed atop traditional relations of production. To make the relations of production adapt to the development of productive forces, it is necessary to break through the old organizational forms, management models, and operational mechanisms of the traditional relations of production, shattering the shackles to give birth to new-type relations of production.
In a group study session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: "Relations of production must be compatible with the requirements of the development of productive forces. To develop new quality productive forces, we must further comprehensively deepen reform and form new-type relations of production that are compatible with them." This judgment creatively explicates the category of new-type relations of production and provides the basic theoretical basis for us to scientifically grasp the dialectical unity between new-type relations of production and new quality productive forces. Along with the new round of technological and industrial revolution led by information technology and artificial intelligence, emerging sciences and technologies have extensively integrated into all links of social production, circulation, exchange, and consumption, changing the relations between man and nature, man and things, and even man and man. This objectively necessitates promoting the transformation of relations of production. New quality productive forces are driven by scientific and technological innovation. The key to the transformation of new-type relations of production is to focus on national strategic needs, reform old organizational forms, management models, and operational mechanisms, and unite national strategic forces to jointly overcome key technological challenges. In other words, developing new quality productive forces means tackling and breaking through key core technologies, and the transformation of new-type relations of production requires the continuous improvement of the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies. Improving this system aims to enhance the overall effectiveness of the national innovation system and build a technological innovation system that meets the needs of national technological innovation and productive force development in the New Era.
(2) Improving the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies is a realistic necessity for building institutional mechanisms for comprehensive innovation and promoting high-quality development of the Chinese economy
The focus of deepening the reform of the science and technology system lies in improving the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies. The Decision emphasized: "Education, science and technology, and talent are the foundational and strategic supports for Chinese-path modernization." It made systematic deployments and integrated reforms for "building institutional mechanisms to support comprehensive innovation." The essence of innovation-driven high-quality development is to drive efficiency changes through the power of innovation, thereby promoting quality changes. This helps accelerate the formation of new quality productive forces and continuously shapes new advantages and new drivers for development. To support the construction of institutional mechanisms for comprehensive innovation and promote comprehensive innovation centered on scientific and technological innovation, the Party and the state have formulated a strategic development layout focused on the integrated reform of education, science and technology, and talent systems, led by the improvement of the new-type whole-nation system. The new-type whole-nation system is the fundamental top-level design in the modernization of the technological governance system and governance capacity, and it is an important institutional foundation for building a global leader in science and technology.
Since the beginning of the New Era, the new-type whole-nation system has been an important strategic handle for achieving high-level science and technology self-reliance and self-strengthening and for deepening the reform of the science and technology system. It is the key to achieving national development and security on the new journey of Chinese-path modernization. On one hand, our Party has taken "improving the new-type whole-nation system" as an important part of the reform of national innovation institutional mechanisms in the New Era, achieving significant reform results in major technology projects such as quantum communications, deep-sea exploration, Mars exploration, and clean energy. On the other hand, "by taking the improvement of the new-type whole-nation system as the lead, strengthening strategic technological forces, optimizing the allocation of innovation resources, enhancing basic technological capabilities, and strengthening national technology strategic consultation," China’s technological strength has significantly increased. The new-type whole-nation system is required in a context where the strategic mission of the national innovation system faces significantly increased "hard constraints." It is necessary to lead and pioneer new drivers in frontier core technologies to achieve high-quality economic development. It is necessary to explore organizational models for tackling key core technologies to enhance the overall efficiency of the national innovation system. While the factors of production, combination methods, and allocation efficiency of China's economic development are changing, it is necessary to further grasp the core operational mechanisms of technological innovation interaction under the conditions of the socialist market economy, including organizational methods, practical carriers, institutional arrangements, and policy guarantees.
The current world development faces the contradiction of flourishing technological development alongside slowing economic growth. From the demand side, China's economy has entered a new development stage, shifting from the past "scale- and speed-oriented extensive growth" (high-speed growth) to "quality- and efficiency-oriented intensive growth" (medium-to-high speed growth). The power mechanisms reshaping economic growth—such as digital-intelligent transformation, new formats and the new economy, and the drivers of AI and cloud computing—all rely on technological strength and innovation capacity. Innovation is the "sharp weapon of the state" (guozhiliqi); countries are competing fiercely in the field of innovation to seize the commanding heights of technological development and the initiative in development. From the supply side, the marginal contribution of traditional production factors such as human resources, capital, and natural resources is showing an increasingly obvious diminishing trend. Resource constraints continue to strengthen, and the original factor-driven production and supply model can no longer meet the high-level development needs for building a modern powerful nation. High-level development needs are essentially governed by the growth logic of the economic kinetic energy "production-supply"—that is, promoting economic development and value creation through technological progress and scientific innovation. Realizing technological progress and scientific innovation is a path that must be persisted in over the long term, and it is the true trump card in the international competition of comprehensive national strength. This requires building new quality productive forces by improving institutional mechanisms for comprehensive innovation, accelerating technological progress and the transformation of production kinetic energy, and making innovation the "living source" (huoshuiyuanyuan) [3] of China's economic growth.
(3) Improving the new-type whole-nation system for tackling key core technologies is an inevitable choice to adapt to the new landscape of international technological competition and win the initiative in development
The current domestic and international environments have brought a series of new topics and challenges to China's development; however, the overall trend facing our development is one where strategic opportunities coexist with risks and challenges. At this stage, China is adapting to the trends of the new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation by aligning institutional structural change with technological change. By breaking through the institutional constraints of the traditional science and technology system, China has realized innovation in its national management system for science and technology innovation. Major progress has been achieved in key core technology fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and biotechnology, with disruptive technological innovations constantly emerging. Simultaneously, as the "changes unseen in a century" [4] accelerate their evolution, science and technology innovation has become the core bargaining chip in the competition among major world powers. The contradiction between the rise of Chinese technological innovation and external containment pressure has intensified, and human society has ushered in a brand-new opportunity to reshape the landscape of international technological competition. To seize opportunities for technological development, major world powers are accelerating the adjustment of their organizational systems and management frameworks for scientific research, striving to gain an advantage in the new round of technological competition. In the modern era, developed Western countries gained the discourse power over production systems and the value distribution system through R&D and technological innovation. Even after shifting most of their industrial and manufacturing systems to other countries or regions, they can still extract high profits and value-added from the international division of labor chain in coordination with financial hegemony. Currently, the recovery of the world economy is weak, and intense international competition lies hidden against the backdrop of the reshaping of global industrial and supply chains. Presently, developed Western countries are continuously increasing their capacity-building for independent innovation in frontier technology fields, building "moats" in major areas of frontier technological innovation, attempting once again to occupy the "commanding heights" of science and technology in the new international order. At this moment, challenges and opportunities coexist. China is adept at "nurturing opportunities within crises and seizing changes amid opportunities," grasping the general direction of global technological progress. Taking the development of clean energy photovoltaic (PV) cell technology as an example: during the critical period of reshaping the energy landscape, China accurately grasped the future source of power. The PV industry and clean energy will surely replace oil as the ultimate source of kinetic energy for emerging and future industries. Historical experience shows that after World War II, those who controlled oil controlled the initiative of development; in the future, whoever masters core technological innovation in clean new energy will be able to grasp the initiative of future development. By optimizing technological routes, continuously improving conversion efficiency, and thereby reducing costs and increasing efficiency, China's new energy enterprises have promoted the mature development of the entire industry through technological innovation. This has ultimately laid a solid foundation for the sustainable development of emerging and future industries and continued to consolidate China's leading international advantage in new energy development. Therefore, we must recognize the importance and urgency of seizing the innovative development opportunities brought by the independent controllability of key core technologies from the height of "Great History," the "Great Macro-level," and the "Great Landscape." By improving the new-type whole-nation system and giving full play to the institutional advantage of "concentrating resources to accomplish major undertakings," we should focus on national strategic needs, better leverage both the decisive role of the market and the role of the government, transition from being a "follower" to a "leader" in important technological fields, accelerate the construction of new competitive advantages in science and technology that support the development of new quality productive forces, and gain the initiative in future development.
II. Profoundly Grasping the Internal Mechanism of Improving the New-Type Whole-Nation System for Key Core Technology Breakthroughs to Promote the Development of New Quality Productive Forces
Science and technology lead the era; innovation determines the future. Marx believed that "productive force is produced by cooperation itself." The specificity of the new-type whole-nation system lies in its being an organizational model for promoting large-scale division of labor and cooperation unique to China. That is, through division of labor and cooperation in the field of science and technology innovation, it promotes the gathering of advanced productive factors to form a powerful synergy for technological innovation, advancing breakthroughs in key core technologies. We must use an innovation ecosystem that solidifies the foundation of technological innovation as external support, use the effective coordination mechanism between the government and the market as operational security, and use the construction of enterprise-led innovation consortia as the core driving force to powerfully promote the formation and development of new quality productive forces.
(1) External Support: Solidifying the Foundation of Technological Innovation, Building a Good Innovation Ecosystem, and Accelerating the Transformation of Achievements
New quality productive forces originate from technological breakthroughs brought by the new round of technological revolution. How technological innovation, as the core element of new quality productive forces, can be transformed into actual productive forces is a current priority. The Decision [5] made important deployments for "improving the systems and mechanisms for developing new quality productive forces according to local conditions," clearly elucidating the urgency of solidifying the foundation of technological innovation and creating a favorable innovation ecosystem under China's new development landscape. In other words, technological competition is, in essence, a competition of innovation ecosystems. To solidify the foundation of technological innovation and promote the development of new quality productive forces, it is necessary to clarify the direction and laws of the paradigm shift in technological innovation in the New Era, carry out overall planning around the technological innovation ecosystem, and provide strong external support through the advantages of organizational and management frameworks.
General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: "Our country possesses a vast number of scientific and technological workers and a massive scale of R&D investment, and has initially acquired the conditions to compete on the same stage with advanced international levels in some fields. The key is to improve the technological innovation ecosystem, stimulate the vitality of innovation and creation, and build a stage for the vast numbers of scientists and technological workers to display their talents, so that technological innovation achievements emerge in a steady stream." Currently, "global technological innovation has entered a period of unprecedented intensive activity; various disciplines and fields are deeply cross-integrated; disruptive, original, and foundational technologies are constantly emerging; and the trend of multi-point breakthroughs and collective breakthroughs is becoming increasingly apparent." To solidify the foundation of technological innovation, build a good innovation ecosystem, and accelerate the transformation of achievements, we need to clarify the data-driven, intelligent, and ecological directions of the technological innovation paradigm shift in the New Era. Gaining insight into the evolutionary laws of innovation under the background of the technological revolution—"market demand – technological demand – technological breakthrough – commercial application"—helps different subjects of technological innovation to innovate organizational forms and management framework mechanisms under the premise of grasping the direction of the paradigm shift and following evolutionary laws, thereby breaking through key core technologies and promoting the transformation of scientific and technological achievements.
The digitalization and intellectualization of the technological innovation paradigm shift have empowered the entire process of productive force development, integrating into every link from scientific research to technological innovation and then to industrial production. Taking the biological field as an example, the "Deep Potential" team (a Sino-US cooperation) adopted a brand-new research method of "molecular dynamics simulation based on deep learning," expanding the scale of molecular dynamics simulation with first-principles [6] accuracy to 100 million atoms and increasing computational efficiency by more than 1,000 times. This is the first time internationally that intelligent supercomputing has been combined with physical models, leading scientific computing from traditional modes toward the direction of intelligent supercomputing. "Driven by the new scientific research paradigm, the innovation model of new quality productive forces is also evolving from a linear model to collaborative and ecological innovation. During this transition, the boundary between basic research and applied research is gradually blurring, the technological innovation chain and cycle are significantly shortened, and the innovation mode has transformed from point-like to multi-dimensional spiral leaps. By building innovation networks, innovation subjects, information, and resources are closely linked, providing strong support for the emergence of technological singularities." At the same time, thanks to the shift in research paradigms, the link between technological R&D and application has become tighter, and innovation activities are continuously extending downstream. The distance from "market demand" to "commercial application" is increasingly shortened. The orientation of technological innovation toward national needs and people's lives and health has become a reality. The organizational methods and management frameworks of scientific research innovation fully utilize China's institutional advantage of concentrating resources to accomplish major undertakings. We must strengthen the layout of state-led "Big Science" research and theoretical science research, and accelerate the transformation of technological achievements to better serve economic development.
(2) Operational Security: Better Leveraging the Roles of Both the Government and Market Mechanisms to Promote the Allocation of Innovation Resources
The formation and development of new quality productive forces are achieved by leveraging the efficient coordination of government and market mechanisms to promote the leap-frog combination and innovative allocation of traditional productive factors. Through an overall layout of "the whole country as a single chessboard" [7], we create a better macroeconomic environment and institutional conditions for market operation, providing operational security for the rapid formation and development of new quality productive forces.
The Decision emphasized: "We must better leverage the role of market mechanisms, create a fairer and more dynamic market environment, and achieve optimization of resource allocation efficiency and maximization of benefits." From the perspective of realistic phenomena, emerging industries and technological applications—represented by intelligent vehicle driving and the "low-altitude economy" [8] of drones—bring dividends of technological convenience and efficient life services to the people, but they also cause significant impacts on the traditional taxi and logistics industries and affect existing jobs. Furthermore, problems of excessive marketization and over-concentration of productive factors have appeared in some fields, followed by government "governance and correction." However, this is actually an inverted perception of the government's role in economic and social management. It implies that when faced with new problems arising from the defects of market spontaneity and blindness, the government can only respond passively and negatively, subsequently oscillating between "laissez-faire" and "control," which is unfavorable for coordinating an "effective market" and a "promising government." Summarizing the historical experience of government governance, the real logic of governance is quite the opposite. Only when the government plays a preventive and guiding role in economic and social management can market mechanisms function better, can the potential for social and economic development be better released, and can the efficient coordination between the government and the market powerfully promote the formation and development of new quality productive forces. This is because there are various challenges in the current process of economic and social development, and the challenges themselves exhibit both common and specific characteristics. There are common problems at the institutional level that do not match the development of new quality productive forces, and there are specific problems of imbalanced regional development caused by differences in resource endowments in various places. This requires the government to both "let things be flexible" and "be able to manage them" to achieve a balance between "gathering" and "releasing." Taking data as a productive factor as an example: the new demands and new business formats spawned by data factors are an important part of China's economic development, consistent with the evolutionary direction of advanced productive forces required by the nature of new quality productive forces. Currently, both innovation-driven development and scientific research applications require data support, and new technologies and formats also require massive data to achieve information-driven results. However, China's data productive factors are unevenly distributed between the eastern coastal areas and the central and western regions. The eastern coastal areas have a high proportion of the population and possess a large amount of data factor resources and relatively complete digital infrastructure. The central and western regions have prominent advantages in natural resources and possess advantages in data server construction, storage, and data management. By leveraging the leading role of the government in resource allocation within the new-type whole-nation system, we combine the advantages of capital, management, and total volume in the East with the energy and natural advantages of the West, orderly guide intensive computing power demands from the East to the West, enable the cross-regional flow of data factors, and weave a "single network" of national computing power, carrying out overall layout from the height of "the whole country as a single chessboard." On this basis, market mechanisms can function better. Various digital enterprises seek to layout servers and big data centers in the central and western regions, which both relieves energy tension in the East and opens up new driving forces for development in the central and western regions. In short, the government must create more space for development for the market through institutional reforms, allowing the market to play its full role in serving new quality productive forces; this cannot be achieved without the strong security provided by the new-type whole-nation system in coordinating the relationship between the government and the market.
(3) Core Driving Force: Enterprise-Led Innovation Consortia Helping the Deep Integration of Technological Innovation and Industrial Innovation
Innovation consortia are typically a new type of organizational form led by leading enterprises, uniting scientific research institutes and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to promote collaborative innovation among industry, academia, and research, and to facilitate the landing and transformation of scientific and technological achievements. Facing a technological revolution full of challenges and fierce industrial competition, leading enterprises play a leading and driving role, reconnecting fragmented innovation subjects and prompting close cooperation between upstream and downstream sectors to form an innovation system with consistent goals, collaborative breakthroughs, strong innovation strength, and high-yield results. Enterprise-led innovation consortia are important carriers for achieving major breakthroughs in technological development. Serving as the high-quality development engine for the enterprises themselves, they increase the supply of high-quality innovative technology, enhance the overall effectiveness of the national innovation system, and promote the integrated development of technological innovation and industrial innovation, acting as the core driving force for cultivating and developing new quality productive forces.
At this moment, as the level of scientific and technological innovation achieves a historic leap, the state acts as the "setter of the exam" [9] by continuously deepening the reform of the science and technology system; enterprises are the "examinees" solving practical problems in the assault on key core technologies; and the people are the "graders" evaluating the effectiveness of the integration of technological and industrial innovation. "From the perspective of enterprises as decision-makers in technological innovation, leading science and technology enterprises act as the mainstay and play a dominant role in innovation decision-making"; they possess a vast number of invention patents and lead the majority of technological innovations. For example, in the power industry, State Grid has built a three-level innovation system consisting of research and industrial units directly under its headquarters, provincial power companies, and grassroots innovation forces. It has also established joint research institutes with universities to accelerate breakthroughs in key technologies for the Energy Internet. In April 2024, IPRdaily, a global intellectual property information service provider, compiled statistics on AI invention patents applied for and disclosed by enterprises in China over the past decade (April 1, 2014, to March 31, 2024); State Grid held 11,567 AI invention patents. State Grid’s patent ownership has ranked first among central state-owned enterprises (SOEs) for ten consecutive years, with its invention patent ownership also ranking first. While creating a "Chinese brand" in global power grid core technology, it has also taken a leading position in the world. As a leading science and technology enterprise, State Grid—by heading and participating in major national science and technology projects and co-defining scientific problems with universities and research institutes—has injected an inexhaustible source of power for development and innovation to achieve self-reliance and self-strengthening in power grid technology.
From the perspective of leading science and technology enterprises promoting collaborative innovation among industry, academia, and research, these firms possess significant advantages in management models, innovative technologies, and talent pools. By integrating innovation resources, fostering an innovation ecosystem in their fields, and building robust innovation bases, they demonstrate a powerful capacity for the R&D of common key core industrial technologies. This benefits from deep cooperation between enterprises, universities, and research institutes, which has yielded solid results in technological innovation and industrial application. Meanwhile, China’s leading science and technology enterprises assist the development of small and medium-sized technology firms through technology licensing, patent sharing, and joint R&D, helping to enhance their R&D capabilities. From the perspective of closely integrating upstream and downstream sectors to promote the transformation of scientific and technological achievements, leading science and technology enterprises, as the "chain leaders" [10] of industrial chains, possess absolute centripetal force within the upstream and downstream supply chains. They can attract a group of leading firms through key links such as innovation, capital, and talent, and promote the re-optimization of industrial chains by strengthening upstream and downstream cooperation. To this end, we must vigorously support leading science and technology enterprises in extending their reach into basic and applied research, truly connecting basic research, technological application, and industrial development. By exerting their leading role, these enterprises can work simultaneously on the supply side of R&D and the demand side of industrial application to achieve the efficient transformation of scientific achievements, facilitate the deep integration of technological and industrial innovation, and provide the core kinetic energy for the development of new quality productive forces.
III. Thoroughly Implementing the Key Tasks of Improving the New-type Whole-of-Nation System for Assailing Key Core Technologies
Developing new quality productive forces is a systemic project and a long-term task; similarly, improving the new-type whole-of-nation system for assailing key core technologies is an arduous reform task. It requires both the courage to challenge frontier scientific and technological problems and a holistic strategy for integrated planning and systemic advancement. To this end, we must improve the Party’s centralized and unified leadership over science and technology work, build an integrated allocation mechanism conducive to breakthroughs in core technologies, establish a technological innovation system with enterprises as the mainstay, promote higher-level open cooperation in innovation, and—by grasping the laws governing the development of new quality productive forces—concentrate national strategic science and technology strengths, plan according to local conditions, and form a collaborative and efficient new-type whole-of-nation system.
(i) Improving the Party’s Centralized and Unified Leadership over Science and Technology Work
The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the greatest advantage of the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics. The Central Committee’s centralized and unified leadership over science and technology work is decisive for the success or failure of China’s technological development. Only by better leveraging the greatest political advantage of the Party's leadership can we construct a collaborative and efficient organization and mobilization system, coalesce a powerful force to drive technological innovation, and ensure that the reform and development of the science and technology system always advance in the right direction.
First, we must improve the system of the Party Central Committee’s centralized and unified leadership over science and technology work. Centralized and unified leadership by no means implies taking over every detail of innovation results; rather, it means giving play to the Party's role as the leadership core that "commands the overall situation and coordinates all parties" [11]. "We must strengthen the top-level design and overall coordination of the Central Science and Technology Commission over science and technology work." In promoting the construction of systems and mechanisms for comprehensive innovation, we must place the reform of the science and technology system in a more prominent position, emphasize systemic integration, and advance reforms with global planning and holistic progression, "strengthening the coordination of strategic planning, policy measures, major tasks, scientific research forces, resource platforms, and regional innovation." In focusing on building mechanisms that support comprehensive innovation, we must remain problem-oriented and place greater emphasis on highlighting priorities. Starting from the "choke points" and bottlenecks in the innovation system, we should allow various advanced and high-quality innovation elements to aggregate toward new quality productive forces, emphasizing the construction of collaborative and efficient decision-making, command, and implementation systems to forge a powerful synergy.
Second, we must construct a working pattern where the government and the market work together with high efficiency. Building a collaborative mechanism between the government and the market must not be an empty slogan of "new wine in old bottles." It requires both a better role for the market and a better role for the government. Regarding the market, emphasizing its decisive role in the allocation of science and technology resources requires full attention to the degree of marketization in the circulation of innovation elements, the mobility of personnel and technology, management processes, and evaluation mechanisms for innovation results. Market-based means must truly serve the needs of national research tasks, utilizing the market’s decisive role to improve the industrial innovation division of labor, spatial layout, and the support system for innovation and entrepreneurship services. Regarding the government, it must not only plan ahead to prevent the negative effects of the market but also act as a bridge for cross-sectoral exchange and cooperation among various innovation subjects. The core technology breakthrough model under the new-type whole-of-nation system involves unified strategic moves in several key fields, releasing major projects in a task-oriented format. This urgently requires the government to implement "item-specific" policies [12] for different projects, setting reasonable task progress indicators and scientific evaluation targets so that the service process is "invisible" while the results are "visible." In this critical period of developing new quality productive forces and promoting revolutionary breakthroughs in key core technologies, the government should act as a "behind-the-scenes conductor," orchestrating a beautiful movement for the overall development of national technology, fully mobilizing social innovation forces, and catalyzing the development of new quality productive forces through revolutionary technological breakthroughs.
Third, we must strengthen the construction of national strategic science and technology forces and optimize their positioning and layout. The Decision [13] emphasizes: "Improve the system of national laboratories." National laboratories bear the responsibility of focusing on important national security fields; they are the general platforms and "chain leaders" for technological breakthroughs, intended to produce strategic and key major technological achievements. In improving the organization of basic research, we must leverage the role of national research institutions as institutionalized organizations. Basic research oriented toward major national strategies and industrial needs must be supported by original basic theories, with the mastery of underlying technical principles serving as the source supply. By continuously improving the investment mechanism that combines competitive support with stable support, we will form more robust national strategic forces to solidify the foundation and "baseplate" of technological innovation.
(ii) Building an Integrated Allocation Mechanism Conducive to Assailing Key Core Technologies
Building a new-type whole-of-nation system conducive to key core technology breakthroughs urgently requires the establishment of an integrated allocation that integrates the innovation chain, industrial chain, capital chain, and talent chain (hereafter the "four chains"). Technological innovation has evolved into an integrated, networked, and comprehensive activity where technology and industry are more closely linked. We must break the state of relative separation among the "four chains," clear the bottlenecks and "broken points" in the transformation of scientific achievements into industry, and construct an integrated allocation mechanism for the rational distribution and free flow of elements, promoting the deep fusion of the "four chains" to further release the kinetic energy of innovation.
First, we should create a "dual-core drive" [14] led by the innovation and industrial chains to promote the organic integration of innovation and production. The innovation chain and the industrial chain are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. The innovation chain connects all links from R&D to industrialization, playing a role in strengthening, complementing, and stabilizing the industrial chain. The industrial chain connects all links from raw materials to end products, exerting a "demand-pull" effect on the innovation chain, driving the realization of value and the application of scientific achievements. We must deploy the innovation chain around the upstream, midstream, and downstream of the industrial chain—providing front-end basic research, mid-end technological R&D, and back-end industrial technology supply—to enhance the resilience and competitiveness of the industrial chain. Conversely, we must layout the industrial chain around the innovation chain, reducing costs and increasing efficiency in upstream raw material manufacturing, optimizing quality in midstream component manufacturing, and ensuring efficient transformation of downstream end products. This "dual-core drive" will accelerate the transition from basic research to product landing, moving from the replacement of individual tech products to the formation of new industrial layouts, thereby achieving a truly organic integration of technological innovation and industrial development.
Second, we must strengthen the catalytic and supportive role of the capital chain, providing "financial water" for the innovation and industrial chains. As an important factor of production, capital is a vital catalyst. On the input side, we should moderately expand the sources of the capital chain, including central and local fiscal funds, commercial banks, and non-bank financial institutions, while also encouraging the entry of corporate funds and other social capital. On the operational side, we should fully leverage the catalytic power of capital, using mechanisms to standardize its use and supervision—ensuring it is both "vibrant" and "under control." On the return side, while focusing on the rate of return, we should also accelerate the speed of capital recovery to ensure the capital chain can continuously meet the needs of the innovation and industrial chains.
Finally, we must develop the leading and transformative role of the talent chain to provide intellectual support for the innovation and industrial chains. The essence of the "dual-core drive" is talent-driven; neither innovation nor industrial cycles can function without the intellectual support of the talent chain. The Decision emphasizes "deepening the reform of the system and mechanisms for talent development," highlighting talent as the core competitiveness and the foundation of innovation and industry. The talent chain involves personnel in R&D, transformation, production, logistics, and marketing. Building the talent chain requires an integrated strategy: constructing mechanisms for rational use, specialized evaluation, efficient mobility, positive incentives, and diverse service guarantees to fully stimulate the creative vitality of market talent.
(iii) Establishing a Technological Innovation System with Enterprises as the Mainstay
State-owned enterprises (SOEs) already possess strong innovation capabilities, core competitiveness, and institutional advantages in original innovation; they are the core force for high-level technological self-reliance and self-strengthening under the new-type whole-of-nation system. At the same time, we must encourage the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). We need to accelerate the creation of support carriers for industry-academia-research integration, improve incentive mechanisms, and foster a proactive innovation ecosystem. This involves reinforcing efficient collaboration and creating a technological innovation environment with a rational layout of resources. As the mainstay of innovation, enterprises must continuously drive technological, institutional, and management innovation to enhance their own vitality, thereby raising the overall level of social innovation and promoting the construction of an industrial technological innovation system.
Taking "the deep integration of industry, academia, and research" as the point of penetration, we must build innovation-oriented supporting vehicles for the transformation of scientific achievements. The transformation of achievements is the "final kilometer" [15] of innovative development and value realization. On one hand, scientific research organizations are primarily distributed among higher education institutions and research institutes; they control the "seller's market" of R&D investment and intellectual property, possessing significant discourse power in project planning and achievement evaluation. In contrast, enterprises—which urgently need to transform and apply innovative achievements—constitute a relatively weak "buyer's market." To strengthen the dominant position of enterprises in the integration of industry, academia, and research, we must fundamentally realize this by enhancing the discourse power and status of enterprises in innovation decision-making, R&D investment, research organization, and the transformation of achievements. On the other hand, different enterprises possess significantly different levels of discourse power regarding risk prevention and the distribution of scientific project profits during their participation in major science and technology projects. The Decision [16] emphasizes: "Persist in and implement the 'Two Unswervingly' [17]." We must increase support for scientific and technological innovation in private enterprises, match fiscal fund management systems with private enterprise financial systems, enhance the risk resistance and control capabilities of private enterprises, and bolster their enthusiasm for participating in national strategic scientific tasks as well as their intrinsic motivation to build scientific infrastructure and innovation platforms.
Taking "improving incentive mechanisms" as the key point, we must foster a proactive ecosystem for scientific and technological innovation. Creating such an ecosystem requires a two-pronged approach—addressing both the "hard environment" and the "soft environment"—to continuously improve incentive mechanisms. The "hard environment" refers to incentives provided through the comprehensive use of policy tools such as fiscal, tax, and financial measures; the "soft environment" refers to incentives through cultural dimensions, such as promoting entrepreneurship and increasing social recognition. Within the hard environment, when enterprises take the lead or participate in major national scientific and technological breakthroughs, they urgently require support from innovation factors such as land, technology, capital, and talent. We must use hard environment incentives to accelerate the clustering of these innovation factors toward enterprises. Beyond hard environment incentives, enterprises also need soft environment incentives, such as market and social recognition, to encourage entrepreneurs to fully exert their innovative spirit and assume social responsibilities. The soft environment can also alleviate present difficulties in the innovation ecosystem, such as the difficulty for enterprises to gather innovation resources and the limited coverage of public resources, thereby fostering a more proactive innovation ecosystem.
Taking "strengthening collaborative innovation" as the final objective, we must create a scientific and rational regional innovation layout. "Since the Industrial Revolution, Marshall was the first to analyze regional economic innovation from the perspective of industrial spatial agglomeration, arguing that the externalities and economies of scale generated by industrial clustering in a specific region are important drivers of regional development." With the rise of innovation ecosystems, the academic community has taken the regional innovation ecosystem as a new direction for regional innovation research, emphasizing that the government, as an important participant in this system, must improve regional policy synergy, promote the free flow of regional factors, and achieve the synergetic agglomeration of industries and enterprises. Enterprises are the key to coordinating various types of innovation within the regional layout. We must highlight the principal position of enterprises in innovation, cultivating both leading science and technology enterprises capable of guiding industrial development and more "Little Giant" [18] enterprises that are specialized, refined, unique, and innovative, allowing them to exhibit their talents in the vertical segments of more projects. We must give full play to the internal synergy of regional innovation systems, allowing large, medium, and small enterprises to cultivate resources in different fields intensively to match the industrial needs of regional development, thereby creating a scientific, rational, collaborative, and efficient regional innovation layout.
(4) Promoting Higher-Level Open Cooperation in Scientific and Technological Innovation
Scientific and technological progress is a global and epochal issue; only open cooperation is the correct path forward. As our country enters a new stage of scientific development, external scientific exchanges have gradually deepened. The volatile international situation and the rapid pace of scientific advancement place higher demands on open cooperation. To respond to new challenges, we must be more proactive in responding to and seeking change. We should open our minds, deeply participate in global science and technology governance, cultivate competitive advantages in cooperative resources, better coordinate the relationship between openness and security, and plan and promote scientific innovation from a global perspective.
Deeply participate in global science and technology governance to lay the theoretical foundation for cooperation. The more science progresses, the closer its connection with the world becomes. Humanity needs open cooperation now more than ever to enjoy the dividends of scientific development and respond to shared challenges such as the risks of Artificial Intelligence, the decoupling of international industrial chains, and health and medical security. This requires China not only to increase the breadth and depth of its participation in global science governance but also to shift its identity from a "participant" to a "leader" in the formulation of global scientific rules and standards, elevating these into international consensus and norms. On one hand, we should benchmark ourselves against the world's leading scientific nations, enhancing our own innovation capabilities and attraction to high-tech talent, and continuously improving recruitment policies for high-end fields and scarce talent to attract overseas talent through diversified policies. On the other hand, we must avoid blind competition and create "asymmetric" competitive advantages in certain international scientific fields. By accumulating late-mover advantages, we can enhance China's asymmetric advantages in frontier technology, photovoltaic energy, the digital economy, and green development, continuously driving innovation in scientific issues through theoretical innovation to enhance our discourse power in global science and technology governance.
Leverage the clustering effect of "Big Science" facilities [19] to cultivate competitive advantages in cooperative resources. By the end of 2023, China had planned and built 77 national major scientific and technological infrastructure projects (Big Science facilities), with 57 currently under construction or in operation, covering major research fields. The comprehensive level of some facilities has entered the world's "first tier." We must strengthen the internationalization of the construction and operation of these facilities, allowing scientific achievements, technical resources, and data factors to flow effectively across borders. By enhancing the convenience of factor circulation, we can empower scientific research and progress with technical resources and data factors, generating significant spillover effects. The construction and application of Big Science facilities is itself a process of scientific innovation, providing superior support for international frontier science and serving as a cradle for talent growth and a treasury for gathering talent, thereby better exerting clustering effects to solve major frontier scientific problems.
Actively coordinate openness and security to create a security guarantee for cooperation. Currently, the global environment is complex and volatile, with opportunities and crises coexisting. Carrying out high-level international scientific cooperation on the basis of high-level scientific self-reliance and self-strengthening requires coordinating the relationship between development and security. Scientific security is often closely linked to national industrial security, economic security, and intellectual property security. Within the framework of opening up and cooperation, we must strengthen industrial security protection rules at the national level and provide support for international scientific cooperation at the legislative level. At the level of research team organization, we must enhance awareness of scientific security, advocate for the rights to the team's own R&D achievements, and remain vigilant against the penetration of external forces.
(Author's affiliation: Fujian Normal University) Source: Jinyang Academic Journal, Issue 3, 2025 Web Editor: Bao Luo