Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method

Wang, Yanqing; Ding, Weilai; Zhu, Hongbo; Mo, Junxiong

doi:10.3390/land15020298

Open AccessArticle

Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method

Department of Land Resource Management, School of Public Administration, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China

^*

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Land 2026, 15(2), 298; https://doi.org/10.3390/land15020298

Submission received: 31 December 2025 / Revised: 26 January 2026 / Accepted: 5 February 2026 / Published: 11 February 2026

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers on Land Use, Impact Assessment and Sustainability)

Download

Browse Figures

Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Analyzing the evolution of cultivated land quality protection policy in China is crucial for refining its frameworks and constructing a “trinity” system integrating quantity, quality, and ecological sustainability. This study employs content analysis to systematically trace the evolutionary patterns of such policies, based on a review of 200 national and local policy documents issued between 1986 and 2014. The results reveal the following: (1) Policy development has occurred in five distinct stages: embryonic, practical exploration, system construction, in-depth transformation, and comprehensive upgrading. The policy system is now maturing toward an integrated “trinity” protection mechanism. Accordingly, governmental priorities have shifted from emphasizing subsistence benefits to prioritizing ecological benefits. (2) Despite a multifaceted policy framework, effectiveness is hindered by the absence of binding national legislation, which remains in the drafting phase. This gap has resulted in fragmented implementation, inconsistent regional standards, and limited policy efficacy. (3) To strengthen the system, we propose three optimization pathways: elevating the legislative hierarchy for robust legal safeguards, implementing zoning-based control mechanisms for targeted governance, and refining interest linkage policies to enhance stakeholder coordination. Furthermore, by constructing a policy orientation index, we quantify the distinct shift from quantity control towards quality and ecological priorities. The study links this discursive evolution to land governance challenges, arguing that policy fragmentation and weak legal binding may undermine land value stability and long-term investment. Our findings extend beyond descriptive policy history, offering a framework for assessing how policy discourse translates into tangible land system outcomes.

Keywords:

cultivated land quality protection; policy evolution; content analysis method

1. Introduction

China’s cultivated land protection policy has undergone three historic transformations: from an initial focus on quantity protection, to equal emphasis on quantity and quality, and ultimately to the establishment of a “trinity” protection based on quantity, quality and ecology protection [1]. In 1997, the Circular of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the State Council on Further Strengthening Land Management and Effectively Protecting Cultivated Land was issued. This document stands as a crucial milestone in cultivated land protection, marking the entry of cultivated land protection into a new phase of usage and management. In 2017, in the Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection and Improving the Balance between Occupation and Compensation, the “trinity” cultivated land protection concept was proposed, featuring quality improvement and ecological protection as key considerations. They aim was to comprehensively and systematically advance cultivated land protection to meet the new demands of economic and social development for such protection [2]. On 5 September 2022, the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) released the Draft Law on the Protection of Cultivated Land (Draft for Public Comment), which explicitly states that the goals of cultivated land protection are “maintaining the quantity of cultivated land, improving its quality, and stabilizing its ecological functions.” China’s cultivated land protection strategy is undergoing a fundamental transition-from a narrow focus on quantity to an integrated model that simultaneously safeguards quantity, quality, and ecological integrity-which was officially underscored as a central policy objective at the 2023 Central Rural Work Conference. It is evident that China’s cultivated land quality protection policy is transitioning from traditional quantity-centric protection to a “trinity” protection system encompassing quantity, quality, and ecology. During this transition, a large number of cultivated land quality protection policies have been formulated and implemented, providing sufficient research samples for this study. While extensive research has documented the institutional evolution of the protection of Chinese farmland, a critical gap remains in systematically linking the evolution of policy discourse to the economic and ecological performance of land systems. Existing studies often treat policy as a given input or focus on its implementation outcomes, neglecting to consider how the shifting priorities and instruments articulated in policy texts themselves shape the logic of land governance and value realization. This study posits that policy texts are not merely declarative; they constitute a form of discursive power that guides resource allocation, shapes stakeholder behavior, and ultimately influences land productivity and value. By employing quantitative content analysis, this paper aims to decode this discursive evolution and explicate its potential implications for land economics and sustainable land management.

Domestic research on cultivated land quality protection is multifaceted, centering on three core research areas: the policy system [3], farmers’ behavioral responses [4,5], and technical and regional implementation models. First, regarding the policy system, studies have categorized protection policies by specific instruments and lineages [6], emphasizing the evaluation of their synergistic effects [7]. The overarching policy orientation emphasizes a dual focus on quantity and quality, operationalized through mechanisms such as total cultivated land balance and incentive systems [8,9]. Evaluations of policy effectiveness typically assess the outcomes of specific policies [10] and analyze their implementation pathways [11]. Second, regarding on farmers’ behavioral responses, as the direct land managers, farmers’ protection practices are a key research stream. Work in this area primarily investigates the drivers and underlying mechanisms influencing these behaviors [12,13,14,15]. Third, concerning technical and regional implementation, scholars have verified the efficacy of specific technical measures [16,17], leading to proposals for integrated management strategies encompassing soil improvement, fertility management, and pollution remediation [18,19]. Concurrently, studies have developed localized protection models to address regional heterogeneity [20,21,22,23,24]. For instance, black soil protection policies can improve cultivated land quality by promoting agricultural mechanization to reduce fertilization intensity [25]; in natural oases, ecological buffer zones can be established, and differentiated environmental protection policies can be implemented inside and outside these zones [26]. Currently, there is a lack of specialized research on the analysis of policy texts on cultivated land quality protection. To fill this research gap, the aim of study is to adopt the content analysis method and construct a “time–space–content” analytical framework-where the time dimension periodizes policy evolution into stages, the space dimension analyzes vertical governance hierarchies (national to local), and the content dimension classifies policy instruments and keywords-with 200 policy texts as research samples. The goal is to systematically trace the policy trajectory and decode its evolutionary logic. This study systematically traces the textual evolution of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies, with a core focus on exploring how shifts in policy discourse shape the core attributes of land as a production factor and economic asset. Specifically, it examines the impacts of such discourse evolution on land’s value formation mechanisms, productivity returns, and cross-regional resource allocation efficiency, aiming to provide empirical insights for policy optimization and sustainable land use governance. More importantly, by introducing a land-centric interpretive framework, this study sought to bridge policy discourse analyses with core concerns in land economics-such as land value formation, investment incentives, and spatial differentiation of land use efficiency-thereby generating evidence-based insights for optimizing protection in the new era.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Content Analysis

Content analysis began with an in-depth deconstruction of the target texts [27]. First, keywords and sentences with core meanings were accurately extracted from the texts [28,29]—a fundamental step in converting textual information into analyzable units. The key operation lies in completing the transformation from “qualitative to quantitative”, that is, converting data originally presented in linguistic form (without quantitative attributes) into quantifiable data through standardized coding. On this basis, these quantitative results were processed using statistical methods, and analytical conclusions are presented through objective statistical analysis. This further uncovers the associations and characteristics underlying the textual content, ultimately extracting rules that reflect the core essence of the texts and adhere to clear counting standards. Notably, such rules are not subjective inferences but are testable and interpretable, with their validity verifiable through repeated analysis or logical verification. Therefore, compared with traditional qualitative policy reviews that rely on expert selection and interpretation of key documents, this systematic content analysis approach transforms a large corpus of textual data into structured, quantitative metrics. This allows for a more objective and reproducible identification of macro-level discursive trends and structural transitions in policy, providing a novel methodological pathway for studying policy evolution.

2.2. Data Source and Sample Selection

In this study, China’s cultivated land quality protection policies issued since 2000 are taken as the research object. The policy retrieval and screening process followed a multi-level and systematic approach. First, regarding the search pathway, we prioritized national-level policies and conducted targeted searches on the official websites of central state organs, including the Central Committee of the CPC, the State Council, the Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR), and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MOA). We then expanded the scope to local-level policies, conducting systematic retrievals on the official websites of provincial, municipal, and county governments, as well as their affiliated departments (e.g., land and resources departments, agriculture and rural affairs departments). On this basis, we performed retrospective retrievals using existing policy texts and the relevant research literature to further add policy documents highly relevant to cultivated land quality protection, forming a comprehensive policy retrieval network. To ensure the scientificity and validity of the selected policy texts, we formulated three core screening and sorting criteria: The relevance principle requires that only policy texts whose main content or specific clauses are directly related to cultivated land quality protection be selected, ensuring a high degree of alignment between the policies and the research theme. The normativity principle limits the policies to legislative documents and normative documents (e.g., opinions, implementation plans, notices, and measures) formulated by statutory authorities, including the CPC Central Committee, the State Council, national and local land and resources departments, and agriculture and rural affairs departments. The uniqueness principle mandates that duplicate policy documents or those with identical content be screened out to avoid sample redundancy. Finally, 200 effective policy samples were identified: 55 are national-level, 89 are provincial-level, and the remaining 56 are municipal and county-level local policy samples. See the Appendix A Table A1 and Table A2 for the complete list of policy samples.

2.3. Framework for Policy Text Analysis

To systematically deconstruct the evolution of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies, we developed a three-dimensional analytical framework, as visually summarized in Figure 1.

First, the temporal dimension periodizes the policy trajectory into five sequential stages of evolution: the budding stage (2000–2004), practical exploration (2005–2009), system construction (2010–2014), deepening transformation (2015–2019), and comprehensive upgrade (2020–present). Second, the vertical hierarchy dimension structures the policy corpus according to the legislative and administrative authority of the issuing body, creating a governance chain that ranges from national laws and central directives down to localized implementation rules. Finally, the horizontal composition dimension classifies policies by their textual genre and functional type-such as laws, guidelines, implementation plans, and notifications-thereby revealing the diversity of policy instruments employed. This integrated “time-hierarchy-type” framework, applied to our collection of 200 policy texts, enables a structured analysis of when and at which governance level policies were promulgated, as well as in what form they were articulated, offering a holistic lens through which to examine the system’s evolution.

2.4. Content Coding and Policy Text Keywords

The 200 policy samples were coded following the rule of “Text Numbering-Specific Clauses/Sections” using NVivo 12 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia) to generate the coding of policy content analysis units, as shown in Table 1. Based on the textual content, core ideas, and evolutionary changes in the policies, keywords reflecting the core content of the policy texts were identified, totaling 13 keywords. They are A-Soil Improvement, B-Balance of Land Occupation and Compensation, C-Irrigation and Water Conservancy, D-Capital Investment, E-Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides, F-Project Areas, G-Agricultural Products, H-Quality Evaluation, I-Supervision and Management, J-Scientific Planning, K-Technology Promotion, L-Adapting Measures to Local Conditions, and M-Quality Grade. Their concise definitions are provided in Table 1. For the detailed coding of policy texts and keyword definitions, see Table 2.

The identification and coding of these 13 keywords are not merely a descriptive exercise. These keywords represent core policy instruments that are theorized (based on land economic theories) to influence based on land economic theories the economic and productive attributes of cultivated land through distinct mechanisms. For instance, keywords such as Soil Improvement (A) and Capital Input (D) pertain to direct investment in land capital, potentially leading to value capitalization. Quality Evaluation (H) and Quality Grade (M) aim to reduce information asymmetry, enhancing market efficiency. Supervision and Management (I) serves as a regulatory tool to mitigate land degradation risks, while Technology Promotion (K) directly targets productivity enhancement. The principle of Adapting Measures to Local Conditions (L) underscores the pursuit of spatial allocative efficiency. Therefore, shifts in the frequency and co-occurrence of these keywords across policy stages (analyzed in subsequent sections) reflect an evolving governance logic that shapes land not only as a resource but as a productive and economic asset. This analytical perspective guides the interpretation of the policy evolution patterns revealed by the content analysis.

2.5. Text Frequency Statistics

To carefully and thoroughly examine these 200 policy texts, we counted the keywords of each text using Microsoft Excel 2021 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) to develop an analysis unit coding table. For cross-period frequency comparison and statistical validation, we further employed SPSS 26.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA) to calculate the proportion of each keyword. The frequency of occurrence of these keywords across five distinct periods-namely, the embryonic, practical exploration, system construction, in-depth transformation, and comprehensive upgrading stages-is presented in Table 3.

A two-dimensional diagram of the policy texts was constructed, which was used to analyze the distribution characteristics of the 13 keywords and the content of the policy texts (i.e., text coding) across three periods. The two-dimensional distribution diagram of the policy texts is presented in Figure 2.

2.6. Analytical Framework and Strength Measurement Method

2.6.1. Theoretical Framework

(1): Institutional Change Theory

Institutional Change Theory posits that institutions evolve dynamically, and their transformation is jointly driven by changes in the external environment, the accumulation of internal contradictions, and interactions among key actors [30]. The evolution of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies exhibits the typical phased characteristics of mandatory institutional change, where the central government dominates institutional design and implementation based on national strategic needs [31]. Thus, Institutional Change Theory offers significant explanatory power for understanding China’s top-down agricultural sustainable development policies, which involve interactions among multiple stakeholders. This process is also marked by notable path dependence: the early institutional framework centered on administrative mandates and quantity control has profoundly shaped the formulation paradigms and tool selection of subsequent policies [32]. Additionally, there are several “critical junctures” in the change process, which signal major shifts in policy paradigms and initiate new paths of institutional development [33]. This study finds that the goal of China’s cultivated land quality protection has gradually expanded from initial subsistence security to a comprehensive governance objective that integrates food security, ecological benefits, and sustainable development, and this evolution of goals constitutes the internal driving force behind institutional change.

(2): Policy Instrument Theory

Complementing this, Policy Instrument Theory defines policy instruments as the combination of specific means, techniques, and mechanisms adopted by governments to achieve policy objectives [34]. Based on the degree of government intervention and types of resources involved, policy instruments can be categorized into three types: regulatory, economic incentive-based, and hybrid. Drawing on the policy instrument classification proposed by Howlett and Ramesh (1995) [34] and combining common expressions in China’s cultivated land protection policy texts, this study assigns 13 keywords to these three instrument categories (see Table 4). However, the effectiveness of a single instrument is often limited, so the coordination and combination of policy instruments have become key to enhancing governance effectiveness. An ideal instrument portfolio should achieve functional complementarity, incentive compatibility, and adaptability to different governance contexts. Thus, examining the combined effects of China’s current cultivated land protection policy instruments and whether there exists a structural imbalance within them constitutes one of the core focuses of this study.

2.6.2. Measurement of Policy Instrument Intensity

To quantitatively analyze the core governance models relied on by the government in different stages of cultivated land protection and their evolutionary characteristics, we calculated the standardized relative intensity of each policy instrument type across various policy stages based on the instrument classification established in Section 2.6.1, with the results visualized in Figure 3. The calculation formula is as follows:

S_{d, s} = \frac{\sum_{K \in d} F_{K, S}}{T_{S}} \times 100 %

where

S_{d, s}

denotes the intensity of the policy instrument dimension, namely the relative frequency (in percentage) of dimension d (Regulation and Control, Investment and Incentivization, Guidance and Restoration) appearing in policy stage s.

\sum_{K \in d} F_{K, S}

represents the total occurrence frequency of all keywords k classified into dimension d in policy stage s.

T_{S}

refers to the total occurrence frequency of all 13 keywords in policy stage s.

Figure 3. Evolution of the intensity of China’s cultivated land protection policy tools in different dimensions.

3. Results

3.1. Analysis of Changes in Policy Quantity

Since 2000, the number of cultivated land quality protection policies in China has exhibited a “fluctuating” growth trend (see Figure 4). During the period 2000–2004, cultivated land quality protection policies were in the embryonic stage of exploration, and a systematic framework had not yet been formed in the policy system. The promulgation of the Decision of the State Council on Deepening Reform and Strictly Managing Land in 2004 marked a crucial turning point: the concept of “cultivated land quality construction” was explicitly proposed for the first time in a national policy document, signaling that cultivated land protection in China began to shift from simple quantity control to equal emphasis on quantity protection and quality construction. This laid a conceptual foundation for the subsequent development of related policies. A total of 14 relevant policy texts were promulgated during the entire embryonic stage, with an average of 2.8 documents per year.

From 2005 to 2009, as the transitional stage of cultivated land quality protection, although the number of relevant documents did not increase significantly during this period (totaling 18 documents, with an average of 3.6 issued annually), the concepts of “cultivated land quality” and “soil fertility improvement” were gradually incorporated into the national policy framework. From 2010 to 2014, cultivated land quality protection entered a critical stage of system construction, during which a large number of relevant documents were issued (totaling 61 documents, with an average of 12.2 per year). In 2015–2019, cultivated land quality protection entered the stage of deepening transformation and improvement, with a large number of relevant policy texts promulgated (totaling 68 documents, with an average of 13.6 per year and the number reaching as high as 22 in 2016). The promulgation of the Measures for the Investigation, Monitoring, and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality in 2017 marked a key step in the scientific and refined transformation of the policy system: it established a monitoring and evaluation system covering indicators such as cultivated land quality grades and soil health status, while also forming a “trinity” policy framework integrating “quantity control, quality improvement, and ecological protection.” Since 2020, cultivated land quality protection has been in a comprehensive upgrading stage centered on in-depth transformations and improvements, and the number of relevant policies has decreased compared with the previous two stages. During this period, the policy content has been paid to overall development in policy content, integrating cultivated land quality protection into national strategies such as food security, agricultural and rural development, and ecological civilization construction.

3.2. Analysis of Vertical and Horizontal Structure of Policy

3.2.1. Vertical Hierarchical Dimension

From the perspective of the vertical hierarchical distribution of policy issuance, China’s cultivated land quality protection policies exhibit the characteristics of “central coordination–provincial refinement–municipal and county implementation” (see Table 5). Specifically, since 2000, the Central Committee of the CPC has promulgated 2 documents (accounting for 1.00%), the State Council and relevant central ministries and commissions have issued 53 documents (accounting for 26.50%), and local governments at all levels have formulated 145 documents (accounting for 72.50%). Among local government policies, provincial governments have issued 89 documents (accounting for 44.50%), while municipal and county governments have released 56 documents (accounting for 28.00%). It is evident that in recent years, local governments have been the main issuers of cultivated land quality protection policies, with nearly half of these being administrative measures formulated at the provincial level.

3.2.2. Horizontal Composition Dimension

China’s cultivated land quality protection policies cover five categories based on the horizontal composition of the policy samples (see Table 6): 1 party guideline (accounting for 0.95%), 31 laws and regulations (accounting for 15.50%), 15 rules (accounting for 7.50%), 83 normative documents (accounting for 41.5%), and 71 working documents (accounting for 35.5%). Generally speaking, cultivated land quality is protected under the guidance of a small number of laws, regulations and rules. On this basis, a large number of normative documents and working documents are issued to standardize and strengthen the protection of cultivated land quality.

3.2.3. Comparison of Vertical Levels and Horizontal Composition

From the perspective of vertical policy classification, national-level policies on cultivated land quality protection constitute a relatively small share (26.5%). In contrast, normative documents and related policies issued by local governments represent a significantly larger proportion (72.5%). Among central-level policies, the majority are promulgated by the State Council and the MLR, indicating that the central government attaches great importance to cultivated land quality protection. However, the overall supply of legal documents in this field remains insufficient. Provincial-level policies account for the largest share of local policies, reflecting their critical bridging function: connecting central guidelines with local implementation.

The distribution of policy instrument types across different governance levels further reveals the characteristics of policy composition, as detailed in Table 7.

From the perspective of horizontal policy composition, most policies are issued in the form of normative and working documents. Table 7 further illustrates that Hybrid Tools (EGHL) are the most frequently employed across all levels, especially at the city/county level (49.5%), indicating a reliance on flexible, comprehensive measures in implementation. Economic Instruments (ACDFK) are also widely used, particularly at the national level (34.9%). Regarding legal effectiveness, the prevalence of these mid- to low-level policy forms may constrain their capacity to exert consistent and robust regulatory effects.

A comparative analysis of the vertical hierarchy and horizontal structure reveals that under the overall framework formulated by the State Council and the MNR, most provinces in China have carried out extensive pilot projects. Consequently, locally formulated policies-which are often grounded in grassroots governance practices and heavily utilize hybrid instruments-and national policies are interconnected, mutually reinforcing, and closely coordinated.

To sum up, China’s cultivated land quality protection policy system presents significant structural characteristics of “vertical division of labor and horizontal flexibility”. Central policies focus on institutional frameworks and standard-setting, while local (especially provincial) policies are dominated by specific implementation and resource allocation, and many exist in the form of regulatory and work documents. While this structure endows policies with the necessary adaptability, it also means that in actual operation, the core protection tools, implementation intensity, and priority of financial support may vary from province to province and from county to county. Considering the huge differences in agricultural ecological zones in China, from the black soil in the northeast to the red soil in the south, this heterogeneity in policy supply is the logical starting point for understanding the diversity of local protection practices and potential regional gaps.

3.3. Analysis of the Evolution of Policy Content

An analysis of the frequency statistics of cultivated land quality protection policy texts reveals that the policy content has evolved through five distinct stages: the embryonic stage, the practical exploration stage, the system construction stage, the in-depth transformation stage, and the comprehensive upgrading stage. With the gradual advancement of pilot initiatives for cultivated land quality protection, the 13 core keywords exhibit an increasing frequency of occurrence and the policy content has been continuously enriched and refined, as detailed in Table 8.

The period from 2000 to 2004 represents the embryonic stage of policies for the protection of cultivated land quality in China marks the embryonic stage of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies. At this stage, policies were centered on “cultivated land quantity protection,” while analogous quality protection policies emerged sporadically. In 2000, the MLR issued the Notice on Strengthening Supplementary Cultivated Land Work to Ensure the Balance of Cultivated Land Occupation and Compensation. This document proposed establishing two key systems: a linkage mechanism between supplementary cultivated land for construction land projects and land development and consolidation projects, and a reserve system for supplementary cultivated land. Although the primary focus of this policy was on the quantity of supplementary cultivated land, it laid the institutional foundation for the “balance of occupation and compensation” principle in cultivated land quality protection. In response to practical challenges, local governments increasingly focused on cultivated land quality protection, laying a seed for “explicit compensation” for cultivated land. In 2003, the Decision of the Central Committee of the CPC on Several Issues Concerning Improving the Socialist Market Economic System emphasized the implementation of the strictest cultivated land protection system. This strengthened the importance of cultivated land protection at the macro policy level, creating a policy environment emphasizing cultivated land protection for the subsequent refinement of quality protection policies for such land and guiding governments at all levels to gradually consider quality in cultivated land management. Crucially, the promulgation of the Decision of the State Council on Deepening Reform and Strictly Managing Land in 2004 was a pivotal turning point. It explicitly proposed the concept of “cultivated land quality construction” for the first time in a national policy document, marking China’s shift from simple quantity control to a dual focus on “quantity protection and quality construction” in cultivated land management. This laid a conceptual foundation for the subsequent development of related policies.

The period from 2005 to 2009 constitutes the practical exploration stage of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies. Due to implementation of the national food security strategy, the frequency of policy issuance gradually increased, with policy content increasingly focusing on improving soil fertility and rehabilitating medium- and low-yield fields. In 2005, the No.1 Central Document of the CPC-Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Several Policies for Further Strengthening Rural Work and Enhancing Comprehensive Agricultural Production Capacity-explicitly proposed the following concept: “developing high-standard prime farmland.” Subsequently, successive No.1 Central Documents continued to focus on cultivated land quality improvements, providing sustained policy guidance for its implementation. In the same year, the General Office of the State Council issued the Measures for Assessing the Responsibility Targets of Provincial Governments for Cultivated Land Protection, establishing a system of primary responsibility. By strengthening responsibility enforcement, this measure urged governments at all levels to attach greater importance to quality factors in cultivated land protection work and incorporated cultivated land quality protection into the government performance appraisal system, thereby ensuring it was advanced at the institutional level. A landmark event in 2008 was the adoption of the Decision of the CPC Central Committee on Several Major Issues Concerning Promoting Rural Reform and Development at the Third Plenary Session of the 17th CPC Central Committee. This far-reaching document first proposed the concept of “permanent basic farmland” and mandated three core requirements: the total area of basic farmland should not be reduced, its use should not be altered, and its quality should be improved. This reinforced the strategic status of cultivated land quality protection in agricultural and rural development, further elevating its importance and guiding subsequent policy formulation and implementation to prioritize its long-term stability and continuous improvement.

The 2010–2014 period represents the system construction stage of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies. During this period, a large number of relevant documents were issued, with policy coverage significantly expanded and the degree of refinement substantially improved. In 2010, the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture issued the Notice on Further Implementing the Spirit of the National Symposium on Basic Farmland Protection [16], explicitly requiring local authorities to vigorously promote the quality assessment of supplementary cultivated land and strengthen the foundational work of basic farmland protection. This notice urged agricultural departments to further clarify their responsibilities in cultivated land quality management: through scientific assessment of supplementary cultivated land quality, it ensured that the quality of newly added cultivated land meets established standards, it safeguarded the stability of cultivated land quality at the source, and it provided preliminary experience and a normative basis for the large-scale construction of high-quality farmland in subsequent years. A pivotal milestone was the release of the National Master Plan for High-standard Farmland Construction in 2012. This document marked a fundamental shift in policy orientation: it formally expanded the focus from “quantity control” to “dual quantity-quality control”—a transformation that solidified the systematic framework of cultivated land quality protection.

The 2015–2019 period represents the in-depth transformation stage of China’s cultivated land quality protection policies. During this period, the average annual policy density increased significantly, infusing new vitality and strong impetus into cultivated land quality protection and driving the continuous improvement and development of the policy system. In 2015, the General Office of the State Council released the Opinions on Accelerating the Transformation of Agricultural Development Modes. This document explicitly mandated the implementation of the strictest cultivated land protection system, accelerated the delimitation of permanent basic farmland, called for improving the legal framework for cultivated land quality protection, and promoted the formulation of national standards for cultivated land quality, laying a solid foundation for cultivated land quality protection through both institutional construction and practical action. In the same year, the Ministry of Agriculture formulated and issued the Action Plan for the Protection and Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality. This plan not only implemented the spirit of the Central Government’s No.1 Document and the ecological civilization construction strategy but also focused on enhancing the intrinsic quality of cultivated land, advancing the goal of “storing grain in the land” and further consolidating the foundation of national food security. In 2017, two landmark documents were released: First, the Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation emphasized the protection and improvement of cultivated land quality, resolutely preventing insufficient quantity and substandard quality of supplementary cultivated land when balancing occupation and compensation. Second, the promulgation of the Measures for the Investigation, Monitoring, and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality established a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system covering indicators such as cultivated land quality grades and soil health status. Collectively, these documents further clarified the core position of cultivated land quality protection in national cultivated land protection work from a strategic perspective, promoting the formation of a “trinity” policy framework integrating cultivated land quantity control, quality improvement, and ecological protection.

Since 2020, China’s cultivated land quality protection has undergone comprehensive upgrades, with policy documents in this period placing greater emphasis on multi-dimensional coordination and holistic development. In 2022, the MNR issued the Draft Law on the Protection of Cultivated Land (Draft for Comments). This document highlights the state’s emphasis on the importance of cultivated land protection at the legal level, demonstrates the state’s determination to strengthen legislation on cultivated land quality protection, and lays a solid foundation for the subsequent promulgation of the formal law.

The Food Security Guarantee Law of the People’s Republic of China (officially implemented in 2024) defines the responsibility of local governments for protecting cultivated land and permanent basic farmland, mandating that the total area of these land types should not decrease within their jurisdictions and their quality should be improved. Concurrently, the state established compensation systems for cultivated land protection and occupation, strictly regulated the conversion of cultivated land to other types of agricultural land, and set clear requirements for cultivated land quality—providing a comprehensive legal basis for the all-round protection of cultivated land quality. In the same year, the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the Opinions on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Refining the Balance of Occupation and Compensation. This document emphasizes adhering to the guidance of Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, implementing the strategy of “storing grain in the land and storing grain in technology”, and upholding the “trinity” protection of cultivated land quantity, quality, and ecology. During this period, policy documents have further promoted the transformation of cultivated land quality protection toward multi-value coordinated protection-specifically, the “quantity-quality-ecology-economy” integrated model-through legal, policy, and supervision dimensions. This transformation lays a solid foundation for safeguarding national food security and building a strong agricultural country.

3.4. Analysis of the Structural Evolution of Policy Tools

As shown in Figure 3, the policy instrument mix for cultivated land protection in China has undergone profound structural adjustments since 2000, reflecting the evolution of the underlying governance logic.

As the core measure for early-stage cultivated land protection, regulatory instruments maintained a stable share of 35–38% during 2000–2014, reflecting the governance feature of relying mainly on administrative regulation and control in the initial phase of cultivated land protection. Their share plummeted to 28.2% in 2015–2019; while it rebounded to 30% after 2020, an overall weakening trend is evident, indicating that the dominant status of a single administrative regulatory approach has been undermined.

Economic instruments have consistently fluctuated within a narrow range of 29–33%, serving as the most stable supplementary measure in the policy system. This stability underscores the sustained role of economic incentive and restraint mechanisms in cultivated land protection.

The evolution of hybrid instruments is the most remarkable: their share remained stable at 29.7–32.9% in 2000–2014, surged to 40.1% in 2015–2019 to become the most prominent policy instrument, and despite a slight decline after 2020, still stayed at a high level of 39.4%. This trend reveals the transformation of policy instruments from single-measure regulation to administrative-economic multi-dimensional collaborative governance, responding to upgraded policy demands for addressing complex cultivated land protection scenarios (e.g., the overall coordination of urban and rural land resources, the balance between ecological security and food security).

Overall, the evolution of the intensity of China’s cultivated land protection policy instruments is characterized by a solid foundation for regulatory instruments, a stable functional role for economic instruments, and a prominent dominant position for hybrid instruments. The policy system is gradually moving toward a comprehensive governance model featuring the coordination of multiple policy instruments.

4. Discussion

4.1. Insufficient Depth and Breadth of Implementation of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy

After years of implementation, a comprehensive system has been gradually established regarding China’s cultivated land quality protection policy and it has been fully implemented nationwide, achieving phased results in comprehensively improving the production capacity of cultivated land. However, its effectiveness in sustainably enhancing land as a productive asset and ecological capital is constrained by systemic issues with direct implications for land governance and value formation.

First, the current national-level legal framework lacks specialized legal provisions for the field of cultivated land quality protection. As the Law on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality remains at the legislative research and consultation stage, existing relevant documents mainly consist of departmental regulations, normative documents, and working documents. This legal fragmentation creates uncertainty around the long-term rights, responsibilities, and benefits associated with land quality investment. Consequently, this may deter sustained public and private capital investment in soil improvement, undermining the stability and potential appreciation of cultivated land as a capital asset.

China boasts abundant cultivated land resources, but significant regional disparities exist in both the quantity and quality of cultivated land, leading to distinct regional heterogeneity in these resources. Specifically, region-specific ecological and geological issues persistently prevail, for example, red soil acidification in Southern China, black soil degradation in Northeast China, and land salinization in the arid regions of Northwest China. Local governments should formulate and implement targeted policies, systems, and regulatory documents based on local conditions, but the current policy system lacks specialized documents for zonal governance. This mismatch between a generalized policy supply and highly heterogeneous resource endowments leads to inefficient allocation of protection resources. In ecologically vulnerable regions, failure to implement targeted remediation may accelerate land degradation, eroding long-term productive capital. In high-yield regions, the lack of advanced, tailored support may constrain further productivity gains and limit the upward potential of land rents.

Second, the intensity of monitoring and regulation has not been standardized. There are significantly more monitoring efforts in the Yangtze River Basin than in other regions, making it challenging to establish a nationwide comprehensive monitoring network. The resulting information asymmetry and lack of comparable, credible data on land quality obscure the true asset base of cultivated land. This hinders the development of market-based mechanisms, such as quality-dependent eco-compensation or differential land rental markets, thereby impeding the capitalization of land quality improvements into economic value.

Most existing policy documents adopt a government-led behavioral model with the indirect participation of farmers [35]. In some regions, subsidy standards are significantly lower than farmers’ opportunity costs, or directly undermine their vested interests [36]. This has resulted in chaos, characterized by compulsory policy implementation and farmers’ passive coping, and has even given rise to hidden conflicts, with “superficial compliance but actual abandonment of policies” observed. Such a “top-down” policy transmission model struggles to motivate farmers to protect cultivated land, leading to a lack of long-term sustainability in policy effects. Critically, this incentive misalignment fails to transform farmers into active stewards of land capital. Without aligning land quality maintenance with farm-level profitability, the long-term sustenance of soil fertility and ecological functions-the core of land’s productive and natural capital-is at risk, threatening the foundational capacity for sustainable agricultural production.

In summary, the current policy framework’s legal fragmentation, spatial misalignment, information gaps, and incentive disconnect not only describe administrative challenges but also translate into tangible risks for the land system: suppressed investment, spatially uneven asset development, inefficient markets, and the depletion of long-term land capital. Addressing these issues is therefore essential not just for policy improvement, but for safeguarding the economic value and ecological sustainability of China’s cultivated land base.

4.2. The Evolution Logic of Cultivated Land Protection Policy Objectives and Instruments in Different Periods

An analysis of the keywords extracted from 200 cultivated land protection policy texts reveals distinct evolutionary characteristics across different developmental stages of these policies, with policy objectives dynamically aligning with national strategies and principal social contradictions, gradually moving toward scientificity and systematization. During the embryonic stage of these policies, relevant documents primarily focused on cultivated land quantity. The core approach involved safeguarding the cultivated land red line through measures such as delimiting basic farmland and implementing the balance of occupation and compensation. Consequently, keywords such as “agricultural products” and “supervision and management” appeared frequently. Notably, the concept of “cultivated land quality” was first proposed in 2004. During this stage, the primarily aim was to address the challenge of “ensuring adequate food for all.” In the practical exploration stage, cultivated land quality protection transitioned from conceptual definition to practical implementation, directly linking cultivated land quality to grain production. A pivotal development was the proposal of “developing high-standard farmland” in the 2005 Central Document No.1—the first time quality improvement was incorporated as a core goal of farmland construction. Correspondingly, keywords including “soil improvement,” “irrigation and water conservancy,” “quality evaluation,” “supervision and management,” and “quality grade” gained prominence. As construction of high-quality farmland became a national strategy during the system construction stage, balancing cultivated land quantity and quality emerged as the dominant policy theme, gradually forming diverse institutional framework. The frequency of the keyword “technology promotion” increased significantly compared to the previous two stages, reflecting the emphasis on technical support for quality improvement in the policies. The in-depth transformation stage witnessed the issuance of a large number of policy documents. The frequency of keywords such as “chemical fertilizer and pesticide,” “capital investment,” and “adapting measures to local conditions” doubled, indicating that cultivated land quality protection had entered a more comprehensive and refined development track. In the comprehensive upgrading stage, “quality evaluation” and “quality grade” emerged as the most frequently occurring keywords. This reflects the heightened emphasis on cultivated land quality protection in policies issued by both central and local governments.

However, the evolution of policy objectives is not just a discursive shift; it is underpinned and operationalized by corresponding changes in the policy instrument mix. As demonstrated in Section 3.4, China’s cultivated land protection policy instruments have undergone profound structural adjustment since 2000. In the initial stage (2000–2014), regulatory instruments (e.g., “balance of occupation and compensation” and “supervision and management”) maintained a dominant share, reflecting a governance model dominated by administrative regulation. This structure aligned with the early policy objective of quantity preservation. From 2015 onward, however, the share of hybrid instruments (e.g., “adapting measures to local conditions” and “quality evaluation”) surged to become the dominant tool, while regulatory instruments declined significantly. This shift indicates a governance logic transition from single-measure regulation to multi-dimensional collaborative governance integrating administrative, economic, and informational tools. The growing dominance of hybrid and economic instruments (e.g., “capital investment”) corresponds to the increasingly complex, multi-dimensional later policy objectives-encompassing not only quantity control but also quality improvement, ecological conservation, and regional adaptation. Thus, policy instrument evolution is both a response to and enabler of policy objective evolution. Together, they drive a coherent shift in China’s cultivated land protection governance paradigm: from a narrow, quantity-centric, regulation-driven model to a comprehensive, quality- and ecology-oriented, incentive-based model.

It is noteworthy that while China’s cultivated land quality protection objectives and the instrumental means to achieve them have continuously evolved across different policy stages, this dual transformation is compatible with national strategies and the principal social contradictions. The gradual advancement toward a scientific and systematic framework is evidenced not only in the discursive refinement of policy goals but also in the structural optimization of the policy toolbox, which together enhance the adaptive capacity and potential effectiveness of the cultivated land protection system.

5. Conclusions

5.1. Conclusions

Based on the statistical analysis of 200 cultivated land quality protection policy samples, the following conclusions are drawn: (1) The policy system exhibits leapfrog development. Over time, Chinese cultivated land protection policy has evolved to feature a “trinity” protection framework integrating quantity control, quality improvement, and ecological conservation-marking a systemic upgrade from earlier single-dimensional protection policies. This marks a shift in governance logic from ensuring food security to comprehensively enhancing the carrying capacity of land and the value of sustainable capital. (2) Effectiveness at the policy and legal levels remains insufficient. Although a pluralistic policy framework for cultivated land quality protection has been established, national-level laws with binding force are still in the stage of research and public consultation. This has led to inconsistent implementation standards across regions, fragmented policy execution, and the need for further improvement in policy effectiveness. This absence of laws and fragmented enforcement may constitute an institutional risk for long-term land investment and cross-regional value assessment. (3) Policy objectives are increasingly aligned with national strategies, with their evolution becoming more rational. The development of cultivated land quality protection policies in China comprised five stages: the embryonic stage, practical exploration stage, system construction stage, in-depth transformation stage, and comprehensive upgrading stage. These policies are now moving toward maturity. Governments at all levels have shifted their focus from emphasizing the survival benefits derived from cultivated land protection to prioritizing ecological benefits. Guided by national development strategies and principal social contradictions, the policy objectives reflect the logical policy evolution and adaptability to the times. This evolutionary path is consistent with the theoretical development in land economics, which shifts from the management of a single production factor to the operation of multi-functional assets. (4) Based on a quantitative analysis of policy tool combinations, this study finds that the core approaches to cultivated land quality protection have evolved from the early reliance on mandatory, standardized regulatory tools to a coordinated model integrating mixed and economic tools characterized by incentives, adaptability and technological empowerment. This transformation of policy tools constitutes the internal mechanism underpinning the operation of the trinity protection system, signifying that China’s cultivated land governance is moving toward a more flexible and integrated new paradigm.

5.2. Recommendations

Based on the aforementioned analysis, we propose the following policy recommendations to optimize China’s cultivated land quality protection system, with a focus on enhancing legal binding force, policy targeting, stakeholder participation, and incentive compatibility: (1) Improve legal norms and accelerate the promulgation of the Law on Cultivated Land Quality Protection. To establish a cohesive national legal framework, efforts should be made to unify legal standards nationwide, eliminate regional disparities in policy implementation, and formulate supporting special laws and regulations. This will standardize the entire chain of cultivated land quality protection, including investigation, acceptance, and supervision, ensuring consistent enforcement across the country. (2) Implement Differentiated Zones to Enhance Land Use Efficiency. The keyword “Adapting Measures to Local Conditions” (L) has gained prominence, yet regional heterogeneity remains a challenge. We advocate for scientifically grounded, region-specific protection schemes that align policy instruments with local land endowments and degradation threats. This targeted approach, moving beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, can maximize the ecological and economic return on protection investments. (3) Establish a working model of “government guidance with farmers as the main participants.” The analysis indicates a persistent top-down discursive pattern with limited farmer agency. To motivate adherence to protection policies, farmers’ decision-making power must be strengthened and clear benefit-sharing links must be established. This shifts farmers from passive subjects to active partners in land stewardship. (4) Improve the subsidy system and incentive policies. While “capital input” (D) is frequent, its linkage to outcomes is discursively weak. We recommend transforming generic subsidies into performance-based payments that reward verifiable land quality enhancement and ecosystem service provision. This market-conforming instrument can more effectively translate policy discourse into sustained on-ground action and the appreciation of cultivated land value.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.Z.; methodology, H.Z. and Y.W.; formal analysis, Y.W. and W.D.; investigation, J.M.; resources, H.Z.; data curation, Y.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.W. and W.D.; writing—review and editing, H.Z.; visualization, Y.W.; supervision, H.Z.; project administration, H.Z. and J.M.; funding acquisition, H.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Later Funded Project of National Social Science Fund (22FGLB019), the Social Science Fund of Sichuan (SCJJ23ND45), the Soft Science Project of Sichuan (23RKX0107), and Sichuan University (2023CX20).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions which contributed to the further improvement of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Complete coding table of policy content analysis unit.

Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword
1	1-2	B	68	68-1 68-17	HM	135	135-22-3 135-8 135-11 135-5 135-8	EHIJK
2	2-3 2-2	IM	69	69-10 69-15 69-4 69-14 69-32 69-24 69-29	ACDGIKM	136	136-2 136 136-4 136-3 136-2	FGHLM
3	3-2	I	70	70-2 70-3 70-11	GIK	137	137-4-4 137-4-2 137-1-1 137-1-2 137-1-3 137-2-2	ABGHLM
4	4-2	B	71	71-17 71-15 71-2	ACG	138	138-5 138-9-1 138-9-4	CGK
5	5-1-12 5-2-5 5-1-18	DGI	72	72-18 72-2 72-3	AGI	139	139-5	ABCFHLM
6	6-3 6-1	BH	73	73-11 73-43 73-16 73-20	CGKL	140	140	HM
7	7-2 7-4 7-5 7-3	ACHI	74	74-1	G	141	141-11 141-11 141-17 141-12 141-9 141-11 141-17	ABDHIKLM
8	8-6-2 8-4-1 8-4-4 8-2 8	CFI	75	75-15 75-2 75-14	EIM	142	142-2 142-4 142-2	HKM
9	9-3-5 9-3-4	CI	76	76-4 76-11 76-4 76-12	CEGI	143	143	A
10	10	I	77	77-16 77-4 77-9 77-18 77-3 77-5 77-4 77-5 77-15	ABEGHIJKM	144	144-1 144-5-18 144-3-9 144-1 144-3-9 144-1	BCDGHL
11	11-2-2 11-2-8 11-1-2	AGH	78	78-26 78-19 78-4 78-15 78-17 78-5 78-4 78-11	ABDEGHIM	145	145-2-7 145-3 145-1-17 145-2-7 145-2-8	ABCFH
12	12-2 12-1	DFIL	79	79-2 79 79-1 79-2 79-1	ABHIM	146	146-14 146-2 146-5	EGI
13	13-1-1 13-3-4 13-6-1 13-5-2 13-5-3 13-3-4	BCGHLM	80	80-23 80-15 80-3	ACI	147	147-21 147-17 147-21 147-8-1 147-4 147-8-5	ACEGIK
14	14-3-4 14-3-5 14-2-2 14-2-6	CDHL	81	81-6 81-1 81-5 81-12 81-3 81-26	CGHIJM	148	148-18 148-10-1 148-3 148-10-5	CGIK
15	15-2 15 15-4 15-1 15-3 15-5 15-3	ABCGHIM	82	82	BHI	149	149-10 149-8 149-8 149-2 149-6	ACDGM
16	16-1 16-2 16-3 16-3	BHIM	83	83	BHK	150	150-15 150-11 150-2 150-1 150-6	AEHIK
17	17-3 17-1 17-3 17-4 17-1	ABHIL	84	84	HM	151	151-16 151-11 151-2 151-1 151-12	AEHIM
18	18 18-2	GHK	85	85-17 85-25 85-31 85-5 85-4 85-20	BGHIJM	152	152-7-1 152-4-4 152-4-1 152-4-1 152-2 152-6	ACGHIM
19	19	AFK	86	86-18 86-3 86-6 86-2 86-5 86-17	ABFHJM	153	153	F
20	20-3-16 20-3-19 20-1-2 20-4 20-3-20	AEGIM	87	87-12 87-31 87-4 87-11 87-3 87-26	ABCIJM	154	154-9-5	G
21	21-13 21-1 21-8 21-9 21-14	ABFHI	88	88-2	M	155	155-3	FI
22	22-61 22-7-5 27-appendix 27-4-3	CFGL	89	89-16 89-17 89-16	CEH	156	156-6-1 156-4-5 156-4-1 156-1 156-2 156-4-1	BCGHIM
23	23-4-3 23-4-2 23-7-1 23-4-2 23-3-2 23-5-3 23-4-2 23-2-1 23-4-1	BCDFGIJLM	90	90	C	157	157-3-2 157 157-2-3 157-1 157-1 157-3-1	ABFGIM
24	24	GHK	91	91-17 91-13 91-15	ACE	158	158-7-1 158-5 158-5 158-2 158-2 158-3 158-5	BCGHIJM
25	25-6-2 25-2 25-6-3 25-4 25-3	DFIJM	92	92-4 92-2 92-4	AIL	159	159-1	BM
26	26-13 26-1 26-8 26-2 26-14 26-12	ABFHIM	93	93	BM	160	160-1 160-3-2	BL
27	27	GK	94	94-1 94-3-3 94-4-1 94-3-1 94-3-1	ACFHJ	161	161-4-2 161-1 161-3 161-3	ABHK
28	28-3 28-1-5 28-5-12 28-4-10 28-2-8	BCGJM	95	95-12 95-14-2 95-13 95-1 95-3 95-4 95-21	ACEGIJM	162	162-2-6 162-2-2 162-2-4 162-1 162-2-5 162-2-6 162-2-1 162-2-3	BCEGHIJL
29	29-3-3 29-3-1 29-3-4 29-3-3	CDIM	96	96-9 96-1 96-7 96-2 96-9	ADFGK	163	163-3 163-2	BI
30	30-1-3 30-2 30-1-2	AHI	97	97-12 97-7-1 97-2	CGI	164	164-3 164-3 164-41 164-17-2 164-32	CGIKL
31	31-3-2 31-3-1 31-3-1 31-4-1	BCHM	98	98-1 98-3-2 98-4-1	AGL	165	165-4-4 165-10-6 165-1 165-2 165-6-1	CEGIM
32	32	AGHIK	99	99-4-4 99-1 99-4-1 99-1 99-4-2 99-4-1 99-4-2 99-4-2	ADEGHKLM	166	166	C
33	33-2-1 33-2 33-1-1 33-3	CDHI	100	100	E	167	167-11 167-3 167-2 167-5	ABHK
34	34 34-1 34 34-3-2	AFKL	101	101-1 101-3-1 101-3-3	BIM	168	168 168-2-1 168-3-4	BCG
35	35-2-2	K	102	102-1 102-1 102-3-1 102-1 102-4-2 102-2-1 102-4-2	BDEGHLM	169	169-2-2 169-2-7 169-2-5 169-2-7	AGJL
36	36 36-1	HM	103	103-20 103-20 103-9-5 103-23 103-3	ACGHI	170	170-11 170-13 17--12 170-17-5 170-11 170-7 170-9 170-3 170-7 170-18 170-25	ABCEFHIJKLM
37	37-4	BM	104	104-1 104-3-3 104-5-4 104-5-1 104-1 104-5-1	DEGHLM	171	171-4-1 171-4-3 171-2-2	GKL
38	38-3-1 38-3-2	IM	105	105-1 105-2 105-2	BLM	172	172-2-1 172-1-1 172-2-1 172-1-1 172-4-2 172-2-2 172-1-1 172-3-6	ADEGHKLM
39	39-1-1 39-2-1 39-3-1 39-3-2 39-5-4 39-2-2	BDEGKL	106	106-3-1 106-1 106-1 106-3-1 106-1 106-4-1 106-2-1 106-4-7	ABDEGHLM	173	173-3-2 173-4-5 173-2-1 173-3-1 173-1-2 173-4-6 173-5-4 173-2-2 173-4-6	ABDEGHKLM
40	40-5-4 40-5-3 40-1	DIKL	107	107-2 107-19 107-12	HIM	174	174	K
41	41 41-5 41-1-2	BIL	108	108 108-2-2 108-2-1 108-2-2 108-3-1	BCHLM	175	175-3-1 175-1 175-1 175-3-1 175-1 175-4-2 175-2-1 175-4-2	ABDEGHLM
42	42-2-15 42-3-20 42-4-24	BGH	109	109-1-1 109-2-1 109-3-1 109-4-4 109-1-2 109-5-5 109-5-4 109-2-2 109-1-1	BDEFGHKLM	176	176-1 176-7-2 176-1 176-4 176-6-7 176-1 176-6-1 176-6-5 176-2	ABDEFGHKL
43	43-2-3 43-2-1	GH	110	110 110-3	EG	177	177-6-2 177-1 177-1 177-4 177-6-2 177-7-4 177-6-2	ABDEGKL
44	44-3 44-2-3 44	BFHM	111	111-1-1	L	178	178-2-2 178-3-2 178-2-5 178-2-3 178-2-5 178-2-6 178-1-2 178-2-3	ADEFGHLM
45	45-2 45-3-3	JM	112	112-2	HM	179	179-3-1 179-5-2 179-3-2 179-1 179-3-1 179-1 179-4-2 179-2-1	ABCDEGHL
46	46-1 46-2-3 46-1 46-3-2 46-appendix 46-2-2	ADGHKM	113	113-3-3	M	180	180-4-1 180-3-2 180-1 180-3-2 180-1	FGHKM
47	47 47-2-3 47	BFHM	114	114-4-4	D	181	181-3-1 181-5-2 181-3-2 181-1 181-3-1 181-1 181-4-2 181-3-1	ABCDEGHL
48	48-1 48-2 48-8 48-2	DHIM	115	115-3 115-2	GI	182	182-4-1 182-3-2 182-appendix 2 182-1	FGKM
49	49-1 49-2 49-1	AHM	116	116-3-1 116-3-3 116-3-1 116-2-3	AHLM	183	183	I
50	50-5-11 50-1-1 50-2-6	FGIL	117	117-5 117 117-1 117-2 117-2 117-1	BDHJKM	184	184-6 184-9-2	CI
51	51-2 51-2-3 51-2 51-2-3 51-4-3 51-3-2 51-1	ABFHILM	118	118-2	I	185	185-2	HKM
52	52-2-3 52-1 52-2-2 52-2-2 52-2-1	BGHLM	119	119-1 119-2	HI	186	186-3-2 186-4-5 186-2-1 186-3-1 186-1-2 186-4-6 186-5-4 186-2-2 186-4-6	ABDEGHKLM
53	53-2-1 53-2-2 53-2-2	ACL	120	120-3-1 120 120-2-3 120-4-2 120-4-2	AGHKL	187	187-15 186-3	EG
54	54-1 54-1 54-1 54-3-10 54-1	BCGHL	121	121-4-2 121-2	KL	188	188-2-5 188-3-4 188-2-4 188-2-3 188-2-4	AEGKL
55	55-2-2 55-4-10 55-5-15 55-3-8 55-1 55-4-10 55-2-2	ACDFGIL	122	122-15 122-2 122-10	DGM	189	189-4-3 189-1 189-1 189-4-2 189-5-6 189-2 189-5-6	ABDGHLM
56	56-11 56-17 56-2 56-18 56-17	ACGLM	123	123	I	190	190-3-2 190-2-2 190-2-2 190-3-1 190-1-2 190-4-6 190-5-4 190-2-2 190-4-6	ABDEGHKLM
57	57-2	I	124	124-10 124-15-1 124-4 124-14 124-28 124-32 124-24 124-29	ACDGHIKM	191	191-2	I
58	58-25 58-28 58-29 58-18 58-2	ACEGM	125	125-1	GH	192	192-16 192-14 192-22 192-29 192-4 192-22	AGHIJM
59	59-3-1	G	126	126-4-12 126 126-4-12 126-1-1 126-5-14 126-2-4 126-4-11 126-4-11	ABDGHIJM	193	193-8-3 193-14	EI
60	60-6 60-21 60-4 60-3	CEIJ	127	127-4-3 127-3-3 127-4-1 127-4-1 127-2-2 127-2-4 127-2-4	ABCDGIL	194	194-2 194-12	DI
61	61-12 61-20 61-8 61-4 61-5 61-8 61-16	AEHIJKM	128	128-5-12 128-5-12 128-1-1 128-5-13 128-2-5 125-1-2	AFGHIM	195	195-2-4 195-2-1 195-2-1 195-2-1 195-2-3 195-2-5 195-2-2 195-2-4	BCDFGHLM
62	62-5 62-24 62-7 62-20 62-12	BEILM	129	129	E	196	196-3-1 196-3-1 196-1-2196-5-1 196-1-3 196-2-1 196-7-4 196-2-1 196-1-1	ABEFGHILM
63	63-11 63-28 63-2 63-3 62-11	AHIJM	130	130-15 130-23 130-22	BEM	197	197-2-1 197-2-2 197-2-4	FLM
64	64-2 64-5 64-2	DGI	131	131-12 131-12 131-1 131-4 131-5	AFGHI	198	198-25 198-2 190-30	EGM
65	65-3	G	132	132-2 132-3 132-2 132-4 132-2 132-4	AEFHLM	199	199-38 199-21 199-2 199-39 199-23	CEFIM
66	66-3 66 66-2 66-4 66-7 66-3 66-4	ABCFIKL	133	133-18 133-19 133-28 133-1 133-25 133-5 133-3 133-13 133-15	AEFGHIJKM	200	200-4 200-6-21 200-3-8 200-2-4 200-3-11	BGHLM
67	67-2-2 67 67-2-1 67-1 67-3-1 67-2-1	ABFGHL	134	134-7 134-1 134-12 134-2 134-3 134-8 134-10	FGHIJKM

Table A2. Policy content analysis unit.

Hierarchy	Number	Name of the Policy
National policies	[1]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Acceptance of the Adjustment and Delineation of Basic Farmland Protection Zones” (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2000] No. 126)
	[2]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Further Strengthening the Protection of Basic Farmland (Nong Nong Fa [2000] No. 10)
	[3]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Work Plan for the National Inspection of Basic Farmland Protection” (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2004] No. 32)
	[4]	Emergency Notice of the State Council on Resolutely Stopping Acts Such as Tree Planting on Basic Farmland (Guo Fa Ming Dian [2004] No. 1)
	[5]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Rectification Opinions on Relevant Issues in Basic Farmland Protection” (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2004] No. 223)
	[6]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Earnestly Doing a Good Job in the Inspection of Basic Farmland Protection (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2004] No. 251)
	[7]	Opinions of the MLR, the Ministry of Agriculture, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Water Resources, and the State Forestry Administration on Further Improving the Protection of Basic Farmland (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2005] No. 196)
	[8]	Notice of the MLR on Carrying Out the Work of Establishing Basic Farmland Protection Demonstration Areas (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2005] No. 197)
	[9]	Notice of the MLR on Formulating the Construction Plan for Basic Farmland Protection Demonstration Areas (Guo Tu Zi Ting Fa [2006] No. 42)
	[10]	Letter of the MLR on Printing and Distributing the “Work Conception and Relevant Requirements for the Informatization Construction of Supervision and Management of Basic Farmland Protection Demonstration Areas”
	[11]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Issuing the “Application Guidelines and Organization of Application for the Key Project ‘Research and Demonstration of Key Technologies for Cultivated Land Quality Regulation’ under the National Science and Technology Support Program for the 11th Five-Year Plan” (Nong Ban Ke [2006] No. 61)
	[12]	Notice of the MLR on Officially Determining the National Basic Farmland Protection Demonstration Areas (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2006] No. 270)
	[13]	Notice of the State Council on Printing and Distributing the National Land Use Master Plan (2006–2020) (Guo Fa [2008] No. 33)
	[14]	Notice of the General Office of the MLR on Printing and Distributing the Guidelines for the Formulation of Land Use Master Plans at the City, County, and Township Levels (Guo Tu Zi Ting Fa [2009] No. 51)
	[15]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Strengthening the Construction and Management of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality for the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2009] No. 168)
	[16]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Further Implementing the Spirit of the National Forum on Basic Farmland Protection (Nong Ban Nong [2009] No. 150)
	[17]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Work Plan for the Pilot Project of Quality Construction, Management, and Acceptance of Supplementary Cultivated Land Nationwide” (Nong Ban Nong [2010] No. 19)
	[18]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Establishing the Expert Advisory Group for Cultivated Land Quality Construction and Management of the Ministry of Agriculture (Nong Ban Nong [2010] No. 23)
	[19]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Holding the National Conference on Soil Testing and Formulated Fertilization and Cultivated Land Quality Construction and Management (Nong Ban Nong [2010] No. 103)
	[20]	Regulations on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2011 Amendment) (Decree No. 588 of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China)
	[21]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Work Specifications for the Acceptance and Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Trial)” (Nong Nong Fa [2011] No. 4)
	[22]	Notice of the MLR on Printing and Distributing the “Specifications for the Construction of High-Standard Basic Farmland (Trial)” (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2011] No. 144)
	[23]	Notice of the MLR on Issuing and Implementing the “National Land Consolidation Plan (2011–2015)” (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2012] No. 55)
	[24]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Allocating Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection Projects in 2012 (Nong Cai Fa [2012] No. 49)
	[25]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Finance on Accelerating the Formulation and Implementation of Land Consolidation Plans and Vigorously Promoting the Construction of High-Standard Basic Farmland (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2012] No. 63)
	[26]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Technical Specifications for the Acceptance and Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Trial)” (Nong Ban Nong [2012] No. 35)
	[27]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Doing a Good Job in the Performance Evaluation of Special Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection in 2012 (Nong Ban Nong [2012] No. 41)
	[28]	Notice of the MLR on Improving the Level of Cultivated Land Protection and Comprehensively Strengthening the Construction and Management of Cultivated Land Quality (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2012] No. 108)
	[29]	Opinions of the MLR on Accelerating the Construction of 500 High-Standard Basic Farmland Demonstration Counties (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2012] No. 147)
	[30]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Carrying Out Inspection and Supervision Activities for the Acceptance and Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Nong Ban Nong [2012] No. 78)
	[31]	Notice of the General Office of the MLR on Printing and Distributing the “Work Plan for the Investigation, Evaluation, and Monitoring of Cultivated Land Quality Grades” (Guo Tu Zi Ting Fa [2012] No. 60)
	[32]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Allocating Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection Projects in 2013 (Nong Cai Fa [2013] No. 45)
	[33]	Notice of the General Office of the MLR on Deploying the 2014 National Investigation, Evaluation, and Monitoring of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Guo Tu Zi Ting Fa [2014] No. 8)
	[34]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “2014 Technical Models for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement” (Nong Ban Nong [2014] No. 39)
	[35]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Holding the National On-Site Meeting on Cultivated Land Quality Construction (Nong Ban Nong [2014] No. 44)
	[36]	Bulletin of the Ministry of Agriculture on the Status of National Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Bulletin of the Ministry of Agriculture [2014] No. 1)
	[37]	Announcement of the MLR 2014 No. 30—Announcement on Issuing the Main Achievements of the National Investigation and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Announcement of the MLR 2014 No. 30)
	[38]	Notice of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Carrying Out Supervision Work for the Delineation of Permanent Basic Farmland (Guo Tu Zi Fa [2015] No. 131)
	[39]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement” (Nong Nong Fa [2015] No. 5)
	[40]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture and the General Office of the Ministry of Finance on Carrying Out Pilot Projects for the Comprehensive Utilization of Crop Straw to Promote the Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality (Nong Ban Cai [2016] No. 39)
	[41]	Guiding Opinions of the MLR on Implementing the Balance of Occupation and Compensation by Supplementing Cultivated Land Quantity and Improving Cultivated Land Quality (Guo Tu Zi Gui [2016] No. 8)
	[42]	Measures for the Investigation, Monitoring, and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality (Decree No. 2 of the Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China 2016)
	[43]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Monitoring Plan for Cultivated Land Quality in Rotation and Fallow Pilot Areas” (Nong Ban Nong [2016] No. 28)
	[44]	Announcement of the MLR 2017 No. 3—Announcement on Issuing the Main Data Achievements of the 2015 National Update and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Announcement of the MLR 2017 No. 3)
	[45]	Notice of the General Office of the MLR on Printing and Distributing the “Work Plan for the Special Inspection on the Implementation of the Comprehensive Delineation of Permanent Basic Farmland” (Guo Tu Zi Ting Fa [2017] No. 3)
	[46]	Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Doing a Good Job in the Investigation and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Nong Ban Nong [2017] No. 18)
	[47]	Announcement of the MLR on Issuing the Main Data Achievements of the 2016 National Update and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Announcement of the MLR 2017 No. 42)
	[48]	Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Administration of Special Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection” (Nong Cai Fa [2018] No. 6)
	[49]	Notice of the Office of the Leading Group for the Third National Land Survey of the State Council on Printing and Distributing the “Work Plan for the Investigation and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in the Third National Land Survey”
	[50]	Notice of the MNR and the MOA on Strengthening and Improving the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (Zi Ran Zi Gui [2019] No. 1)
	[51]	Notice of the General Office of the MOA on Doing a Good Job in the Management of Degraded Cultivated Land and the Investigation and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in 2020 (Nong Ban Jian [2020] No. 4)
	[52]	Notice of the Office of the Leading Group for the Third National Land Survey of the State Council on Doing a Good Job in the Connection Between the Results of the Investigation and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades and the Classification of Cultivated Land Resource Quality in the Third National Land Survey (Guo Tu Diao Cha Ban Fa [2020] No. 15)
	[53]	Notice of the General Office of the MOA on Actively Using Policy-Based Financial Funds to Accelerate the Construction of High-Standard Basic Farmland and the Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality (Nong Ban Jian [2023] No. 1)
	[54]	Opinions of the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation
	[55]	Implementation Plan for Gradually Converting Permanent Basic Farmland into High-Standard Basic Farmland (Issued by the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council)
Provincial policies	[56]	Regulations of Hunan Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2000 Amendment)
	[57]	Measures of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region for the Protection of Basic Farmland (2000)
	[58]	Regulations of the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2001)
	[59]	Decision of the Standing Committee of the Fujian Provincial People’s Congress on Amending the “Regulations of Fujian Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland” (2001)
	[60]	Measures of Liaoning Province for the Protection of Basic Farmland (2006)
	[61]	Measures of Liaoning Province for the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2006)
	[62]	Measures of Tianjin Municipality for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (2007)
	[63]	Regulations of Hunan Province on the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (2008)
	[64]	Notice of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality Monitoring in Jiangsu Province” (2008)
	[65]	Feedback Opinions of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Environmental Protection on the “Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Zhejiang Province (Draft for Review)” (Zhe Huan Ban Han [2009] No. 285)
	[66]	Notice of the Guangdong Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Implementing the Opinions of the MLR and the Ministry of Agriculture on Strengthening the Construction and Management of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality for the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (Yue Guo Tu Zi Gui Bao Fa [2010] No. 67)
	[67]	Notice of the Hainan Provincial Department of Land, Environment, and Resources and the Hainan Provincial Department of Agriculture on Strengthening the Construction and Management of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Qiong Tu Huan Zi Geng Zi [2010] No. 3)
	[68]	Notice of the Hunan Provincial Department of Agriculture and the Hunan Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Printing and Distributing the “Interim Measures for the Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality in Hunan Province” (Xiang Nong Ye Lian [2010] No. 76)
	[69]	Regulations of Jilin Province on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2010)
	[70]	Regulations of Henan Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[71]	Regulations of Guizhou Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[72]	Regulations of Tianjin Municipality on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[73]	Regulations of Jiangsu Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[74]	Decision of the Standing Committee of the Jiangsu Provincial People’s Congress on Amending the “Regulations of Jiangsu Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland” (2010)
	[75]	Measures of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region for the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[76]	Several Provisions of Shanghai Municipality on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2010 Amendment)
	[77]	Measures of Gansu Province for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (Decree No. 74 of the People’s Government of Gansu Province)
	[78]	Measures of Zhejiang Province for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (Zhe Zheng Ling [2010] No. 285)
	[79]	Notice of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Agriculture on Standardizing and Strengthening the Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Zhe Nong Zhuan Fa [2011] No. 144)
	[80]	Regulations of Shandong Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2012 Amendment)
	[81]	Regulations of Jiangsu Province on the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (2012)
	[82]	Notice of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Department of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry on Further Carrying Out Pilot Projects for the Acceptance and Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Nei Nong Mu Zhong Zhi Fa [2012] No. 150)
	[83]	Notice of the Shanghai Municipal Agriculture Commission on Forwarding the “Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the ‘Technical Specifications for the Acceptance and Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Trial)’” (Hu Nong Wei [2012] No. 282)
	[84]	Notice of the Office of the Hebei Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Issues Concerning Accelerating the Supplementary Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality Grade Achievements (Ji Guo Tu Zi Ban Fa [2012] No. 21)
	[85]	Measures of Henan Province for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (2013)
	[86]	Notice of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Agriculture and the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Printing and Distributing the Specifications for the Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality in Jiangsu Province (Su Nong Ye [2013] No. 30)
	[87]	Regulations of Hubei Province on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2014)
	[88]	Notice of the Jilin Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Standardizing the Evaluation and Verification of Newly Added Cultivated Land Quality Grades (Ji Guo Tu Zi Yong Fa [2014] No. 33)
	[89]	Regulations of Hebei Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2014 Amendment)
	[90]	Notice of the Chongqing Municipal Agriculture Commission and the Chongqing Municipal Finance Bureau on Printing and Distributing the Application Guidelines for the 2015 Grain and Oil High-Yield Creation Demonstration and Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement Projects in Chongqing Municipality (Yu Nong Fa [2014] No. 313)
	[91]	Regulations of Guangdong Province on the Administration of Basic Farmland Protection Zones (2014 Amendment)
	[92]	Notice of the Office of the Fujian Provincial Department of Agriculture on Conducting a Survey on the Implementation of Soil Organic Matter Improvement (Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement) Projects (Min Nong Ting Ban [2015] No. 13)
	[93]	Notice of the Office of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in Land Consolidation Projects in Zhejiang Province (Trial)” (Zhe Tu Zi Ban [2015] No. 18)
	[94]	Notice of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Department of Land and Resources on Earnestly Strengthening the Construction of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality (Gui Guo Tu Zi Fa [2015] No. 13)
	[95]	Measures of Shaanxi Province for the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2015)
	[96]	Notice of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Finance on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Administration of Provincial Special Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Construction in Jiangsu Province” (Su Cai Gui [2015] No. 35)
	[97]	Regulations of Yunnan Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2015 Amendment)
	[98]	Notice of the Shandong Provincial Department of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the Technical Models for Cultivated Land Quality Improvement (Lu Nong Sheng Tai Zi [2015] No. 15)
	[99]	Notice of the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region Department of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry on Printing and Distributing the “Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Ningxia” (Ning Nong [Zhong] Fa [2016] No. 6)
	[100]	Notice of the Office of the Anhui Provincial Department of Agriculture on Carrying Out Centralized Acceptance Activities for Soil Testing and Formulated Fertilization and Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement Subsidy Projects in the Province (Wan Nong Ban Tu Han [2016] No. 35)
	[101]	Notice of the Office of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Standardizing and Strengthening the Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in Land Consolidation Projects in Zhejiang Province (Zhe Tu Zi Ban [2016] No. 48)
	[102]	Notice of the Fujian Provincial Department of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Fujian Province (Min Nong Tu [2016] No. 212)
	[103]	Regulations of Beijing Municipality on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2016 Amendment)
	[104]	Notice of the Shanghai Municipal Agriculture Commission on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Shanghai Municipality (Hu Nong Wei [2016] No. 329)
	[105]	Notice of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Implementing the “Guiding Opinions of the MLR on Implementing the Balance of Occupation and Compensation by Supplementing Cultivated Land Quantity and Improving Cultivated Land Quality” (Zhe Tu Zi Fa [2016] No. 38)
	[106]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Xiamen City on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Xiamen City (Xia Men Fu Ban [2016] No. 230)
	[107]	Notice of the Jilin Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Evaluation and Monitoring of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in Jilin Province” (Ji Guo Tu Zi Fa Wen [2016] No. 8)
	[108]	Notice of the Shanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Implementing the Balance of Occupation and Compensation by Supplementing Cultivated Land Quantity and Improving Cultivated Land Quality (2017)
	[109]	Notice of the Office of the Chongqing Municipal Agriculture Commission on Printing and Distributing the “Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Chongqing Municipality” (Yu Nong Ban Fa [2017] No. 6)
	[110]	Notice of the Shanghai Municipal Agriculture Commission and the Shanghai Municipal Finance Bureau on Improving the Relevant Policies for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement Subsidies in This Municipality (Hu Nong Wei [2017] No. 111)
	[111]	Notice of the Jiangsu Provincial Station of Cultivated Land Quality and Agricultural Environmental Protection on Submitting Technical Models for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement (Su Geng Huan [2017] No. 30)
	[112]	Notice of the Heilongjiang Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Deploying the 2017 Provincial Investigation, Evaluation, and Monitoring of Cultivated Land Quality Grades (2017)
	[113]	Notice of the Fujian Provincial Department of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the 2017 Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Fujian Province (Min Nong Tu [2017] No. 155)
	[114]	Notice of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture on Allocating Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection Projects in 2017 (Qian Nong Cai [2017] No. 102)
	[115]	Measures of the Tibet Autonomous Region for Implementing the “Regulations on the Protection of Basic Farmland” (2018 Revision)
	[116]	Notice of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture on Carrying Out the Application for Demonstration Counties for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement and Chemical Fertilizer Reduction and Efficiency Enhancement in 2018 (Qian Nong Han [2018] No. 109)
	[117]	Reply of the Liaoning Provincial Department of Agriculture to the No. 1433 Proposal of the First Session of the 13th Provincial People’s Congress on Improving Cultivated Land Quality Protection Measures (Liao Nong Jian [2018] No. 52)
	[118]	Notice of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture on Allocating Funds for Cultivated Land Quality Protection Projects in 2018 (Qian Nong Cai [2018] No. 52)
	[119]	Approval of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture on the 2018 Demonstration Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement and Chemical Fertilizer Reduction and Efficiency Enhancement in Guizhou Province (Qian Nong Fa [2018] No. 84)
[120]	Notice of the Office of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture on Printing and Distributing the “2018 Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Guizhou Province” (Qian Nong Ban Fa [2018] No. 152)
[121]	Implementation Opinions of the Jilin Provincial Department of Agriculture and the Jilin Provincial Department of Finance on Accelerating the Promotion of Straw Covering and No-Tillage Conservation Tillage Technology to Promote the “Green Growth” of Cultivated Land Quality, Tillage Ecology, and Tillage Benefits (Ji Nong Ji Fa [2018] No. 22)
[122]	Regulations of Zhejiang Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2018 Amendment)
[123]	Notice of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Allocating Funds for the 2018 Provincial Pilot Project of Rotation and Fallow System (Fallow Cultivated Land Quality Monitoring) (Qian Nong Cai [2018] No. 15)
[124]	Regulations of Jilin Province on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2019 Revision)
[125]	Notice of the Shandong Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Doing a Good Job in the Monitoring and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality in Rotation and Fallow Pilot Areas (Lu Nong Zhong Zhi Zi [2019] No. 15)
[126]	Implementation Opinions of the Liaoning Provincial Department of Natural Resources and the Liaoning Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Strengthening and Improving the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (Liao Zi Ran Zi Gui [2019] No. 1)
[127]	Implementation Opinions of the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Natural Resources and the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Strengthening and Improving the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (Zhe Zi Ran Zi Gui [2019] No. 16)
[128]	Implementation Opinions of the Chongqing Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources and the Chongqing Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Strengthening and Improving the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (Yu Gui Zi Gui Fan [2020] No. 1)
[129]	Notice of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the “2020 Work Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement and Negative Growth of Chemical Fertilizer Use in Guizhou Province” (2020)
[130]	Provisions of Hainan Province on the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (2020 Amendment)
[131]	Implementation Opinions of the Chongqing Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources and the Chongqing Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Strengthening and Improving the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (Yu Gui Zi Gui Fan [2020] No. 1)
[132]	Notice of the Guangdong Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Further Doing a Good Job in the Construction and Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2020)
[133]	Regulations of Guangdong Province on the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality (2020)
[134]	Notice of the Yunnan Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the Measures for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Yunnan Province (2021)
[135]	Measures of Liaoning Province for the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2021 Amendment)
[136]	Notice of the Anhui Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Further Strengthening the Construction and Grade Evaluation of High-Standard Basic Farmland Cultivated Land Quality (Wan Nong Jian [2021] No. 132)
[137]	Opinions of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Earnestly Strengthening the Monitoring and Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality in the Province (Su Nong Ye [2021] No. 37)
[138]	Regulations of Anhui Province on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2023 Amendment)
[139]	Reply of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Natural Resources to the No. 3034 Proposal of the Second Session of the 14th Provincial People’s Congress (Proposal on Strengthening the Protection of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality in the Process of Balancing Occupation and Compensation) (2024)
[140]	Announcement of the Department of Cultivated Land Quality Protection and State Farms of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on the Open Selection of Procurement Agencies for the 2023 Provincial Cultivated Land Quality Grade Evaluation Project (2024)
[141]	Implementation Opinions of the General Office of the CPC Jiangsu Provincial Committee and the General Office of the Jiangsu Provincial People’s Government on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (2024)
[142]	Notice of the Shandong Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Further Doing a Good Job in the Protection and Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality in 2024 (Lu Nong Jian Zi [2024] No. 14)
[143]	Announcement of the Department of Cultivated Land Quality Protection and State Farms of the Guizhou Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on the Open Selection of Procurement Agencies for Technical Services for the Collation of Basic Data for the Compilation of Soil Type Maps in the Third National Soil Survey of Guizhou Province (2024)
[144]	Implementation Opinions of the General Office of the CPC Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps Committee and the General Office of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (2024)
[145]	Implementation Opinions of the General Office of the CPC Yunnan Provincial Committee and the General Office of the Yunnan Provincial People’s Government on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (2025)
City and county level policies	[146]	Regulations of Jilin City on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2001 Revision)
	[147]	Regulations of Hefei City on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2001)
	[148]	Regulations of Qiqihar City on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2001 Revision)
	[149]	Regulations of Benxi City on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2002 Revision)
	[150]	Notice of the People’s Government of Lianyungang City on Printing and Distributing the Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Lianyungang City (Lian Zheng Fa [2005] No. 137)
	[151]	Notice of the People’s Government of Taizhou City on Printing and Distributing the Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Taizhou City (Tai Zheng Ban Fa [2005] No. 137)
	[152]	Notice of the People’s Government of Shaoyang City on Printing and Distributing the “Several Provisions of Shaoyang City on Strengthening the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality” (Shi Zheng Fa [2009] No. 6)
	[153]	Notice of the Chengdu Municipal Agriculture Commission on Submitting the Plan for Modern Agricultural Development and Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in 198 Municipal Strategic Functional Areas (Cheng Nong Ban [2010] No. 106)
	[154]	Regulations of Handan City on the Administration of Basic Farmland Protection (2010 Amendment)
	[155]	Notice of the Chengdu Municipal Agriculture Commission on Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection and Improving Cultivated Land Quality (Cheng Nong Ban [2010] No. 154)
	[156]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Xiangxi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Xiangxi Autonomous Prefecture” (Zhou Zheng Ban Fa [2011] No. 16)
	[157]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Guilin City on Further Strengthening the Construction and Management of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality for the Balance of Occupation and Compensation (Shi Zheng Ban [2011] No. 246)
	[158]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Xiangtan City on Printing and Distributing the Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Xiangtan City (Tan Zheng Ban Fa [2012] No. 55)
	[159]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Taizhou City on Forwarding the Opinions of the Provincial Department of Land and Resources on Carrying Out the Supplementary Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality Grade Achievements in the Province (Tai Zheng Ban Fa [2012] No. 175)
	[160]	Implementation Opinions of the People’s Government of Hangzhou City on Further Strengthening the Quality Management and Subsequent Maintenance of Reclaimed Cultivated Land (Hang Zheng Han [2013] No. 47)
	[161]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Wenzhou City on Forwarding the Opinions of the Municipal Agriculture Office (Agriculture Bureau) and Other Departments on Earnestly Strengthening the Quality Improvement and Subsequent Maintenance of Reclaimed Cultivated Land (Wen Zheng Ban [2013] No. 166)
	[162]	Implementation Opinions of the General Office of the People’s Government of Jingzhou City on Implementing the “Regulations of Hubei Province on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality” (Jing Zheng Ban Fa [2016] No. 46)
	[163]	Notice of the People’s Government of Ningde City on Further Strengthening the Supplementary Cultivated Land Work and Improving Cultivated Land Quality (Ning Zheng Wen [2014] No. 151)
	[164]	Measures of Shenzhen City for the Administration of Basic Farmland Protection Zones (2014)
	[165]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Yiyang City on Printing and Distributing the “Measures for the Administration of Cultivated Land Quality in Yiyang City” (Yi Zheng Ban Fa [2014] No. 14)
	[166]	Notice of the People’s Government of Honghe Hani and Yi Autonomous Prefecture on Adjusting the Payment Method of Cultivated Land Quality Compensation Fees in Dam Areas (Hong Zheng Fa [2015] No. 48)
	[167]	Notice of the Suzhou Municipal Agriculture Commission on Printing and Distributing the “Implementation Rules for the Evaluation of Supplementary Cultivated Land Quality in Suzhou City (Trial)” (Su Shi Nong Ye [2015] No. 18)
	[168]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Wuzhishan City on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for the 2015 Annual Update Evaluation and Monitoring of Cultivated Land Quality Grades in Wuzhishan City (Wu Fu Ban [2015] No. 200)
	[169]	Implementation Opinions of the People’s Government of Yantai City on Improving the Cultivated Land Quality in Yantai City (2015)
	[170]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Baoji City on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Rules for the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality in Baoji City (Bao Zheng Ban Fa [2015] No. 115)
	[171]	Implementation Opinions of the People’s Government of Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture on Doing a Good Job in the Protection and Improvement of Cultivated Land Quality (Yan Zhou Zheng Fa [2016] No. 3)
	[172]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Bayannur City on Printing and Distributing the “Implementation Plan for Promoting the Action for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Bayannur City” (Ba Zheng Ban Fa [2016] No. 60)
	[173]	Notice of the Nanning Municipal Agriculture Commission on Printing and Distributing the Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Nanning City (2016)
	[174]	Notice of the Fuzhou Municipal Agriculture Bureau on Establishing the Leading Group for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Fuzhou City (Rong Nong Han [2016] No. 326)
	[175]	Notice of the Fuzhou Municipal Agriculture Bureau (Agriculture Office) on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Fuzhou City (Rong Nong [2016] No. 352)
	[176]	Notice of the General Office of the Guangzhou Municipal Agriculture Bureau on Printing and Distributing the Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Guangzhou City (Sui Nong Ban [2016] No. 257)
	[177]	Notice of the People’s Government of Qinzhou City on Printing and Distributing the Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Qinzhou City (Qin Zheng Ban [2016] No. 130)
	[178]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Debao County on Printing and Distributing the 13th Five-Year Work Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Debao County (De Zheng Ban Fa [2016] No. 177)
	[179]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Xiamen City on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Xiamen City (Xia Men Fu Ban [2016] No. 230)
	[180]	Notice of the People’s Government of Haiyan County on Printing and Distributing the “Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Haiyan County” (Yan Nong [2017] No. 10)
	[181]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Quanzhou City on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Quanzhou City (Quan Zheng Ban [2017] No. 27)
	[182]	Notice of the Xiamen Municipal Agriculture Bureau and the Xiamen Municipal Finance Bureau on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Fertility Improvement Projects in Xiamen City (2017)
	[183]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Daxing District, Beijing on Strengthening the Management of Delimited Permanent Basic Farmland (2017)
	[184]	Notice of the People’s Government of Huizhou City on Printing and Distributing the “Implementation Measures for Basic Farmland Protection Subsidies in Huizhou City (2017)” (Hui Fu [2017] No. 195)
	[185]	Notice of the Huainan Municipal Agriculture Commission on Printing and Distributing the “2018 Work Plan for Promoting the Zero-Growth Action of Chemical Fertilizer Use in Huainan City” and the “2018 Guiding Plan for the Action of Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Huainan City” (Huai Nong [2018] No. 50)
	[186]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Debao County on Printing and Distributing the 2018 Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Debao County (De Zheng Ban Fa [2018] No. 186)
	[187]	Regulations of Baotou City on the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (2019)
	[188]	Notice of the Qingdao Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the “2020 Responsibility Division for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement Work in Qingdao City” (2020)
	[189]	Notice of the Hohhot Municipal Bureau of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry on Printing and Distributing the “Implementation Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Hohhot City” (2020)
	[190]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Debao County on Printing and Distributing the “2020 Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Debao County” (De Zheng Ban Fa [2020] No. 124)
	[191]	Notice of the Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources, the Guangzhou Municipal Finance Bureau, and the Guangzhou Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the Implementation Measures for Basic Farmland Protection Subsidies in Guangzhou City (Sui Gui Hua Zi Yuan Gui Zi [2021] No. 2)
	[192]	Regulations of Shenyang City on the Protection of Cultivated Land Quality (2021)
	[193]	Notice of the Zhuhai Municipal Bureau of Natural Resources, the Zhuhai Municipal Finance Bureau, and the Zhuhai Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the “Economic Compensation Measures for Permanent Basic Farmland Protection in Zhuhai City” (Zhu Zi Ran Zi Zi [2022] No. 364)
	[194]	Notice of the People’s Government of Shantou City on Printing and Distributing the Measures for the Administration of Special Funds for Permanent Basic Farmland Protection Subsidies in Shantou City (Shan Fu [2022] No. 84)
	[195]	Notice of the Qingdao Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the 2023 Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement in Qingdao City (Qing Nong Zi [2023] No. 20)
	[196]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Jiayuguan City on Printing and Distributing the Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Construction in Jiayuguan City (2021–2025) (Jia Zheng Ban Fa [2023] No. 58)
	[197]	Notice of the Qingdao Municipal Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs on Printing and Distributing the 2024 Action Plan for Cultivated Land Quality Protection and Improvement (Qing Nong Zi [2024] No. 26)
	[198]	Regulations of Zhengzhou City on the Protection of Basic Farmland (2024 Amendment)
	[199]	Regulations of Changchun City on the Protection of Permanent Basic Farmland (2025 Amendment)
	[200]	Notice of the General Office of the People’s Government of Yangzhou City on Printing and Distributing the “Implementation Measures for Strengthening Cultivated Land Protection, Improving Cultivated Land Quality, and Improving the Balance of Occupation and Compensation” (Yang Fu Ban Fa [2025] No. 15)

References

Yu, T. Review on Ecological Protection of Cultivated Land in China. Rural Econ. Technol. 2024, 35, 4–6. [Google Scholar]
Yu, F.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, L. Analysis on the Optimal Path of Cultivated Land Protection Policy Facing Climate Change. China Land Resour. Econ. 2024, 37, 13–19+58. [Google Scholar]
Zhang, Y.T.; Cai, C.-H.; Zhong, C.-C. Evolution of land system reforms in China: Dynamics of stakeholders and policy transitions toward sustainable farmland use (2004–2019). Heliyon 2024, 10, e37471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sun, Y.; Jiang, H.J.; Zhu, X.L. Driving factors, constraints, and policy abandonment of farmland: Insights from China. Land 2024, 13, 2096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Li, H.; Liu, H.N.; Zhang, W.Y. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivations: Key factors influencing farmers’ land quality protection behavior in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2025, 75, 1520–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, T.; Hu, X. The Evolution Logic and Effectiveness of Cultivated Land Protection Policy from the Perspective of Ecological Civilization. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2024, 34, 187–196. [Google Scholar]
Ma, L.; Long, H.L.; Tu, S.S.; Zhang, Y.N.; Zheng, Y.H. Farmland transition in China and its policy implications. Land Use Policy 2020, 92, 104470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chen, G.; Zhang, L.; Cheng, F.; Yun, W. Research on Cultivated Land Protection Policy with Equal Emphasis on Quantity and Quality. China Land Sci. 2009, 23, 39–43. [Google Scholar]
Hu, Q.; Yuan, M. Functional Outline and Policy Regulation of National Cultivated Land Protection Responsibility System. Agric. Econ. Manag. 2024, 81–92. [Google Scholar]
Wang, L.L.; Li, Z.; Yuan, C.C.; Liu, L.M. Exploring the causes of low cultivated land efficiency protection policy in China: An evolutionary game theory model. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 26, 25173–25198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, T.; Chen, M. Current situation and promotion path of execution of cultivated land protection system in China. China Land Sci. 2020, 34, 32–37+47. [Google Scholar]
Zhou, J.; Yang, X.; Chen, K.; Tou, L. Farmers’ preference and heterogeneity of farmland quality protection policy. J. Anhui Agric. Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2025, 34, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
Liu, H.; Wang, Q.; Wu, Y.; Wang, D.; Yan, Y. Study on Farmers’ Cognition, Behavioral Decision-making Response and Influence Mechanism in Cultivated Land Quality Protection. China Land Sci. 2018, 32, 52–58. [Google Scholar]
Liu, S.; Han, J.; Liu, Y. Study on the Impact of Farmland Right Confirmation on Farmers’ Investment in Cultivated Land Quality Protection. Agric. Econ. Manag. 2021, 12, 20–29. [Google Scholar]
Guo, F.; Ren, J. Impact and mechanism of full cost insurance on farmers’ investment in cultivated land quality protection. Resour. Sci. 2023, 45, 2183–2195. [Google Scholar]
Yan, Y.; Chen, M.; Zhang, J.; Li, X.; Liu, Y. Farmers’ willingness to adopt environment-friendly farmland protection technology and behavioral response: An empirical study based on the application of soil testing and formula fertilization technology in 1092 farmers in Jiangxi Province. China Land Sci. 2021, 35, 85–93. [Google Scholar]
Tan, K.; Huang, G.; Xia, Z.; Guo, X. Study on the Application Effect of Cultivated Land Protection and Quality Improvement Technology. Anhui Agric. Sci. 2018, 46, 140–143. [Google Scholar]
Nie, L. Technical measures and application of cultivated land protection and quality improvement. Anhui Agron. Bull. 2023, 29, 103–109. [Google Scholar]
Zhao, J.; Cheng, J.; Pu, N.; Xie, N.; Zhao, Z. Study on the policy system of cultivated land protection under the background of recuperation system. J. China Agric. Univ. 2024, 29, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
Ge, K.; Xu, H.F.; Liu, X.Y.; Ke, S.; Tang, Y.; Lu, X. Dynamic evolution, regional differences, and spatial convergence of high-standard farmland construction efficiency under rural industrial revitalization. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2025, 27, 4129–4152. [Google Scholar]
Qian, F.K.; Jiao, S.Y.; Yu, Y.J.; Wang, X.G.; Shao, T.Y. Cultivated land quality assessment and obstacle factor diagnosis in Changtu County, Northeast China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2024, 35, 5065–5077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, S.; Liu, F. The Impact of External Factors on Farmers’ Cultivated Land Quality Protection Behavior: Empirical Evidence from Henan Province, Jilin Province and Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Rural Econ. 2024, 40, 32–44. [Google Scholar]
Zhang, J.; Mei, L.; Zhang, X.; Xu, L.; Zhang, A. Spatio-temporal characteristics and differential compensation mechanism of ecological value of cultivated land protection in the Yangtze River Economic Zone. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2022, 32, 173–183. [Google Scholar]
Li, L.; Zheng, S.Y.; Zhao, K.F.; Liu, X.Y.; Chen, M.H.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, L.P.; Huang, Y.; Wu, J.; Deng, L.; et al. The Quantitative Impact of Cultivated Land Protection Policies on Abandoned Farmland Landscapes in Guangdong Province, China. Remote Sens. 2024, 14, 4991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Tang, Z.; Song, W.; Zou, J. Farmland protection and fertilization intensity: Empirical evidence from preservation policy of Heilongjiang’s black soil. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 356, 120629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Yi, F.; Lu, Q.; Li, Y.H.; Wang, Z.; Yao, B.; Yang, Q.; Wang, J. Ecological vulnerability assessment of natural oases in arid regions: Application in Dunhuang, China. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 149, 110139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Berelson, B. Content Analysis in Communications Research; Freepress: Glencoe, IL, USA, 1952. [Google Scholar]
Bista, S.; Holland, J.B.; Situ, M. A content analysis of transportation planning documents in Toronto and Montreal. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2021, 9, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Allan, A.; Soltani, A.; Abdi, M.H.; Zarei, M. Driving Forces behind Land Use and Land Cover Change: A Systematic and Bibliometric Review. Land 2022, 11, 1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
North, D.C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
Cui, N.B.; Fan, Y.Y.; Ba, X.Z. Evolution, logic and prospect of China’s conservation tillage policy change: From the perspective of institutional change theory. Acad. J. Zhongzhou 2021, 48, 33–40. [Google Scholar]
Guo, Z. Institutional change, cognitive bias and farmers’ cultivated land use behavior. J. Nantong Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2020, 36, 92–98. [Google Scholar]
Zhang, M.; Du, P.P.; Qin, J.Y. Factor driving mechanism and interest coordination mechanism of rural land system reform from the perspective of food security. Issues Agric. Econ. 2023, 44, 27–35. [Google Scholar]
Howlett, M.; Ramesh, M. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
Cai, Z.Y.; Song, G.; Su, R.Q.; Wang, Y. New insights into sustainable cultivated land use: A synergistic path based on multi-stakeholder coordination of cultivated land use competition. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2025, 27, 2895–2918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, H.L.; Zhao, L.; Shi, X.J. A four-category evolutionary game of rural farmland transfer in China: A simulation method. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2025, 27, 5321–5340. [Google Scholar]

Figure 1. Textual analysis framework for policy evolution.

Figure 2. Two-dimensional distribution of policy texts.

Figure 4. Changes in the number of policies on cultivated land quality protection.

Table 1. Detailed definitions of keywords.

Keywords Label	Definition
A	Policy measures aimed at enhancing the physical, chemical, and biological properties of cultivated land.
B	A regulatory principle requiring non-agricultural land occupation to be compensated by reclaiming an equivalent area and quality of cultivated land elsewhere.
C	Policies supporting the construction and management of water infrastructure to ensure stable supply and efficient use for agriculture.
D	Fiscal tools and direct funding allocated specifically for cultivated land protection and improvement projects.
E	Regulations to promote the reduction, efficient use, and safety of agricultural chemicals to prevent soil degradation.
F	Designation of specific geographical zones for targeted investment and concentrated management of land protection.
G	Policies linking land quality management to output value, using product certification and branding as economic incentives.
H	Systems and procedures for monitoring, assessing, and grading cultivated land quality based on standardized indicators.
I	Institutional mechanisms for overseeing and enforcing land protection regulations and accountability.
J	Spatial planning and zoning tools to designate and protect agricultural land based on scientific assessment.
K	Policies for disseminating and applying advanced, suitable technologies for land conservation and improvement.
L	A guiding principle emphasizing regionally tailored protection strategies rather than uniform solutions.
M	Classification of cultivated land into tiers to guide differentiated management and protection intensity.

Table 2. Simplified coding table of policy content analysis unit.

Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword	Number	Coding	Keyword
1	1-2	B	41	41	B	81	81-6	C	121	121-4-2	K	161	161-4-2	A
2	2-3	I	42	42-2-15	B	82	82	B	122	122-15	D	162	162-2-6	B
3	3-2	I	43	43-2-3	G	83	83	B	123	123	I	163	163-3	B
4	4-2	B	44	44-3	B	84	84	H	124	124-10	A	164	164-3	C
5	5-1-12	D	45	45-2	J	85	85-17	B	125	125-1	G	165	165-4-4	C
6	6-3	B	46	46-1	A	86	86-18	A	126	126-4-12	A	166	166	C
7	7-2	A	47	47	B	87	87-12	A	127	127-4-3	A	167	167-11	A
8	8-6-2	C	48	48-1	D	88	88-2	M	128	128-5-12	A	168	168	B
9	9-3-5	C	49	49-1	A	89	89-16	C	129	129	E	169	169-2-2	A
10	10	I	50	50-5-11	F	90	90	C	130	130-15	B	170	170-11	A
11	11-2-2	A	51	51-2	A	91	91-17	A	131	131-12	A	171	171-4-1	G
12	12-2	D	52	52-2-3	B	92	92-4	A	132	132-2	A	172	172-2-1	A
13	13-1-1	B	53	53-2-1	A	93	93	B	133	133-18	A	173	173-3-2	A
14	14-3-4	C	54	54-1	B	94	94-1	A	134	134-7	F	174	174	K
15	15-2 15	A	55	55-2-2	A	95	95-12	A	135	135-22-3	E	175	175-3-1	A
16	16-1	B	56	56-11	A	96	96-9	A	136	136-2	F	176	176-1	A
17	17-3	A	57	57-2	I	97	97-12	C	137	137-4-4	A	177	177-6-2	A
18	18	G	58	58-25	A	98	98-1	A	138	138-5	C	178	178-2-2	A
19	19	A	59	59-3-1	G	99	99-4-4	A	139	139-5	A	179	179-3-1	A
20	20-3-16	A	60	60-6	C	100	100	E	140	140	H	180	180-4-1	F
21	21-13	A	61	61-12	A	101	101-1	B	141	141-11	A	181	181-3-1	A
22	22-61	C	62	62-5	B	102	102-1	B	142	142-2	H	182	182-4-1	F
23	23-4-3	B	63	63-11	A	103	103-20	A	143	143	A	183	183	I
24	24	G	64	64-2	D	104	104-1	D	144	144-1	B	184	184-6	C
25	25-6-2	D	65	65-3	G	105	105-1	B	145	145-2-7	A	185	185-2	H
26	26-13	A	66	66-3	A	106	106-3-1	A	146	146-14	E	186	186-3-2	A
27	27	G	67	67-2-2	A	107	107-2	H	147	147-21	A	187	187-15	E
28	28-3	B	68	68-1	H	108	108	B	148	148-18	C	188	188-2-5	A
29	29-3-3	C	69	69-10	A	109	109-1-1	B	149	149-10	A	189	189-4-3	A
30	30-1-3	A	70	70-2	G	110	110	E	150	150-15	A	190	190-3-2	A
31	31-3-2	B	71	71-17	A	111	111-1-1	L	151	151-16	A	191	191-2	I
32	32	A	72	72-18	A	112	112-2	H	152	152-7-1	A	192	192-16	A
33	33-2-1	C	73	73-11	C	113	113-3-3	M	153	153	F	193	193-8-3	E
34	34	A	74	74-1	G	114	114-4-4	D	154	154-9-5	G	194	194-2	D
35	35-2-2	K	75	75-15	E	115	115-3	G	155	155-3	F	195	195-2-4	B
36	36	H	76	76-4	C	116	116-3-1	A	156	156-6-1	B	196	196-3-1	A
37	37-4	B	77	77-16	A	117	117-5	B	157	157-3-2	A	197	197-2-1	F
38	38-3-1	I	78	78-26	A	118	118-2	I	158	158-7-1	B	198	198-25	E
39	39-1-1	B	79	79-2	A	119	119-1	H	159	159-1	B	199	199-38	C
40	40-5-4	D	80	80-23	A	120	120-3-1	A	160	160-1	B	200	200-4	B

Table 3. Frequency statistics and proportions of policy texts.

Number	Coding	Keyword	2000–2004		2005–2009		2010–2014		2015–2019		2020 to Date		Totally
Number	Coding	Keyword	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)
1	A	Soil improvement	4	2.00	8	4.00	20	10.00	27	13.50	17	8.50	76	9.08
2	B	Balance of occupation and compensation	3	1.50	4	2.00	23	11.50	25	12.50	14	7.00	69	8.24
3	C	Irrigation and water conservancy	5	2.50	8	4.00	22	11.00	13	6.50	9	4.50	57	6.81
4	D	Capital input	2	1.00	3	1.50	5	2.50	25	12.50	7	3.50	42	5.02
5	E	Chemical fertilizers and pesticides	3	1.50	5	2.50	8	4.00	20	10.00	11	5.50	47	5.62
6	F	Project area	0	0.00	2	1.00	12	6.00	11	5.50	14	7.00	39	4.66
7	G	Agricultural products	8	4.00	6	3.00	26	13.00	38	19.00	19	9.50	97	11.59
8	H	Quality evaluation	1	0.50	11	5.50	24	12.00	36	18.00	23	11.50	95	11.35
9	I	Supervision and management	7	3.50	15	7.50	31	15.50	21	10.50	14	7.00	88	10.51
10	J	Scientific planning	0	0.00	3	1.50	9	4.50	7	3.50	4	2.00	23	2.75
11	K	Technology promotion	2	1.00	2	1.00	15	7.50	22	11.00	8	4.00	49	5.85
12	L	Adjust measures to local conditions	1	0.50	4	2.00	10	5.00	30	15.00	18	9.00	63	7.53
13	M	Quality grade	4	2.00	8	4.00	24	12.00	34	17.00	22	11.00	92	10.99
Total			40	20.00	79	39.50	229	114.50	309	154.50	180	90.00	837	100.00

Table 4. Three-dimensional classification of keywords based on policy tool types.

Tool Type	Analytical Dimension	Policy Objective	Corresponding Keywords
Regulatory tools	Regulation and Control	Establish the basic order and bottom-line constraints for cultivated land protection, and ensure the effectiveness of policy implementation	B, I, J, M
Economic tools	Investment and Incentive	Proactively improve the quality and productive capacity of cultivated land through resource input and interest regulation	A, C, D, F, K
Hybrid tools	Guidance and Restoration	Mitigate the negative impacts of agricultural production on the cultivated land ecosystem and guide its sustainable utilization	E, G, H, L

Table 5. Longitudinal composition of policies on cultivated land quality protection.

Vertical Hierarchy	The Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party	The State Council and All Ministries and Commissions	Local Governments			Total
Vertical Hierarchy	The Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party	The State Council and All Ministries and Commissions	Subtotal	Provincial Level	City and County Level	Total
Quantity	2	53	145	89	56	200
Proportion (%)	1	26.50	72.50	44.50	28.00	100.00

Table 6. Horizontal composition of policies on cultivated land quality protection.

Horizontal Composition	Laws and Regulations	Regulations	Normative Documents	Working Papers	Total
Quantity	31	15	83	71	200
Proportion (%)	15.50	7.50	41.50	35.50	100.00

Table 7. Distribution of Policy Instruments Across Governance Levels.

Level	Number of Texts	Regulatory Tools		Economic Tools		Hybrid Tools
Level	Number of Texts	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)	Frequency	Proportion (%)
Subtotal	55	51	27.0	66	34.9	72	38.1
Provincial Level	90	89	26.6	105	31.4	140	41.9
City and County Level	55	47	22.0	61	28.5	106	49.5
Totally	200	187	22.3	232	27.7	318	38.0

Table 8. Characteristics and key milestones of the five policy evolution stages.

Stage (Period)	Core Theme	Key Policy Keywords (Prominent)	Representative Policy Document/Event	Policy Logic Shift
Embryonic (2000–2004)	Quantity Primacy	B, G, I	Decision of the State Council on Deepening Reform… (2004)	From pure quantity control to initial conceptualization of quality
Practical Exploration (2005–2009)	Linking Quality to Yield	A, C, H, M	Central Document No.1 (2005) proposes “high-standard farmland”	Quality becomes a tangible goal linked to grain production
System Construction (2010–2014)	Institutionalization	H, I, M, K	National Master Plan for High-standard Farmland Construction (2012)	“Dual control” (quantity and quality) framework solidified
In-Depth Transformation (2015–2019)	Integration and Refinement	D, E, L, (H, M peak)	Measures for the Investigation, Monitoring, and Evaluation… (2017)	“Trinity” (quantity, quality, ecology) framework formed; emphasis on local adaptation
Comprehensive Upgrade (2020-present)	Holistic Governance	H, M, (Broad integration)	Draft Law on the Protection of Cultivated Land (2022)	Integration into national strategies (food security, ecology); legal upgrading

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, Y.; Ding, W.; Zhu, H.; Mo, J. Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method. Land 2026, 15, 298. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15020298

AMA Style

Wang Y, Ding W, Zhu H, Mo J. Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method. Land. 2026; 15(2):298. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15020298

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Yanqing, Weilai Ding, Hongbo Zhu, and Junxiong Mo. 2026. "Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method" Land 15, no. 2: 298. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15020298

APA Style

Wang, Y., Ding, W., Zhu, H., & Mo, J. (2026). Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method. Land, 15(2), 298. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15020298

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Menu

Analysis of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy in China Based on the Content Analysis Method

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Content Analysis

2.2. Data Source and Sample Selection

2.3. Framework for Policy Text Analysis

2.4. Content Coding and Policy Text Keywords

2.5. Text Frequency Statistics

2.6. Analytical Framework and Strength Measurement Method

2.6.1. Theoretical Framework

2.6.2. Measurement of Policy Instrument Intensity

3. Results

3.1. Analysis of Changes in Policy Quantity

3.2. Analysis of Vertical and Horizontal Structure of Policy

3.2.1. Vertical Hierarchical Dimension

3.2.2. Horizontal Composition Dimension

3.2.3. Comparison of Vertical Levels and Horizontal Composition

3.3. Analysis of the Evolution of Policy Content

3.4. Analysis of the Structural Evolution of Policy Tools

4. Discussion

4.1. Insufficient Depth and Breadth of Implementation of Cultivated Land Quality Protection Policy

4.2. The Evolution Logic of Cultivated Land Protection Policy Objectives and Instruments in Different Periods

5. Conclusions

5.1. Conclusions

5.2. Recommendations

Author Contributions

Funding

Data Availability Statement

Acknowledgments

Conflicts of Interest

Appendix A

References

Share and Cite

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI