Enhancing the Marketization and Globalization Response Capacity of Policies: Evolution of China’s Seed Industry Policies Since the 21st Century

Abstract

In the face of marketization and globalization of agricultural product trade, ensuring food security through effective seed industry policies has become a vital objective for many nations, especially for developing countries striving toward this goal. The evolution of seed industry policies to meet the challenges of marketization and globalization has not been extensively examined. This study seeks to answer how China’s seed industry policies have been continuously adjusted since the 21st century to ensure seed security and food security amidst marketization and globalization. Focusing on 96 national-level seed policies issued between 2000 and 2024, we employ methods such as co-word analysis, social network analysis (SNA), cluster analysis, and content analysis to explore policy evolution from five perspectives: policy stakeholders, policy issues, objectives, discourse, and tools. The key findings are: (1) China’s seed policies have largely aligned with the country’s marketization and globalization processes, progressing through three stages: seed industry marketization, response to globalization, and modernization and self-strengthening, forming a comprehensive policy framework. (2) The scale of cooperation networks among policy issuers has expanded, shifting toward a loose-centralized structure, with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs as the core and coordinated involvement of other departments such as the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the State Administration for Market Regulation. (3) The policy discourse shifted from fostering a market-oriented environment to emphasizing seed industry innovation, reinforcing basic R&D capabilities, addressing innovation challenges, and promoting industrialization. (4) The policy paradigm transitioned from an initial phase of adjusting to market-oriented transformation to a comprehensive phase of modernization and self-reliance, with policy focus moving from incomplete market mechanisms and regulatory shortcomings toward issues like seed source bottlenecks, and objectives from reforming seed management to achieving technological independence. (5) The logic of policy evolution shows notable differences in attention focus related to management concepts, support for technological innovation, and promotion of quality seed breeding—shifting from regulation to service emphasis, from focusing on key projects to diversified innovation, and from importing superior varieties to breakthroughs in new breeds and technologies. These findings offer valuable insights for developing countries facing food security challenges.

1. Introduction

In 1992, China set the goal of establishing a socialist market economy, ending the “dual-track” pricing system for grain and fully liberalizing the grain market [1]. This reform prompted a market-oriented transformation of the nation’s crop production and seed sector. Whether this transition from a planned economy to a market-driven mechanism could ensure national food security soon became a subject of widespread academic concern. In 1994, Lester Brown, the director of the Worldwatch Institute, published a book titled Who Will Feed China?, discussing the potential food shortages that China might face and the significant implications this could have for global food trade. In 2001, China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO), and under the impetus of marketization and globalization, the country began to adjust its seed industry policies to safeguard food security, involving reforms in market access, market supervision, intellectual property protection, and the development of an innovation environment. This raises critical questions: How have China’s seed industry policies continuously adjusted since the 21st century in response to marketization and globalization to ensure the safety of its seed industry and food security? How have the collaborative networks among policy issuers evolved? What changes have occurred in the policy discourse system?

Seed industry policy is an important branch of agricultural policy, consisting of normative documents issued by the government to achieve the goals of its development [2,3]. It encompasses a range of policies designed to guide, support, and promote the innovation processes and directions of the seed industry, focusing on significant dimensions and links in its development. A modern seed industry plays a critical role in ensuring both food security and sustainable agricultural development by enhancing the yield and quality of crops while improving agriculture’s adaptability to environmental changes [4,5].

Food security remains a major concern for policymakers worldwide, and many countries are formulating policies to promote the high-quality development of the seed industry [6]. Since the 20th century, developed countries such as the United States, Germany, and Japan have successively introduced national programs to strengthen their leadership and ensure sustainable innovation in the seed sector. Likewise, China attached great importance to the construction of institutional frameworks supporting modern seed development. Over the past two decades, the central government introduced a series of strategic measures designed to enhance the quality and efficiency of seed-sector growth. From the promulgation of the Seed Law of the People’s Republic of China in 2000, to the State Council’s Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Modern Crop Breeding in 2011, and subsequently, the Action Plan for Seed Industry Revitalization approved by the 20th meeting of the Central Committee for Deepening Reform in 2021, these policies have guided and adjusted the direction of seed industry development through various dimensions, including technological exploration, quality standards, and market environment. As the world’s largest developing country and a major agricultural power, the evolution of China’s seed industry policy has profoundly influenced not only the structure of its agricultural production but also the overall pattern of global food security. Against this background, a systematic analysis of the characteristics, internal logic, and paradigm shifts in the evolution of seed industry policy is crucial for understanding the sustainable development path of the sector. However, existing research has not yet fully revealed several core questions: What evolutionary process and paradigm transformations has China’s seed industry policy undergone? What intrinsic logic has driven this process? Addressing these questions is an urgent task. The findings of this study aim to provide valuable insights for policymakers, helping to optimize the policy system and promote the seed industry’s transition toward a high-quality and sustainable future.

Existing literature on seed industry policy research can be broadly categorized into three types. First, early studies primarily focused on the impact of seed industry policies on the sustainability of the sector. For example, Spielman et al. [7] analyzed the effects of technological advancements and seed industry policy reforms on the sustainable development of India’s seed sector, concluding that these policy changes could help accelerate the growth in the yields of major food crops in India. Second, much of the existing research is based on policy evaluation, challenges faced by the seed industry, and urgent needs for policy optimization. Many scholars have offered insights and suggestions for improvement. For example, Anabel Marin and colleagues, through evaluating Argentina’s seed industry, highlighted that technological innovation in breeding promotes enhanced soybean productivity and emphasized strengthening policies to support breeding innovation [8]. Similarly, Rodrigo Dutra-Silva and others, based on reviewing seed legislation in neighboring Brazil, pointed out the urgent need to reinforce it in areas such as commercialization, regulatory flexibility, and the conservation of genetic diversity [9]. Cui Ningbo et al. [10], while exploring the “bottleneck” challenges in resource management, breeding, marketing, and the policy environment affecting high-quality seed industry development, suggested recommendations for enhancing the overall level of the policy through path reshaping. Huang Jikun et al. [11]. summarized the achievements and experiences of China’s seed industry development policy reform, analyzed the challenges and underlying reasons faced by seed industry development, and proposed policy recommendations aimed at deepening the institutional reforms of the seed innovation system, including the establishment of a Chinese technological innovation system for modern biobreeding techniques and industrial development. Third, research has mainly focused on the evolution of seed industry development policies or the policy texts themselves. There is relatively limited research in this area, with only a few scholars exploring this topic. For example, Xing Ruimiao et al. [12]. analyzed seed industry intellectual property policy texts from the perspective of intellectual property rights. Zheng Hui et al. [13] examined policy hotspots in the niche area of the marine seed industry from a marine perspective. Li Wanjun et al. [14] employed qualitative analysis methods to review the provisions related to technological innovation in the Seed Law, summarizing the evolution of these provisions.

While there have been certain achievements in research related to seed industry policies, there remains room for expansion:

First, regarding the research subjects, there is a lack of discussion on the characteristics of the evolution of China’s seed industry policies and their underlying logic. Existing literature is limited to the analysis of specific policy types, but there is a need to explore the internal logic of the evolution of seed industry policies across different types and over various periods.

Second, from a theoretical perspective, there is a shortage of frameworks that integrate policy paradigm theory to analyze policy evolution. In recent years, an increasing number of scholars have used policy paradigm theory to formulate analytical models that reveal mechanisms behind policy change, yet such approaches are scarce within the field of seed industry policy.

Third, in terms of methodology, most studies on the evolution of seed development policy have relied primarily on qualitative approaches, leading to a degree of subjectivity and instability in the findings. Limited quantitative research focusing on specific subfields of seed industry policy has mainly evaluated the use and combination of policy instruments, while a perspective integrating policy evolution and quantitative analysis has been largely absent. Recently, more researchers in other policy areas have introduced bibliometric techniques to explore hidden structures and latent patterns in policy documents; nevertheless, similar applications are still lacking in the realm of seed industry policy.

Fourth, from a research perspective, insufficient attention has been paid to the role of policy cooperation departments. Current studies have yet to construct analytical frameworks that consider the cooperation among policy departments and the focus of policy attention, nor have they examined the evolution patterns of these dimensions within seed industry policies.

In view of these gaps, this paper centers on China’s seed industry policies from 2000 to 2024. We construct a theoretical framework based on seed policy paradigms, exploring policy evolution from five dimensions: policy issuance, policy issues, objectives, discourse, and tools. Employing a comprehensive methodological approach—combining co-word analysis, social network analysis (SNA), cluster analysis, and content analysis—we investigate the evolution of the collaborative networks among policy issuers and the development of policy discourse since 2000. Our analysis uncovers the internal logic of seed policy paradigm shifts and examines their development trajectories from multiple perspectives, shedding light on national-level policy characteristics, mechanisms, and future trends. The findings are anticipated to facilitate an in-depth understanding of China’s seed policy evolution and its underlying logic and assist policymakers in optimizing seed industry policies.

The organization of this paper is as follows: Section 2 introduces the theoretical framework. Section 3 details the data sources and research methods. Section 4 presents the evolution stages of China’s seed policies since the 21st century, focusing on the collaboration patterns among policy issuers, discourse shifts, and paradigm changes. Section 5 summarizes the logic behind seed policy evolution. Section 6 discusses the relevance of our findings, alongside contributions, limitations, and directions for future research. Finally, Section 7 concludes with key insights and policy recommendations, especially emphasizing sustainability transition perspectives.

2. Theoretical Framework and Overview of the Development of Seed Industry Policies

2.1. Theoretical Framework

Peter A. Hall proposed the concept of policy paradigm in his seminal 1993 work “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain”, suggesting that policymakers habitually operate within a framework comprising various ideas and standards [15]. This framework not only defines policy objectives and instrument categories but also specifies the nature of problems to be addressed, collectively constituting what Hall termed a “policy paradigm”. Hall distinguished between routine policy changes and paradigm shifts, proposing three sequences of policy paradigm evolution: first-order changes primarily involve adjustments in instrument settings; second-order changes manifest through modifications in policy instruments; third-order changes encompass comprehensive transformations in policy objectives, instruments, and their settings, signifying a fundamental paradigm shift.

Since its inception, the policy paradigm concept has stimulated extensive academic discourse. Scholars have explored its components, with many identifying policy objectives and instruments as core elements [15,16]. Kern et al. further conceptualized policy paradigms to include governance institutions [16], while Cao and Cui emphasized the incorporation of problem definition [17]. Zou extended this framework by highlighting policy discourse as a critical component [18]. The theory has been widely applied to analyze policy evolution in energy, healthcare, housing, and science innovation sectors, revealing underlying governance logics. However, existing literature fails to provide a structured understanding of seed policy transformation mechanisms.

This study develops a theoretical analytical framework based on policy paradigm theory (Figure 1). The proposed seed industry policy paradigm comprises five components: problem interpretation (defining seed industry challenges), policymaking agents, policy objectives, policy discourse, and policy instruments. The framework posits that crises emerge when existing seed policy paradigms prove inadequate in addressing new challenges from marketization and globalization processes. Policymakers respond by redefining problems, adjusting objectives, and updating instruments—though not necessarily simultaneously, with varying emphasis during different adjustment phases. Notably, policy discourse serves as a critical indicator of paradigm evolution, reflecting policymakers’ evolving understanding of seed industry challenges and value orientations across different marketization-globalization stages. Discourse shifts also provide insights into corresponding adjustments in policy objectives and instruments. Ultimately, this framework elucidates the interconnectedness between seed policy adjustments, paradigm shifts, and the underlying drivers of marketization and globalization.

2.2. Overview of the Development of Seed Industry Policies

The Seed Law, enacted in 2000, marked a crucial step in China’s market-oriented reform of the seed industry. It not only standardized China’s seed market but also established an important legal foundation for China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, aligning with the market-opening requirements of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and the competitive environment of the international seed market. Following China’s entry into the WTO, the country adjusted its seed industry policies to address the challenges of marketization and globalization. The 2004 revision of the Seed Law explicitly introduced a licensing system for seed production and operation, thereby strengthening seed quality inspection and supervision. In 2006, the document Opinions on Promoting the Reform of the Seed Management System and Strengthening Market Supervision required the strict implementation of enterprise market-access and seed quality labeling systems, further enhancing regulation of the seed market. After joining the WTO, China’s seed industry directly faced the shocks and pressures of international market competition.

To respond to the challenges of marketization and globalization, the State Council issued the Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Modern Crop Seed Industry in 2011, launching a new round of reform in the seed industry. Subsequently, the Regulations on the Protection of New Plant Varieties were revised in 2014, followed by the revision of the Seed Law in 2015. These policy adjustments not only strengthened the innovation and protection of domestic superior seed varieties but also laid an important institutional foundation for China’s accession to the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) in 2016. Such measures aimed to address the technological barriers established by multinational seed corporations in areas such as transgenic breeding and molecular breeding, thereby contributing to national food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines the concept of food security—a definition that remains widely adopted to this day—as a condition in which all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.

Following major technological breakthroughs in molecular biology and breeding, the penetration of the international seed market continued to deepen. In the context of scientific and technological globalization, China still faces the bottleneck challenge of seed germplasm resources. In 2021, the 20th Meeting of the Central Committee for Comprehensively Deepening Reform reviewed and approved the Action Plan for the Revitalization of the Seed Industry, which explicitly elevated seed source security to the level of national security. This marked the beginning of a comprehensive effort to revitalize the seed industry, signifying that China’s seed industry reform had entered a new stage of overall adjustment aimed at coping with global seed industry competition, breaking through core technological barriers, and enhancing international competitiveness.

3. Data Sources and Research Methods

3.1. Data Source and Processing

Following the principles of openness, systematicity, and authority in the collection of policy texts, this study selected China’s national-level seed industry policies issued from 2000 to July 2024 as the primary research materials. The keywords “seed industry,” “seeds,” and “agriculture” were used to retrieve relevant documents. The search was conducted through the official websites and databases of major governmental bodies, including the Policy Document Database of the State Council, PKULAW (Peking University Law Database), and the official portals of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA) and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) (see

Table 1. Data source information.

Data Source	Nature	Link
PKULAW (Peking University Law Database)	Professional commercial legal database	https://www.pkulaw.com/law/?keyword= (accessed on 10 July 2024)
Official website of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA)	Portal of the leading governmental department for agricultural affairs	https://www.moa.gov.cn/
Policy Document Database of the State Council	Official platform for central government policy releases	https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengcewenjianku/index.htm (accessed on 10 July 2024)
Official website of the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST)	Portal of the relevant governmental authority for science and technology	https://www.most.gov.cn/index.html (accessed on 10 July 2024)

for details). Both full-text and title searches were performed to comprehensively collect all national seed industry policy texts published during the study period.

Among these data sources, PKULAW and the official website of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs were particularly significant for this study, as they ensured both the historical depth and comprehensive coverage of seed industry policies. PKULAW offers a systematic advantage by providing complete access to the legislative and institutional evolution of agricultural policies over time, thus strengthening the longitudinal rigor of the research. Unlike other databases that may only present partial versions of documents, PKULAW includes all historical amendments to key legislative instruments. For instance, in the case of the Seed Law, the database records every revision since its initial enactment in 2000, covering the four major amendments introduced in 2004, 2013, 2015, and 2021. This comprehensive archival capacity provides irreplaceable data support for analyzing the legislative evolution of the seed industry—for example, the 2015 amendment emphasized protecting the legitimate rights of seed science and technology professionals and strengthening innovation capacity within the sector. In contrast, the official website of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs ensures both the authoritativeness and timeliness of policy coverage, reflecting the most recent priorities of the government in the modernization and sustainability of China’s seed industry.

To ensure the representativeness and accuracy of the policy text data, the following criteria were applied for further screening and cleaning of the policy texts to construct an effective text database: (1) Only national-level seed industry policies publicly released by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, central institutions, the State Council, and its affiliated departments, as well as the National People’s Congress, were selected; (2) Policies that contained the keywords “seed industry” or “seeds” in their titles, or those that, while not containing these keywords, were closely related to innovations in seed industry policy, were read individually to exclude texts with low relevance; (3) The types of texts included laws, regulations, plans, opinions, notices, and measures, while excluding informal decision-making documents such as replies, approvals, industry standards, and policy interpretations. Ultimately, a sample database was established comprising 96 seed industry policies, and the search for policy text was completed on 10 July 2024.

3.2. Research Method

Policy bibliometric analysis is a research method that quantitatively analyzes the structural attributes of policy literature. This method reveals changes in policy discourse, collaborative networks among policy actors, and the structure and evolution of policy systems through semantic analysis of policy text content, as well as quantitative analysis of large samples of structured or semi-structured policy texts [19,20]. This approach helps to understand the patterns of policy evolution and grasp trends in policy development.

Building upon the aforementioned theoretical framework of seed industry policy paradigms, this study examines China’s seed policies through five dimensions: policy issuers, policy discourse, policy issues, policy objectives, and policy instruments, thereby constructing the P-IDIOI model, as shown in Figure 2.

The classification of policy evolution stages serves as the starting point for analyzing policy evolution, with key policies and significant historical events used as time nodes and criteria for categorizing seed industry policies. Thus, from the perspective of policy bibliometric analysis, the main content of policy evolution analysis includes the policy issuers and policy discourse. Building on a content analysis of policy language, this study classifies seed industry policy paradigms based on the overarching characteristics of the policy language system across different periods. It also summarizes the evolution of policy issues, objectives, and tools over time.

In the dimension of policy issuers, social network analysis is employed to visualize the dynamic evolution of the collaborative network for joint seed industry policy releases [21,22,23]. Social network analysis utilizes quantitative indicators to study the relationships among social actors and the overall network structure, providing insights into both the structural characteristics of social networks and the positions of individuals within the network [24,25,26]. By applying social network analysis methods and using software such as Gephi 0.10.1 and Ucinet 6.0, this study analyzes the collaborative network of policy issuers in China’s seed industry using indicators such as network density, average degree, and average weighted degree to explore the status and changes in various issuers within this network [27,28]. In the visualization produced by Gephi, each node represents a policy-issuing department, lines between nodes indicate joint policy issuance relationships, larger nodes imply that a department has participated in a greater number of joint policy releases with other entities, and thicker edges represent more frequent collaboration between departments.

In the dimension of policy discourse, co-word analysis, as a content analysis technique, focuses on keywords within policy texts, using word frequency co-occurrences as the basis for analysis and conducting clustering analysis to reflect the strength of associations between words [29,30,31]. This method visualizes research hotspots and development trends in a specific field to explore the evolutionary patterns and structural relationships of policies [32,33]. In co-word analysis, degree centrality indicates the frequency of keyword co-occurrence; a higher frequency reflects greater influence of that term within the network, signifying that the keyword better represents the core discourse focus of the policy corpus. This paper employs co-word analysis and clustering analysis to uncover hidden knowledge and internal structural relationships within policy texts, analyzing the themes of seed industry policies at different stages to summarize the characteristics and trends of policy discourse evolution.

The specific analysis process is as follows:

In the first step, a stop-word dictionary was constructed by integrating established stop-word lists, such as those developed by the Harbin Institute of Technology and Sichuan University, and a custom dictionary was built to improve segmentation precision. Within the Python 3.1.2 environment, the custom dictionary was imported, and Jieba segmentation was employed to tokenize the collected policy texts. Stop words were removed using the stop-word list. Keywords were then extracted based on the Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency (TF–IDF) algorithm [34,35]. Core keywords were identified from each policy text and used as thematic terms and co-occurrence analysis data. These keywords collectively reflect the key characteristics of the seed industry policies for each corresponding year. Meanwhile, the issuing authorities of each policy text were also extracted.

In the second step, in the dimension of policy discourse, a co-word matrix of keywords was constructed for each policy stage. Based on the TF–IDF algorithm, the keywords extracted from each policy document were merged and filtered using a co-occurrence frequency threshold of three or higher. The keyword matrix was then imported into UCINET for network analysis to obtain the degree centrality values of the keywords. Simultaneously, in the dimension of policy issuers, an adjacency matrix of jointly issued policies was constructed to represent inter-departmental collaboration.

In the third step, in the dimension of policy issuers, network analysis software Gephi was used to visualize the adjacency matrix and to create cooperation network graphs for policy issuers at each stage. In the dimension of policy discourse, cluster analysis was performed using SPSS 21.0 to interpret and illustrate the evolutionary process of China’s seed industry policies across different periods.

The technical route of this study is illustrated in Figure 3.

4. Result

4.1. Stages of Policy Evolution

China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. In response to the challenges of marketization and globalization, significant adjustments have been made to the seed industry policy framework. Marketization refers to enabling the market to play a primary role in resource allocation, reducing government intervention, and promoting the free and rational flow of factors through competitive mechanisms to improve resource allocation efficiency [36]. Globalization involves the transformation of market, production, and consumption patterns across nations through trade, investment, and technology transfer, compelling enterprises and countries to adapt to international competition [37].

This study conducts a statistical analysis of 96 central-level seed industry policy documents in China to illustrate the temporal dynamics of policy issuance. To clearly present these temporal changes, key policies and significant historical events serve as time nodes and classification criteria. The evolution of China’s seed industry policies from 2000 to 2024 can be divided into three stages: preliminary adjustment (2000–2010), deep adjustment (2011–2020), and comprehensive adjustment (2021–2024), as shown in Figure 4.

Based on the stage divisions, we statistically analyzed the number of policies issued. Overall, the issuance of seed industry policies exhibits a fluctuating upward trend, with three peaks of significant growth occurring in 2004, 2012, and 2021. The number of policy issuances has shown a stable growth pattern over these stages, as illustrated in Figure 5. The average annual numbers of policies for each stage were 2.3, 4.3, and 7.5, respectively. The second stage saw a doubling in the number of policies compared to the first stage, while the third stage approached a quadrupling compared to the first stage. This indicates an increasing emphasis on seed industry development and food security in China, alongside a strengthening capacity to respond to marketization and globalization. The peak in policy issuance in 2021 is closely related to key policies and significant time points, aligning closely with the overall trajectory of policy evolution.

4.2. Evolution of the Cooperative Network Among Policy Issuers

The policy issuers, also known as policymaking entities, are the institutions or organizations that issue relevant policy documents according to their legal authority and procedures. In China, the primary issuers of seed industry policies are official entities, including the ruling party, legislative bodies, and administrative agencies. The policy issuers in China’s seed industry are diverse and interconnected through multiple network relationships. Analyzing the departments responsible for policy issuance makes it possible to identify the core entities shaping seed policies and to explore how interdepartmental cooperation networks have evolved in response to marketization and globalization.

Based on the division of stages, this study employs social network analysis (SNA) using Ucinet and Gephi software to analyze the cooperative networks of joint policy issuers during the preliminary adjustment stage, deep adjustment stage, and comprehensive adjustment stage. The attributes of the cooperative networks across the three stages are presented in

Table 2. Attributes of the Collaboration Network.

Variable	2000–2010	2011–2020	2021–2024
Number of Co-authored Papers	9	8	13
Co-authored Papers/Total Policies	39%	19%	43%
Number of Nodes	4	9	20
Average Degree	1	3.78	4.6
Average Weighted Degree	4.5	5.78	8.7
Network Density	0.167	0.278	0.124
Centrality Index	0	0.357	0.608

. The number of nodes reveals the size of the network, while network density indicates the strength of connections between nodes. Average degree and average weighted degree reflect the extent of direct connections between nodes; average degree reflects the average number of direct connections each node has, while average weighted degree accounts for the frequency of direct connections. The centrality index indicates the extent to which the network is concentrated around specific nodes; a higher centrality index indicates a trend toward a more centralized structure, while a lower centrality index suggests a more balanced structure [38]. The cooperative networks of joint issuers across the three stages are illustrated in Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8. In these figures, the nodes represent the issuing departments, and the lines between nodes indicate the existence of a joint issuance relationship. Larger nodes indicate that a department has a higher frequency of joint issuances with other departments, while thicker lines represent a greater number of joint issuances between two departments.

(1)

Cooperative Networks during the Preliminary Adjustment Period (2000–2010)

In this stage, out of 23 seed industry policies, 9 were issued collaboratively, all involving two departments. Four entities participated in the collaborative network: the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, the State Council, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce. In this stage, all nodes in the collaborative network were directly connected to each other, with both network density and centrality being relatively low. The connections among issuing departments were loose, and the power among the departments was relatively balanced, resulting in a loose and balanced network structure.

(2)

Cooperative Networks during the Deepening Adjustment Period (2011–2020)

During this stage, the number of seed industry policies increased to 43, with 19% of these policies being issued collaboratively. Among the 8 collaboratively issued policies, 2 involved three departments, 1 involved four departments, 1 involved five departments, and 4 were jointly published by two departments. This stage saw the introduction of new issuing entities, with a total of 9 participants in the collaborative network. Compared to the initial phase, the network size expanded, and its structure changed, with both network density and centrality increasing. The cooperative relationships among issuing entities became tighter, with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Science and Technology taking the lead, followed by the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security. The network structure became more interconnected, with the Ministry of Agriculture’s node significantly expanding, highlighting its core position. In contrast to the previous stage, the collaborative network in this phase exhibited a tight and centralized structure.

(3)

Cooperative Networks during the Comprehensive Adjustment Period (2021–2024)

In this stage, the proportion of collaboratively issued policies rose to 43%. Among the 9 jointly published policies, there was 1 involving four departments, 1 involving five departments, and 3 involving seven departments. The number of issuing entities significantly increased, with a total of 20 participants in the collaborative network, marking the highest number of entities across the three stages. Compared to the initial and deepening reform phases, the collaborative network expanded dramatically during this leap phase, with new participants such as the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the National Intellectual Property Administration, and the National Financial Regulatory Administration joining the network. Although network density decreased, the centrality index rose to 0.608, with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs gradually occupying a core position in the network, resulting in a multi-layered structure centered around this ministry. Compared to the previous stage, the collaborative network in this phase exhibited a loose and centralized structure. This indicates that the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs holds a significant leading role in the formulation of seed industry policies and exerts considerable influence in the policy development process. Meanwhile, the participation of an increasing number of entities highlights that cross-departmental coordination has become increasingly important in advancing the seed industry’s development.

By comparing the cooperative attributes and networks across the three stages, it can be observed that over time, the scale of collaborative networks among joint policy issuers has shown a continuous expansion trend. The number of joint publishing entities has increased from 4 during the Preliminary Adjustment Period to 20 during the Comprehensive Adjustment Period, resulting in increasingly tighter cooperation and more complex network structures. The density values of the collaborative networks among joint policy issuers are 0.167, 0.278, and 0.124, indicating a trend of first rising and then falling, with the peak density reached during the Deepening Adjustment Period, followed by a decline in the Comprehensive Adjustment Period. Figure 6 and Figure 7 illustrate that during the Deepening Adjustment Period, the core joint publishing entities included the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Education. As the number of publications and publishing entities gradually increased, the degree of cooperation among these entities peaked during this stage. In the Comprehensive Adjustment Period, a significant influx of new publishing entities led to a substantial expansion of the network, while the network density decreased due to dilution. The centrality gradually increased, with the collaborative network evolving to center around the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. In summary, the cooperative network has evolved from a loose and balanced structure to a tight and centralized structure, and then back to a loose and centralized structure. This pattern demonstrates that the network of policy issuers is characterized by a core position occupied by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, with multiple departments—such as the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the State Administration for Market Regulation—collaborating closely in the formulation of seed industry policies. It reflects a diversified yet increasingly centralized development trend, suggesting that cross-departmental collaboration and joint policy formulation have become key operational mechanisms in China’s seed industry policymaking.

4.3. Evolution of Policy Discourse

The discourse system surrounding seed industry policies is fundamental to understanding the evolution of policy paradigms. Analyzing key policy texts since the early 21st century reveals substantial shifts in China’s seed industry policy discourse (see Table 2,

Table 3. High-Frequency Keywords in Seed Industry Policies during the Preliminary Adjustment Period (2000–2010).

Keyword	Frequency	Centrality	Keyword	Frequency	Centrality	Keyword	Frequency	Centrality
Seed	18	33	Breeding	21	21	Subsidy	3	18
Variety	10	33	Breeding and Selection	21	21	System	4	17
Promotion	9	33	Management	21	21	Project	4	17
Quality Seed	13	30	Construction	21	21	Inspection	3	17
Production	8	29	Support	20	20	Seed Industry	5	16
Quality	5	29	Aquaculture	20	20	Administration	5	16
Germplasm Resources	7	25	Plants and Animals	20	20	Enterprise	3	15
Crops	5	25	New Varieties	19	19	Seed Law	3	15
Technology	3	24	Standards	18	18	Cultivation	3	15
Base	8	23	Licenses	18	18	Market Access	4	15
Seed Projects	8	23	Approval	18	18	Law Enforcement	3	13
Livestock	6	22	Market Regulation	18	18

and

Table 4. High-Frequency Keywords in Seed Industry Policies during the Deepening Adjustment Period (2011–2020).

Keywords	Frequency	Centrality	Keywords	Frequency	Centrality	Keywords	Frequency	Centrality
Seed Industry	34	37	Superior Varieties	16	37	Management	7	24
Modern Seed Industry	24	37	Seed Production	15	36	Public Welfare	6	29
Bases	23	37	Integration of Breeding, Propagation, and Promotion (IBPP)	13	34	Propagation	6	27
Germplasm Resources	23	37	Production	12	29	Seed Law	6	26
Varieties	23	36	Cultivation	11	34	Mechanism	5	30
Breeding	23	36	Protection	11	28	Technology	5	29
Seeds	22	36	System	11	34	Higher Education Institutions	5	27
Enterprises	20	37	Research Institutes	10	34	Talent	4	27
New Varieties	19	37	Collaborative Research	9	31	Scientific Research	4	26
Crops	18	37	Research Outcomes	9	30	Biological Breeding	4	26
Livestock and Poultry	17	36	Resources	8	27	Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)	4	26
Innovation	16	36	Equity Distribution	7	28	Rule of Law in Seed Management	4	22
Development	16	37	Genetics	7	26

and Figure 9, Figure 10 and Figure 11). Changes within this discourse system are closely reflected in different periods of seed industry development, capturing variations in the authority’s understanding of seed policy issues and shifts in policy value orientations. These, in turn, provide insights into policy objectives and the tools employed to achieve them.

(1)

Policy Discourse during the Preliminary Adjustment Period (2000–2010)

The 2000 Seed Law marked a critical milestone in China’s seed industry market-oriented reform. It not only regulated China’s seed market but also laid a vital legal foundation for China’s accession to the WTO in 2001. This was aimed at meeting the requirements of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture to liberalize the agricultural product market and adapt to the competitive environment of the international seed industry.

During the Preliminary Adjustment Period, a total of 23 policy documents were analyzed. Using the term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) algorithm, keywords were extracted from each policy document, and those with a co-occurrence frequency of three or more were merged and filtered. The resulting keyword matrix was imported into Ucinet for analysis, yielding the keyword degree centrality, as shown in Table 3. It can be observed that terms such as “seed,” “variety,” “promotion,” “improved seed,” and “production” had high frequencies and centralities, indicating their significant positions within the network. Among these, “seed” had the highest frequency and centrality, positioning it as the core of the entire network. The frequencies and centralities related to the seed industry were still low, reflecting the limited number of dedicated seed policies issued during this stage. This indicates that the seed industry was still in the planning phase, with an incomplete policy framework that primarily focused on seed management and the promotion of improved varieties.

This study further employs cluster analysis to reflect the relationships among the thematic keywords. Through co-word clustering, 35 high-frequency thematic keywords formed two thematic groups, representing the key focus and direction of seed industry policies during this stage, as illustrated in Figure 9. To accurately understand the meaning of these groups, the policy texts represented by each thematic keyword were closely examined, and the themes of this stage were summarized in conjunction with Figure 9.

System for Breeding and Promoting Quality Varieties: This phase emphasizes the breeding and promotion of quality varieties. The central government employs various policy tools, including subsidies for quality seeds, construction of major engineering projects, establishment of breeding bases, construction of seed processing facilities, and support for key area projects. Specific initiatives include the implementation of seed projects, livestock and poultry quality variety projects, and “vegetable basket” projects, along with technology promotion projects. A special fund is established to support the breeding and promotion of superior plant and animal varieties, and a subsidy system for quality seeds is introduced. Efforts are focused on enhancing the breeding capacity for food crops and researching and developing techniques for identifying and constructing superior germplasm resources for major crops, forestry, grassland, livestock, poultry, and aquaculture. These initiatives aim to increase financial and technological investments through multiple channels, thereby creating favorable conditions for the breeding and promotion of quality varieties and the development of the seed industry.

Seed Management System: Clustering analysis indicates that the seed industry policies in this phase focus on reforming the seed management system. This includes reforms in the management system of seed enterprises, promoting the separation of government and enterprise functions in seed management, and emphasizing the standardization of seed production management, seed marketing management, and seed production base management. The Seed Law of 2000 and 2004 explicitly established a licensing system for seed production and marketing, enhancing the inspection and supervision of seed quality. The 2006 document “Opinions on Promoting Seed Management System Reform and Strengthening Market Supervision” clearly stipulates strict market access for enterprises and the implementation of seed quality labeling systems, reinforcing market supervision of seeds. During this period, market-oriented reforms were driven by WTO rules, such as the Agriculture Agreement, and global competition in the seed sector. Legal measures—including market access regulations, market supervision, and the improvement of legal frameworks—completely transformed the previously government-dominant seed industry model. A seed market environment primarily characterized by domestic Chinese enterprises with limited foreign capital entry was initially established, laying a solid foundation for the development of the seed industry and promoting its market-oriented growth.

(2)

Policy Discourse during the Deepening Adjustment Period (2011–2020)

Following China’s accession to the WTO, the seed industry faced significant challenges from the international market. To counter the impacts of marketization and globalization, the State Council issued the “Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Modern Crop Seed Industry” in 2011, initiating a new wave of seed industry reform. The revision of the Regulations for the Protection of New Plant Varieties in 2014 and the Seed Law in 2015 not only strengthened the protection and innovation of domestically developed varieties (elite seeds) but also laid a crucial institutional foundation for China’s accession to the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) in 2016. This was part of efforts to address technological barriers posed by global seed industry giants in areas such as genetically modified organisms and molecular breeding, contributing to national food security.

During the deep adjustment phase, a total of 43 policy documents were analyzed. The frequency of high-frequency keywords and their degree centrality are presented in Table 4. In this phase, keywords such as seed industry, modern seed industry, breeding bases, and germplasm resources exhibited high frequencies and centrality, indicating their significant roles within the network. Among these, “seed industry” had the highest frequency and centrality, followed closely by “modern seed industry,” establishing them as central components of the entire network. This reflects the focus of this phase on the development of the modern seed industry, emphasizing the construction of breeding bases and the protection and utilization of germplasm resources. In this stage, the seed industry replaced “seeds” as the network’s central theme, highlighting a gradual refinement of the seed policy framework.

Through co-word clustering, 38 high-frequency keywords were grouped into three thematic clusters. To accurately interpret the meaning of these groups, a close reading of the policy documents associated with each keyword was conducted, alongside a summary of the themes in this phase as illustrated in Figure 10.

Reform and Innovation in the Seed Industry System: Clustering analysis indicates that the policy characteristic of this phase centers on reform and innovation in the seed industry. Documents such as “Opinions on Deepening the Reform of the Seed Industry System to Enhance Innovation Capability” and “Guidance on Expanding Trials for Talent Development and Research Achievements in the Seed Industry” were successively released. These documents guide the development of seed enterprises through funding and corporate reforms, support the construction of integrated seed enterprises, and strengthen the role of seed firms as leaders in technological innovation. They also promote talent cultivation in the seed industry, advance reforms in the rights and interests of research outcomes, and improve systems for sharing among achievement contributors, enhancing the innovative enthusiasm of research personnel. Increased financial investment from the national budget aims to bolster foundational public research in research institutes and higher education institutions. Additionally, mechanisms for collaborative research in the seed industry are being established to drive major collaborative projects on improved varieties and to cultivate and promote high-quality, high-yield, multi-resistant, and broadly adaptable new varieties. Policies incentivizing key seed production counties are implemented to facilitate the development of advantageous seed production bases. Continuous investments in funding, talent development, and infrastructure are creating a favorable environment for innovation in the seed industry.

Capacity Building in Biotechnological Breeding: This phase places significant emphasis on the research and application of biotechnological breeding techniques. Projects aimed at capacity building and industrialization in biotechnological breeding, along with major initiatives for cultivating genetically modified organisms (GMOs), are being implemented to enhance the development of biotechnological breeding techniques. Simultaneously, attention is directed toward establishing a biosafety guarantee system for GMOs.

Genetic Resource Protection System: This phase emphasizes the improvement of systems for preserving crop germplasm resources and livestock genetic resources, advancing the conservation and utilization of livestock genetic resources. In 2019, the General Office of the State Council issued the “Opinions on Strengthening the Protection and Utilization of Agricultural Germplasm Resources,” establishing a multi-layered system for collection and conservation, diversified development and utilization, and multi-channel policy support. This framework aimed to build a modern seed industry powerhouse and safeguard national food security. During this phase, driven by international technological barriers, seed industry reform shifted from predominantly regulatory control to a more guiding policy approach. The focus was on fostering an innovative environment within the seed industry, responding to international competition and technological barriers, and gradually breaking technological monopolies to ensure food security.

(3)

Policy Discourse during the Comprehensive Adjustment Period (2021–2024)

Following significant breakthroughs in molecular breeding technologies, the international market penetration of China’s seed industry has continued to strengthen. Amid the wave of global scientific and technological globalization, China still faces challenges related to seed sourcing and core technology restrictions. In 2021, the Second Plenary Session of the Central Committee for Deepening Overall Reform approved the “Revitalization Action Plan for the Seed Industry,” which explicitly elevated seed source security to a strategic level of national security. This marked the start of a comprehensive push for seed industry revitalization and major reforms, entering a stage of thorough adjustment aimed at countering global seed industry competition, breaking through core technological barriers, and enhancing China’s international competitiveness.

During the comprehensive adjustment phase, a total of 30 policy documents were analyzed. The frequency and degree centrality of high-frequency keywords are presented in

Table 5. High-Frequency Keywords in Seed Industry Policies during the Comprehensive Adjustment Period (2021–2024).

Keywords	Frequency	Centrality	Keywords	Frequency	Centrality	Keywords	Frequency	Centrality
Seed Industry	22	42	Variety	8	35	Modern Seed Industry	7	29
Seed Industry Revitalization	19	42	Aquaculture	6	35	Conservation	6	29
Breeding	17	42	Core Technology	6	34	Science and Technology	5	29
Germplasm Resources	16	41	Construction	6	34	Combating Infringement	5	29
Livestock and Poultry	13	41	Crops	5	34	Leading Enterprises	3	29
Improved Varieties	13	40	Seeds	7	33	Precision	5	27
Base	12	40	Innovation	6	33	Mechanism	5	26
R&D	7	40	Promotion and Application	6	33	Service	4	26
Biological Breeding	12	39	Seed Sources	6	33	Major Projects	4	25
Tackling Key Issues	9	39	Supervision	6	33	New Varieties	3	23
Seed Production	10	38	Industrialization	6	33	Formation Enterprises	3	22
Propagation	7	38	Census	5	32	Talent	3	21
Resource Bank	9	37	Subsidy	5	32	New Variety Rights	3	18
Intellectual Property	7	37	Enterprises	5	32
Joint Tackling	9	35	Southern Breeding	5	30

. In this stage, “seed industry revitalization” emerged as a new high-frequency, high-centrality keyword, reflecting a shift in the focus of seed industry policies toward promoting revitalization. Throughout the previous two phases, keywords such as “genetic resources,” “bases,” “quality seed,” and “breeding” remained of significant importance within the network, and this policy orientation continued into the third phase. Additionally, keywords such as “research and development,” “key breakthroughs,” “joint efforts,” and “core technologies” occupied important positions in the network, indicating that policies are focused on guiding the research and application of core technologies in the seed industry.

Through co-word clustering, 43 high-frequency keywords were grouped into three thematic clusters. To accurately interpret the meaning of these groups, a close reading of the policy documents representative of each keyword was conducted, along with a summary of the themes in this phase as illustrated in Figure 11.

Innovation in Seed Industry Science and Technology and Its Promotion: This phase emphasizes technological independence and strength in the seed industry, focusing on breakthroughs in breeding innovation, the development of critical core technologies, and collaborative efforts to apply quality varieties. Major initiatives include the implementation of key projects in biological breeding, post-subsidy policies for major variety development and promotion, integrated pilot projects for breeding application, a new round of genetic improvement plans for livestock and poultry, and the establishment of innovation bases and platforms for the seed industry. These initiatives aim to enhance the foundational research and industrial application capabilities of breeding technology, further increasing attention to breeding innovation capacity, thereby fostering self-reliance and strength in the seed sector. This phase reflects a heightened focus on technological innovation at the source of the seed industry and addresses key core technologies along the industrial chain, thereby underscoring the significance of autonomous innovation capabilities.

High-Quality Development of Leading Seed Enterprises: This stage emphasizes supporting leading seed enterprises through focused actions. The document “Notice on Supporting the Development of National Seed Industry Leading Enterprises” explicitly encourages the aggregation of resources, technology, talent, capital, and other elements toward key competitive enterprises. The emphasis is placed on implementing supportive policies, building platforms, and providing financial services to enhance the core R&D capabilities, driving power, and international competitiveness of leading enterprises. This approach promotes deep integration between research and production as well as varieties and markets, fostering leapfrog development in the seed industry.

Intellectual Property Protection System in the Seed Industry: This phase places importance on providing policy guidance for the protection of intellectual property rights in the seed industry. Policies such as “Notice on Carrying Out Special Rectification Actions for the Protection of Seed Industry Intellectual Property Rights” and “Guidance on Protecting Seed Industry Intellectual Property Rights and Combatting Counterfeit and Substandard Products to Create a Positive Environment for Seed Industry Revitalization” have been introduced. These policies aim to enhance the protection of intellectual property rights in the seed industry, combat infringement, stimulate original innovation, strengthen market supervision, protect new variety rights, and purify the seed market, thereby supporting the cultivation and transformation of new varieties and creating a favorable environment for seed industry revitalization. During this phase, seed industry reform was driven by international technological barriers and the seed sourcing bottleneck crisis. Policies focused on guiding measures such as tax incentives and fiscal support, alongside service-oriented policies that established innovation platforms, service networks, and financial services—creating an environment conducive to seed industry revitalization and technological innovation. Emphasis was placed on improving innovation services within the seed sector, as well as advancing government mechanisms to promote innovation and overcome critical technological restrictions related to seed sourcing.

4.4. Evolution of Policy Paradigms

Based on content analysis of the language used in seed industry policies and in consideration of the overall characteristics of the policy language system across different periods, this paper categorizes China’s seed industry policies since the 21st century into three main policy paradigms: the Initial Adjustment Period with a focus on market-oriented transformation of the seed industry (2000–2010), the Deepening Adjustment Period emphasizing responses to globalization (2011–2020), and the Comprehensive Modernization Period characterized by a self-strengthening paradigm driven by modernization efforts (2021–present). Under these different paradigms, the recognition of the core contradictions within China’s seed sector (policy issues), the policy objectives (policy orientation), and the means to address problems (policy tools) have undergone profound transformations (see

Table 6. Evolution of Policy Paradigms.

Historical Stage	Policy Issues	Policy Objectives	Policy Tools
Initial Adjustment Period (2000–2010)	Underdeveloped market mechanisms, inadequate seed market regulation, insufficient seed supply capacity	Reform and improve seed management systems, strengthen seed market regulation, enhance seed supply capacity	Market access, market regulation, legal frameworks, financial support including subsidies for elite varieties and major projects such as seed industry projects, infrastructure construction such as breeding bases and seed processing facilities
Deepening Adjustment Period (2011–2020)	Insufficient protection and utilization of germplasm resources, lagging biological breeding technologies domestically, underlying systemic issues within the seed industry	Deepen seed industry reform, strengthen germplasm resource protection and utilization, improve breeding innovation capabilities	Building research environment through R&D platforms, increased funding for biological breeding capacity development and industrialization projects, talent cultivation, infrastructure development including national germplasm resource bank, germplasm big data platforms, seed production bases; enhancing information services; offering tax incentives; protecting intellectual property; regulating through legal measures; developing markets
Comprehensive Adjustment Period (2021–2024)	Bottlenecks in seed sources, limited international competitiveness of seed enterprises, low level of intellectual property protection for breeding innovations	Achieve technological independence and self-reliance in the seed industry, maintain control and self-sufficiency over seed sources	Constructing innovation environment with platforms; increasing funding for major biological breeding projects, variety research, and promotion subsidies; supporting national seed industry large enterprises; infrastructure development including seed industry innovation bases and core breeding bases; talent cultivation; information services; tax incentives; strengthening intellectual property protections including establishing substantive derivative variety systems; financial services; regulatory measures; market regulation

).

(1)

Recognition of Policy Issues

Policy issues are objective realities, yet they are simultaneously influenced by policy authority (the Policy issuers) and the prioritization within the policy agenda. As Hall asserts, shifts in the concepts of policy authority are prerequisites for the transition of policy paradigms [15]. Seed industry policy issues reflect pressures stemming from marketization and globalization. When these pressures are perceived as anomalies within the policy field, they trigger different policy evolution pathways across various domains.

Following China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, the country began fulfilling commitments under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, such as opening its agricultural markets. This integration of domestic and international markets led China’s seed industry to rapidly embed itself within the global seed market. With market liberalization, foreign investment entered the sector, the number of market players increased, and industry competition intensified. Some regions experienced disorderly market behavior, including the circulation of counterfeit and inferior seeds and unregulated business practices. The most prominent issues in the seed sector at the time were an underdeveloped market mechanism, insufficient market supervision, and inadequate capacity to supply high-quality seed varieties.

As globalization accelerated, alongside advances in biotechnology and the implementation of reform policies, new challenges emerged for China’s seed industry. Biological breeding technologies gradually became dominant in the global development of seed science and technology. Major multinational corporations, including Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer, and Limagrain, secured absolute advantages in biotechnology research, genetically modified organism (GMO) technology, molecular marker applications, and data-driven breeding innovation. Their proactive expansion into China’s seed market risked forming oligopolistic or monopolistic structures, thereby exerting downward pressure on domestic seed prices and market share. At the same time, foreign seed enterprises—through joint ventures, collaborations, sponsorships, or the establishment of local research institutions—gained relatively “fair” access to Chinese research and germplasm resources, which resulted in the gradual erosion of China’s high-quality genetic resources. The strong dependence on external sources for key germplasm further posed a severe threat to national food security. During this period of reform deepening, issues such as insufficient germplasm conservation and utilization, coupled with lagging progress in biological breeding technologies, became increasingly urgent challenges to address. As biotechnological reform accelerated, more intrinsic structural problems within the seed industry surfaced, rendering policy responses increasingly complex.

As economic globalization continued to deepen, the trend of monopolization in the international seed industry intensified, while escalating uncertainties in global relations added further pressure to China’s seed sector. By 2021, the global seed industry had entered the “Breeding 4.0” era, characterized by the integration of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and big data applications in breeding. The wave of mergers and acquisitions among international seed companies led to an oligopolistic global landscape. By the end of 2021, China had more than 7000 crop seed enterprises, yet the top ten companies achieved combined annual sales of approximately 10 billion yuan (roughly USD 1.55 billion), accounting for only about 13% of the domestic market. The small scale of these enterprises, dispersed resources, and the lack of large-scale, integrated seed corporations encompassing biotechnology, digitalization, and informatics restricted China’s participation in global competition. By 2023, multinational corporations such as Bayer (Germany) and Corteva (USA) had established dominant positions, collectively controlling over 40% of the global seed market. A small number of leading enterprises thus occupied the entire value chain of the global seed industry, possessing core breeding technologies and germplasm resources, while controlling a substantial share of the world’s seed supply. This phenomenon indicated that a significant portion of global food security governance had effectively shifted into the hands of a few powerful seed conglomerates. Leveraging their abundant capital, advanced technologies, comprehensive management systems, and highly integrated industrial chains, biotechnology giants such as Bayer captured a considerable share of China’s crop seed market. Consequently, China’s reliance on foreign seeds increased, exacerbating critical “bottleneck” issues in seed sourcing. During this reform stage, key challenges included restricted access to critical seed resources, insufficient international competitiveness of domestic seed enterprises, and inadequate protection of intellectual property rights in breeding innovation—all urgent areas in need of resolution.

(2)

Positioning of Policy Objectives

Policy objectives refer to the goals that policymakers aim to achieve through policy actions designed to address specific issues. During the formulation of China’s seed industry policies, the value orientation of central decision-makers frequently determines shifts in the overarching policy objectives. Changes in policy objectives reflect transformations in the policy discourse followed by policymakers, driving the paradigm shift in seed industry policy to ensure China’s seed security and food security.

In the initial adjustment period, a series of seed industry policies were primarily oriented towards supporting the market-oriented reform of the seed sector. The policy goals focused on reforming and improving seed management systems, strengthening market regulation, and enhancing the capacity to supply high-quality seeds. For instance, the 2000 Seed Law aimed to safeguard the legal rights of varieties breeders and seed producers, traders, and users, while improving seed quality standards. In 2006, the General Office of the State Council released the “Opinions on Promoting the Reform of the Seed Management System and Strengthening Market Supervision,” explicitly emphasizing the need to accelerate seed system reform in accordance with the requirements of establishing a socialist market economy, including separating government from enterprise, strengthening management, standardizing the legal framework, and regulating seed market order.

As market-oriented reforms progressed, China developed a more robust seed industry system, and the degree of marketization continued to increase. During this period, key policy objectives shifted toward deepening reform: strengthening the protection and utilization of germplasm resources, enhancing breeding innovation capacity, and reforming the seed industry system. In 2011, China launched a new round of seed industry reform, with the State Council issuing the “Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Modern Crop Seed Industry” in 2011, and the “Opinions on Deepening the Reform of the Seed Industry System and Enhancing Innovation Capacity” in 2013. These aimed to deepen institutional reforms and improve technological innovation capabilities. The 2015 revision of the Seed Law aimed to protect the lawful rights and interests of seed industry scientific and technological personnel, fostering stronger innovation capacity.

The year 2021 represented a pivotal turning point for the comprehensive revitalization of China’s seed industry. Strengthening the development of indigenous seed enterprises, enhancing food production self-sufficiency, and ensuring national control over the nation’s “rice bowl” became urgent strategic priorities. During this phase of systematic adjustment, the overarching goal of China’s seed policy was to achieve technological independence and self-reliance in seed sources. The Seed Industry Revitalization Action Plan elevated seed source security to a strategic component of national security, explicitly outlining overarching objectives to attain technological self-reliance and seed-source independence. Specific targets included fostering innovation-driven breakthroughs, supporting leading enterprises, and improving seed production bases. In 2022, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized, during a meeting with members of the agricultural, social welfare, and social security committees of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, that “seed source security was closely related to national security” and that China must resolutely strengthen its seed industry to achieve scientific and technological self-reliance and independence in seed sources.

(3)

Selection of Policy Tools

Policy tools refer to the specific means and methods employed by authorities to address social issues or achieve policy objectives. Since the 21st century, in response to the shocks of marketization and globalization, China’s seed industry policy tools have gradually been refined. At each stage, increasingly sophisticated combinations of policy tools have been adopted, evolving toward facilitating the marketization and globalization of the seed industry to ensure food security.

During the initial adjustment period, the main policy tools for supporting the transformation toward a market-oriented seed industry included market access, market regulation, improvement of legal and regulatory frameworks, financial support, and infrastructure development. Key measures comprised standardizing seed production and operation entities, regulating seed quality agencies, conducting seed quality sampling and testing, addressing infringement cases, subsidizing excellent seed varieties, implementing major projects such as the “Seed Industry Project,” establishing seed breeding bases, developing seed processing facilities, and supporting key projects in priority areas. These measures significantly addressed issues such as the underdeveloped market mechanism, inadequate regulation, disorderly market order, and insufficient seed supply capacity.

With increasing global competition in agricultural product trade, China faced pressures related to WTO rules and the limitations of “yellow box” support policies, alongside risks of frequent lawsuits from WTO member countries that are export-oriented. During the deepening adjustment phase, China began exploring reforms under international trade frameworks—modifying “yellow box” policies and expanding the scope of “green box” support. Given WTO restrictions on seed exports and related provisions, there was a shift toward market-oriented policies, emphasizing the decisive role of markets in resource allocation and advocating for streamlined administrative procedures and deregulation. The government’s role transitioned from dominance, planning, and direct involvement toward improving innovative systems, establishing innovation platforms, and providing innovative services. In the modern seed industry development paradigm of the deepening adjustment period, policy tools primarily included infrastructure for scientific research, financial investment, talent development, infrastructure construction, information services, tax incentives, intellectual property protections, legal regulation, and market development. Major measures involved building capabilities for biological breeding and industrialization projects, supporting major GMO variety breeding initiatives, establishing national germplasm resource banks, creating big data platforms for germplasm resources, improving germplasm conservation registers, developing research and development platforms, rewarding and supporting advantageous seed production bases in key counties, encouraging independent innovation in seed enterprises, applying tax incentives to breeding, propagation, and dissemination” integrated enterprises, and protecting breeding results obtained via patents. These measures played a vital role in strengthening germplasm resource conservation and utilization and enhancing breeding innovation capacity.

During the comprehensive adjustment stage, the seed revitalization action policy relied heavily on tools such as constructing an innovation environment, financial investment, infrastructure development, talent cultivation, information services, tax incentives, intellectual property protections, financial services, legal regulation, and market regulation. Key initiatives included germplasm resource census and conservation, funding for production performance testing, major biological breeding projects, subsidies for major variety research and promotion, pilot programs integrating variety development and application, a new round of genetic improvement plans for livestock and poultry, projects to upgrade the modern seed industry, long-term research and development pilots, “Unveiling the List” and “Provincial-Departmental Linkage system, establishment of seed industry innovation bases and platforms, support for national seed enterprises, recognition of regional superior variety breeding bases, construction of core breeding bases at the national level, breeding bases for livestock and aquatic superior varieties, rewards for large-scale seed-producing counties, and system for substantively deriving new varieties. These measures are of great significance for advancing the seed industry, realizing technological independence, and maintaining independent and controllable seed sources.

5. Policy Evolution Logic

Based on the clustering results of high-frequency keywords across different periods of seed industry policies, it is evident that since the 21st century, in response to marketization and globalization, the attention of the central government toward seed industry policies has shifted. This transition started with the initial adjustment phase, which focused on the breeding and promotion system for quality seeds and the seed management system, progressed to the deepening adjustment phase that prioritized systemic reform and innovation in the seed industry, capacity building in biological breeding, and the protection of genetic resources, and culminated in the comprehensive adjustment phase, where the emphasis shifted to scientific and technological innovation in the seed industry, the high-quality development of leading seed enterprises, and the establishment of an intellectual property protection system for the seed industry. These changes reflect the underlying logic of the evolution of China’s seed industry policies, primarily manifested in three aspects: management philosophy, support for technological innovation, and the breeding and promotion of quality seeds, as illustrated in Figure 12.

5.1. Management Philosophy: From Regulation to Service

The management philosophy of seed industry policies is determined by the development strategy and tasks relevant to specific periods. In the initial adjustment phase, strategic initiatives such as the launch of seed projects resulted in significant emphasis on reforms to the seed management system, with the enactment and improvement of the Seed Law focusing on regulatory frameworks to advance market-oriented development, displaying a tendency of “strong regulation with weak guidance and service.” In the deepening adjustment phase, the launch of modern seed industry strategies marked systemic reform and innovation as key focal points, with an emphasis on further improving the Seed Law to promote governance through law, coupled with a flexible, guiding policy approach to foster an innovative development environment in the seed industry, reflecting a characteristic of “strong guidance with weak regulation and service.” As the comprehensive adjustment phase commenced, the initiation of the seed industry revitalization strategy brought forth a focus on scientific and technological innovation in seed research and application, the high-quality development of leading seed enterprises, among other priorities, aiming to provide detailed services through major projects, engineering initiatives, and innovation and service platforms to support research breakthroughs and application in the industry. Consequently, this phase gradually transformed toward a model characterized by “strong service with weak regulation.”

5.2. Support for Technological Innovation: From Single to Diverse Innovation

From the initial adjustment phase to the comprehensive adjustment phase, the support for technological innovation has shown a steady upward trend. Support for seed enterprises and the cultivation of innovative talent began to exhibit a stable evolution starting from the deepening adjustment phase, highlighting China’s commitment to fostering innovation and developing talent within the seed industry. In terms of specific technological projects, the initial phase guided the development of transgenic varieties, while the deepening adjustment phase gradually shifted the focus toward innovations in biological breeding technologies. Moreover, increasing attention was given to supporting fundamental research in breeding, innovations in significant breeding techniques and materials, collaborative breakthroughs in research, and the development of research infrastructure. Later phases witnessed enhancements in the intellectual property protection system, sharing national research facility platforms, and the establishment of collaborative innovation entities integrating industry, academia, and research.

5.3. Breeding and Promotion of Quality Seeds: Progressing from Low to High Levels

The breeding and promotion of quality seeds exhibit a gradual evolutionary trend, reflecting China’s determination to “extract productivity from quality seeds.” The initial adjustment phase emphasized promoting new varieties and technologies through outreach, training, and technical guidance, establishing subsidy systems for quality seed promotion, and constructing breeding bases and processing facilities to improve the coverage of quality seeds. The deepening adjustment phase began to focus on key technology developments in molecular design breeding and efficient seed production while nurturing and promoting breakthrough varieties that adapt to mechanized production, are high-yield, quality-oriented, and resistant to multiple stresses. Support for large-scale seed breeding bases, national breeding and seed production bases, and the establishment of standardized and mechanized seed production facilities were enhanced. In the comprehensive adjustment phase, attention shifted to the breeding and promotion of high-yield, quality breakthrough varieties, the recognition of seed production counties and regional quality seed breeding bases, and financial support for the construction and application of core breeding farms and breeding bases for livestock and aquatic species. In the promotion of quality seeds, there has been a shift from importing quality varieties to promoting independently bred high-yield, quality breakthrough varieties, continually enhancing the quality and performance of the seeds being developed and promoted. The support for constructing quality seed breeding bases has steadily increased, with a growing emphasis on high-level construction of seed industry bases and fine-tuned development in key areas. Moreover, there is an increasing focus on key core technology breakthroughs and applications in the industrialization processes involved in breeding and promoting quality seeds.

6. Discussion

Quantitative analysis of China’s national seed industry policies since the 21st century reveals that while largely consistent with broader trends in marketization and globalization, these policies exhibit distinctive features.

From the perspective of policy evolution, some authors have begun to address the stages of seed industry policy evolution, but they have not integrated the contexts of marketization and globalization. Our study classifies these stages within the backdrop of China’s marketized food security and global commodity trade.

The evolution of the cooperative structure among policy actors reflects the increasing capacity of policymaking entities to respond to marketization and globalization. Using social network analysis, our findings indicate the importance of cross-departmental cooperation among policy actors in the context of marketization and globalization. This aligns with existing research on innovation and agricultural policies [39], emphasizing the need to strengthen inter-organizational cooperation to break down information and resource flow barriers [40]. Moreover, our study reveals the dynamic process within China whereby seed industry policy actors enhance their responses to the challenges of market-oriented food security and global agricultural trade. Over time, the network of joint policymaking actors has expanded, with increasingly complex structures, reflecting a trend toward diversification of policymaking entities. The network has also shifted from a tightly knit to a more fragmented structure

The evolution of policy discourse demonstrates the enhanced capacity of seed policies to respond to marketization and globalization. Through co-word analysis and clustering methods, our results indicate the increasing importance of seed industry innovation in this context, resonating with scholarly discussions on seed industry revitalization. This process reflects China’s adaptive response, shifting focus from solely constructing a market-oriented environment to fostering seed industry innovation and ultimately emphasizing the enhancement of innovation capabilities and industrialization. This shift indicates policymakers’ heightened sensitivity to market demands and international competition, with policy orientations progressively moving toward more forward-looking and sustainable approaches.

The paradigm shift in policy further illustrates how policy elites adapt their strategies to evolving marketization and globalization contexts, strengthening the capacity to respond to these forces. Our analysis shows that policies are increasingly influenced by international rules and commitments, consistent with research on forest policy [41]. Additionally, this study reveals how Chinese seed industry policymakers have, since the early 21st century, closely tailored their policy issues, objectives, discourse, and tools to the specific circumstances of each phase—shaped by stages of marketization and globalization—aiming to secure national seed security and food security. We observe a transition of China’s seed industry policy paradigm from a market-oriented transformation paradigm to an action-oriented revitalization paradigm.

Through this discussion, we make three additional contributions to the existing literature. First, we propose a theoretical framework based on the paradigm shift perspective to analyze the evolution of seed industry policies. This framework elucidates differences regarding policy actors, policy issues, objectives, discourse, and tools, allowing us to categorize the evolution of China’s seed industry policies since the 21st century into three paradigms: the market-oriented transformation paradigm, the globalization response paradigm, and the modernization and self-strengthening paradigm. This approach facilitates a more structured understanding and comparison of the various stages in China’s seed industry policy development. Second, we identify practical pathways to enhance the capacity of seed industry policies to respond to marketization and globalization challenges. Our findings clarify how policies should be adjusted under the influence of global and market-driven forces, providing policy optimization insights to support sustainable development in the seed industry. The analytical framework for seed industry policy paradigms proposed in this study forms a constructive dialogue with Hall’s classical theory of policy paradigm change. This research not only verifies Hall’s core argument that paradigm transformation is accompanied by systematic shifts in policy problems, policy objectives, and policy instruments, but also reveals the particularities of the Chinese context. While Hall, based on the experience of Western countries, emphasizes the “disruptive” nature of paradigm shifts, the case of China’s seed industry policies demonstrates a “layered evolutionary” feature. Specifically, the three paradigms of market-oriented transformation, globalization response, and modernization-driven self-reliance do not represent simple replacements of one another; rather, they evolve gradually while maintaining policy continuity through the superimposition of policy instruments and the upgrading of policy objectives. This finding supplements the classical paradigm theory’s understanding of the transformation process and provides a new analytical perspective for the study of policy paradigm change in developing countries.

Moreover, these insights offer a reference for developing countries seeking to address food security issues amidst globalized agricultural trade. Third, our results also highlight methodological advances. The evidence demonstrates that combining policy evolution analysis with quantitative methods is effective. While policy document bibliometric analysis has been used in fields such as energy and healthcare to reveal hidden information and patterns behind policy texts, research in the seed industry policy domain remains limited. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to construct a policy paradigm theoretical analysis framework and to apply a comprehensive suite of methods—including co-word analysis, cluster analysis, and social network analysis—to examine the evolution of China’s seed industry policies since the 21st century. Our work reveals pathways for improving the market-oriented and globalization response capabilities of seed industry policies.

Despite its contributions, this study has certain limitations. First, the analysis focuses exclusively on national-level policies and does not cover the policy practices and evolutionary dynamics at the local level. Consequently, the interpretation of the interplay between central and local policies remains limited. Second, this research is based on a case study of China’s seed industry policies, and the generalizability of its conclusions needs to be further tested through comparative studies examining policy evolution across different national contexts in the future. Third, although the analytical framework proposed in this study effectively identifies paradigm shifts, it also presents a key limitation: its analytical focus is confined to the interpretation of seed industry issues, policy actors, policy objectives, policy discourse, and policy instruments. It does not sufficiently explain whether institutional changes have actually altered the operational mechanisms of the existing seed industry system. This raises a deeper question about whether the new paradigm can truly achieve its stated objectives.

Building on these reflections, future research could advance in several directions. (1) It may conduct an in-depth investigation of the evolution pathways of local-level seed industry policies and their interaction mechanisms with national policies, thereby constructing a multi-level analytical framework for policy network analysis. (2) Cross-national comparative studies could be undertaken to explore both the common strategies and context-specific pathways for optimizing seed industry policy systems, generating more insightful implications for global food security governance. (3) The integration of policy bibliometric analysis and empirical performance data could enable the construction of a “policy paradigm transformation–seed industry performance” linkage model, facilitating an assessment of whether the new paradigm can genuinely realize its intended goals.

7. Conclusions

This study employs co-word analysis, social network analysis, cluster analysis, and content analysis to examine 96 national seed industry policies since the 21st century, analyzing the evolution of policy actors, policy issues, objectives, discourse, and tools in China’s seed industry. The main conclusions are as follows:

(1)

Since the beginning of the 21st century, China’s seed industry policies have largely aligned with broader trends of marketization and globalization. The evolution process has encompassed three stages: the market-oriented transformation of the seed industry, responses to global challenges, and the modernization and self-strengthening of the sector. A comprehensive and distinctive seed industry policy system has thus been established. During this period, policies have advanced progressively, with an increasing number of policy documents and growing influence. The evolution of China’s seed industry policies exhibits a progressive characteristic. In response to intensifying international market competition and the advent of the fourth technological revolution, China has responded promptly and effectively to regulate seed industry development. The pace of policy evolution has accelerated, and the capacity of seed industry policies to address marketization and globalization challenges has continually improved, ensuring the security of China’s seed industry and food supply.

(2)

In the context of marketization and globalization, the cooperative network of policy issuers has gradually expanded and become more complex. An increasing number of entities are participating in the formulation of seed policies, reflecting a trend toward diversification among policy issuers. From the perspective of network density, as the cooperative network expands, the degree of interaction among policy issuers has decreased, showing a trend of initial increase followed by a decline, indicating a relatively loose interaction among policy issuers. The centrality index has gradually risen, suggesting a decreasing level of balance within the network, with the power dynamics among departments shifting from “balanced” to “relatively concentrated” and then to “concentrated.” The cooperative network is evolving toward a loose-centralized structure, demonstrating trends of diversification and centralization, with inter-departmental collaboration becoming an important mechanism for formulating seed policies.

(3)

Under the context of marketization and globalization, the evolution of policy discourse exhibits clear stage-specific characteristics. During the initial adjustment period, policies primarily focused on the cultivation and promotion of excellent seed varieties and seed management systems. In the deepening adjustment phase, attention shifted to reform and innovation within the seed industry system, capacity building in biological breeding, and the protection of genetic resources. By the comprehensive adjustment period, policies emphasized technological innovation and research in seed science and technology, high-quality development of leading seed enterprises, and the establishment of an intellectual property protection system for the seed industry. Overall, policy priorities demonstrate an evolution from creating a market-oriented environment to fostering an environment conducive to seed industry innovation and development, and finally to enhancing foundational research and development capabilities, tackling key technological challenges in seed innovation, and promoting industrialization.

(4)

With changes in the policy environment driven by marketization and globalization, policy issues, objectives, and instruments have continuously evolved. This ongoing process has driven the transition of seed policies from initial adjustment and deepening adjustment stages to a comprehensive adjustment phase, with the paradigm shifting from the early-stage market-oriented transformation to the modern, self-reliant development model of the seed industry. Policy issues have shifted from problems such as imperfect market mechanisms and inadequate regulation to bottlenecks in seed sources (‘bottleneck’ issues). Policy objectives have moved from reforming and improving seed management and strengthening market regulation to achieving technological independence, self-sufficiency in seed sources, and control over seed supply. The policy tools have transitioned from predominantly market regulation to a diversified set of instruments supporting technological innovation through coordinated efforts.

(5)

The logic of policy evolution shows distinct differences in management philosophy, support for technological innovation, and emphasis on seed breeding and promotion. Firstly, in terms of management philosophy, seed policies have evolved from predominantly regulation-based policies, complemented by guiding and service-oriented policies, to a mode dominated by guiding and regulatory policies, supported by service-oriented ones, and finally toward policies characterized by service-oriented and guiding functions with regulation serving as support. Secondly, concerning support for scientific and technological innovation, awareness has steadily increased, shifting from reliance on good varieties and technology importation and absorption towards self-reliance, independent innovation, and reliance on domestic technological strength. The focus has shifted from protecting germplasm resources and ensuring seed source security to creative breeding materials, with the leading role of enterprises in technological innovation gradually strengthening. Policy tools have progressed from single support mechanisms to diversified and innovative support instruments. Third, in seed breeding and promotion, the construction of breeding bases has transitioned from centralized national key projects to more open regional identification, resulting in the widespread dissemination of seed breeding bases across the country to secure seed supply and food security. Breeding and promotion technologies have shifted from early-stage technology introduction and propaganda to independent breakthroughs of key core technologies.

Our research provides specific recommendations for improving the capacity of policies to respond to marketization and globalization. In terms of optimizing the seed policy system, first, it is crucial to establish and improve a policy system for technological innovation in the seed industry, developing comprehensive and specialized policies that increase investment in seed technology and integrate innovation resources to lead seed innovation and promote high-quality development. Second, enhancing policy coherence and interactivity is essential. During the improvement of the seed support policy system, it is necessary to strengthen coordination and collaboration among policy issuers in policy formulation, implementation, and innovative development to jointly advance seed innovation. Finally, attention should be paid to diversifying policy tools, providing comprehensive support to seed innovation across the entire value chain.

In the design of seed industry policies, development should be guided by the advancement of new quality productivity:

First, establish cross-sectoral innovation alliances for the seed industry and strengthen inter-departmental collaboration mechanisms. Led by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, critical resources including funding, equipment, core technologies, and specialized talent should be systematically deployed to facilitate joint breakthroughs in pivotal technological domains.

Second, optimize research and development (R&D) investment structures and establish a sustainable seed industry funding mechanism primarily supported by public finance. The public fiscal funds should serve as the main financing source, complemented by incentive mechanisms to mobilize social capital, encouraging broad participation in the upgrading of seed industry innovation. Overcoming core technological barriers will promote technological independence and self-reliance, ensuring seed source autonomy, safeguarding national food security, and supporting the sustainable development of the seed industry.

Third, focus on innovative allocation of elements involved in R&D, breeding, and industrial application to promote the deep integration and collaborative innovation of the seed industry’s innovation chain and industrial chain. Enhance industry-academia collaboration while consolidating and expanding leading enterprises. Leverage major projects and innovation platforms to optimize resources, establish joint R&D institutions, and enable knowledge sharing.