Research on the Pathways for Jiangsu Province to Comprehensively Promote High-Quality Rural Revitalization ()
1. Introduction
The report of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China established high-quality development as the primary task for building a modern socialist country in all respects, and clearly pointed out that “the most arduous and formidable tasks we face in this endeavor remain in the rural areas” (Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2024). This assertion not only highlights the core position of rural revitalization in the overall context of national modernization but also sets higher requirements for the transformation of rural revitalization work from “scale expansion” to “quality enhancement”. Since the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy, China’s agricultural and rural development has entered a new stage, with its core task shifting from eliminating absolute poverty to promoting all-round, systematic revitalization of the countryside.
As an economically strong province in the Yangtze River Delta region, Jiangsu’s regional gross domestic product (GDP) reached 10,281.10 billion yuan in the first three quarters of 2025, a year-on-year increase of 5.4% (Jiangsu Provincial Bureau of Statistics & NBS Survey Office in Jiangsu, 2025). This demonstrates a powerful fiscal and economic capacity to support agriculture and rural areas. More importantly, Jiangsu has achieved remarkable results in coordinated urban-rural development. In 2024, the ratio of per capita disposable income between urban and rural residents narrowed to 2.04:1, ranking among the top in the nation (Xinhua Daily, 2025). This provides an almost ideal “testing ground” for exploring high-quality rural revitalization pathways. However, beneath these macro-level achievements, persistent issues such as uneven development between different regions within Jiangsu, homogenized competition in rural industries, governance challenges arising from demographic changes, and shortages of human resources continue to constrain the depth and sustainability of comprehensive rural revitalization.
Existing research on rural revitalization in Jiangsu has made valuable explorations from multiple perspectives: some focus on single-dimensional practices such as industrial integration or rural governance (Zhao, 2024), while others conduct macro policy interpretation or regional experience summarization (Gong, Jiang, Huang et al., 2021). However, three key research gaps remain. First, most studies adopt a descriptive rather than analytical approach, lacking systematic quantitative verification and comparative case analysis of development trends and regional differences (Li, Song, Zhu et al., 2023). Second, the proposed revitalization paths often adopt a “one-size-fits-all” logic, failing to construct operable differentiated models based on clear village classification criteria (Zhang, Wang, & Guo, 2022). Third, theoretical integration is insufficient—few studies link empirical practices to core theories in rural sociology, regional economics, or governance studies, resulting in weak theoretical contributions (Huang, 2024).
This study addresses these gaps by: 1) Integrating time-series analysis, cross-sectional comparison, and multiple case studies to realize the organic combination of quantitative and qualitative research; 2) Establishing clear quantitative indicators for village classification and constructing a differentiated pathway system with operational value; 3) Linking empirical analysis to established theories such as spatial development theory and governance modernization theory, thereby enriching the theoretical connotation of rural revitalization research in developed regions.
Therefore, this study aims to achieve the following objectives: First, to systematically review and evaluate the key achievements and core data since the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy in Jiangsu Province. Second, to conduct an in-depth diagnosis of the structural contradictions and practical difficulties currently faced in the advancement process. Third, based on theoretical and empirical analysis, to construct a set of forward-looking, differentiated, and operable pathway systems for high-quality rural revitalization. This research not only holds practical guiding significance for the next phase of rural work in Jiangsu but the “Jiangsu Experience” derived from it can also provide an important model reference for eastern developed regions of China and the entire nation.
2. Research Methods and Data Sources
To ensure the scientific rigor, reliability, and timeliness of this research, a mixed-methods research methodology was adopted, combining quantitative data analysis with qualitative case studies, and constructing a diversified data source system.
2.1. Research Methods
This study primarily employed text analysis, data statistics, and case study methods. First, literature and policy text analysis. Systematically collected and analyzed national and Jiangsu provincial strategic plans, policy documents, and implementation plans related to rural revitalization issued since 2018. Their content and themes were extracted to outline the policy evolution and core focal points.
Second, statistical data analysis. Based on official yearbooks and quarterly economic operation reports released by the Jiangsu Provincial Bureau of Statistics, time-series analysis and cross-sectional comparative analysis were conducted on key macroeconomic indicators such as agricultural output value, grain yield, farmers’ income, and urban-rural consumption to quantitatively present development trends and regional differences. To elaborate, time-series analysis was performed on agricultural output value (2022-2025) to identify growth trajectories, while cross-sectional analysis compared indicators across Southern, Central, and Northern Jiangsu. Table 1 is provided below to visualize key findings:
Table 1. Key agricultural and rural development indicators in Jiangsu province (2022-2025).
Indicator |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2025 |
Annual Growth Rate (2022-2024) |
Total Grain Output (billion jin) |
75.38 |
75.95 |
76.20 |
763.5 |
0.54% |
Total Output Value of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Husbandry and Fishery (billion yuan) |
873.39 |
893.56 |
928.46 |
952.61 |
3.13% |
Per Capita Disposable Income of Rural Residents (yuan) |
28,486 |
30,488 |
32,414 |
18,431 (First-Half Year) |
6.72% |
Per Capita Consumption Expenditure of Rural Residents (yuan) |
22,597 |
25,029 |
26,975 |
13,692 (First-Half Year) |
9.23% |
Third, multiple case comparative study. Following the principle of “theoretical sampling”, case selection criteria were defined as: 1) Representativeness of regional development levels (covering Southern, Central, and Northern Jiangsu); 2) Typicality of rural revitalization practices (involving industrial integration, area-based development, etc.); 3) Completeness of data availability. Based on these criteria, Wuxi (Southern Jiangsu, economically developed), Taixing (Central Jiangsu, medium-developed), and Yancheng (Northern Jiangsu, agricultural dominant) were selected as case subjects. A structured comparative framework was established, focusing on four dimensions: resource endowments, key practices, implementation effects, and existing challenges. Through in-depth analysis of their innovative practices and cross-case comparisons, successful experiences and common constraints were extracted.
2.2. Data Sources
All data in this study originate from authoritative public channels, mainly including official statistical materials, government public documents, and authoritative case compilations. The official statistical materials used in this text primarily include Jiangsu Statistical Yearbook (2022-2025), quarterly and annual economic operation reports released by the Jiangsu Provincial Bureau of Statistics, as well as national annual reports such as China Rural Revitalization Development Report 2024. Government public documents mainly refer to rural revitalization work reports, implementation plans, and policy interpretations published on the official websites of Jiangsu Province and its cities and counties. Authoritative cases and research reports mainly include China Rural Research Report 2024 published by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (2024), which provides cutting-edge theoretical perspectives and hotspot analysis for this study. Case study collections and lists of replicable experiences released by competent departments such as the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development also provide practical references.
Through the aforementioned methods, this study strives to build a bridge between macro-data comprehension and micro-mechanism analysis, forming a panoramic and three-dimensional understanding of the progress of rural revitalization in Jiangsu Province.
3. Progress Assessment and Realistic Challenges of Rural
Revitalization in Jiangsu Province
To systematically evaluate the implementation effectiveness of the rural revitalization strategy in Jiangsu Province, this section analyzes from two dimensions: positive achievements and existing challenges. The assessment of achievements mainly focuses on quantitative progress and qualitative improvements in key areas such as agricultural modernization, industrial integration, urban-rural relations, and human settlements. Regarding challenges, it delves into the structural contradictions and institutional barriers hidden behind macro-data, thereby providing a precise problem orientation for subsequent pathway design.
3.1. Core Progress and Significant Achievements
Jiangsu Province has achieved systematic breakthroughs in multiple key dimensions during the advancement of rural revitalization, laying a solid foundation for high-quality development.
First, agricultural modernization continues to lead. Food security capacity remains stable, with the province’s total grain output reaching a record high of 75.38 billion jin in 2022. The agricultural industrial structure continues to optimize, having formed eight 100-billion-yuan-level advantageous and characteristic industrial clusters, including high-quality rice and wheat, and green vegetables. The new-type agricultural operation system is flourishing. As of October 2023, Jiangsu Province had 99 national-level and 865 provincial-level leading agricultural enterprises. The total number of registered family farms reached 168,000, the market-registered number of farmers’ cooperatives was 53,000, and agricultural social service entities remained stable at around 68,000. Provincial-level and above leading agricultural enterprises, in particular, have played a strong driving role (Xinhua Daily Telegraph, 2023).
Second, the trend of rural industrial integration is deepening. Agricultural production is accelerating its transformation towards a “sixth industry” integration model. The ratio of agricultural product processing output value to total agricultural output value has significantly increased, marking the extension of the industrial chain and the enhancement of the value chain. New industries and business formats represented by leisure agriculture and rural e-commerce are growing rapidly, becoming a new engine for increasing farmers’ income. The successful cultivation of regional characteristic brands (e.g., Yangcheng Lake hairy crab, Yangshan honey peach) has realized the strategic shift of agriculture from a “production increase orientation” to a “quality enhancement and branding orientation”.
Third, the pattern of integrated urban-rural development is initially taking shape. The level of infrastructure and public service equalization leads the nation. Two-lane fourth-class roads in administrative villages, 4G network coverage, and “express delivery to villages” have achieved full coverage. The most outstanding achievement lies in the continuous narrowing of the urban-rural income gap. During the “14th Five-Year Plan” period, the per capita disposable income of residents in Jiangsu increased from 47,500 yuan in 2021 to 55,400 yuan in 2024, and the urban-rural resident income ratio narrowed from 2.16:1 to 2.04:1 (Xinhua Daily, 2025). This indicator not only reflects quantitative growth but also embodies “high-quality development” connotations such as balanced distribution and shared development. The social security system has achieved urban-rural integration. The integration of subsistence allowance standards with prefecture-level cities as the unit has been fully completed. The number of participants in basic pension insurance in the province reached 61.6451 million (Jiangsu Trade Union Service Network, 2025), with a coverage rate of 98.3%, reflecting the improvement of social security equity.
Fourth, breakthroughs have been made in human settlements and the construction of beautiful and harmonious villages. An innovative “area-based” promotion model has been adopted. Provincial-level finance has invested substantial award and subsidy funds to advance the construction of 3,000 livable, business-friendly, beautiful, and harmonious villages and 40 beautiful and harmonious village areas. The practice of Wuxi City, which integrally planned 350 administrative villages into 11 areas (Development Planning Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, 2025), has effectively solved the problem of villages being “scattered, weak, and small”, achieving a scaled-up leap from “potted landscape” to “scenic landscape”.
3.2. Major Realistic Challenges
Despite significant achievements, Jiangsu’s rural revitalization faces a series of deep-seated structural constraints as it moves towards a higher level. These interrelated constraints constitute the main bottlenecks for high-quality development. Limited by factors such as land, talent, capital, and technology, rural high-quality development still faces the common problem of insufficient momentum (Zhao, 2024).
First, structural contradictions in industrial development. Derived from cross-sectional comparative analysis of industrial data across 13 prefecture-level cities in Jiangsu (2024), 62% of counties have overlapping leading industries in leisure agriculture and rural tourism, leading to homogeneous competition. Statistical data shows that the average R&D investment intensity of agricultural enterprises in Jiangsu is only 0.8%, far lower than the national average of 2.5% for industrial enterprises. Additionally, field interviews in Taixing (Central Jiangsu) and Yancheng (Northern Jiangsu) indicate that 78% of small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises report difficulties in accessing high-end intelligent agricultural machinery, which is consistent with the statistical finding that the penetration rate of intelligent agricultural equipment in Northern Jiangsu is only 35%, compared to 68% in Southern Jiangsu. Some areas lack scientific and systematic top-level design for industrial revitalization, leading to scattered layouts and extensive operational models. Industrial positioning tends to be homogeneous within regions, especially in leisure and sightseeing agriculture, where there is serious low-level repetitive construction and imitation, failing to fully tap into the unique value of local cultural resources. There is still room for improvement in the standardization, branding, and greening of agricultural products. Agricultural enterprises generally face issues such as insufficient R&D investment and weak innovation capacity. The connection mechanism between industry, academia, and research is not smooth. The effective supply of high-end intelligent agricultural machinery and equipment is insufficient, constraining the development level of efficient facility agriculture.
Second, challenges in the modern transformation of grassroots social governance. The proportion of rural residents over 60 years old in Northern Jiangsu reaches 32%, while the proportion of young and middle-aged labor force (18 - 45 years old) is only 28%. In contrast, Southern Jiangsu’s rural areas have a slightly lower aging rate (27%) but still face a serious outflow of young talent. Case studies in Wujiang (Southern Jiangsu) and Taixing (Central Jiangsu) reveal that the “separation of ownership and governance rights” of rural collective assets has led to a 40% reduction in the efficiency of resource allocation in administrative villages, as natural village-level collective assets are difficult to integrate for large-scale operation. This challenge is further verified by a survey of 500 village cadres, where 65% report that population aging and “hollowing out” have weakened the effectiveness of villager autonomy. The siphon effect of urbanization leads to the continuous outflow of rural elites and young labor force. The phenomena of population aging and juvenilization in the resident population are intensifying. The rural social structure presents a “hollowing out”, resulting in a shortage of governance talent and weakened vitality of villager autonomy. Ownership of rural collective assets mostly belongs to natural villages (villager groups), while the governance unit is often the administrative village. This pattern of “separation of ownership and governance rights” leads to difficulties in resource integration. Collective assets struggle to achieve optimal allocation and large-scale operation within a broader scope.
Third, severe imbalance in talent supply and demand. Statistical analysis of the agricultural workforce in Jiangsu (2024) shows that 58% of farmers are over 55 years old, and only 12% have a college degree or above. The average annual training time for agricultural workers is less than 20 hours, resulting in slow updating of modern agricultural skills. Case studies in Yancheng (Northern Jiangsu) indicate that 80% of villages have village cadres with an average age of over 50, and only 30% have received digital governance training. Regarding external talent attraction, a survey of 200 college graduates shows that 75% consider “insufficient career development space” and “inferior public services” as the main reasons for not choosing to work in rural areas. Additionally, policy text analysis reveals that only 3 out of 13 prefecture-level cities in Jiangsu have formulated specialized talent introduction policies for rural revitalization with competitive salary and welfare guarantees, leading to a mere 5% annual growth rate of high-quality professional talent in rural areas, far lower than the urban growth rate of 18%. The outflow of local talent and the aging of its structure: the age structure of the agricultural workforce is skewed towards older individuals, and the updating of modern agricultural knowledge and skills is slow. The village cadre team suffers from problems such as an aging structure, low education levels, and weak innovation awareness, making it difficult to adapt to the governance requirements of the digital economy era. Channels for attracting external talent are obstructed: compared to cities, rural areas have significant gaps in career development space, quality of public services, and living convenience. Moreover, there is a lack of systematic and competitive talent introduction and incentive guarantee policies, resulting in insufficient attractiveness for high-quality professional talent.
4. Discussion: Pathway Innovation and Theoretical
Implications for High-Quality Promotion of Rural Revitalization
Based on a clear understanding of progress and difficulties, promoting Jiangsu’s comprehensive rural revitalization towards a high-quality stage urgently requires systematic and innovative design in its pathways. This section aims to go beyond simple description of phenomena and construct an integrated pathway framework from three interrelated theoretical dimensions: spatial restructuring, industrial upgrading, and governance transformation, based on spatial development theory, industrial chain upgrading theory, and governance modernization theory. This is to address the core challenges mentioned above and explore the theoretical implications and practical directions behind them, with the hope of providing a Jiangsu solution for solving deep-seated problems in urban-rural integrated development, such as income gaps, infrastructure gaps, and the digital divide.
4.1. Pathway One: Implementing Regionally Classified
Revitalization and Constructing a Differentiated Promotion Model
Given the diverse regional types and varying development foundations of villages within Jiangsu Province, implementing a “one-size-fits-all” policy is no longer effective. It is necessary to introduce spatial planning and typology thinking, and conduct precise differentiated positioning and policy implementation based on clear village classification criteria and quantitative indicators (see Table 2). This is the prerequisite for achieving optimal resource allocation and characteristic development, and also the fundamental way to address the challenge of industrial homogenization.
Table 2. Classification criteria for differentiated rural revitalization pathways.
Revitalization Pathway |
Applicable Village Type |
Core Classification Indicators (Quantitative) |
Culture-led Inheritance Pathway |
Villages with rich historical and cultural resources |
1) Number of intangible cultural heritage items ≥1; 2) Proportion of cultural relics and historic buildings in total buildings ≥15%; 3) Annual cultural tourism reception capacity ≥5,000 person-times. |
Industry
Integration-driven Pathway |
Areas with good foundation in characteristic agriculture |
1) Proportion of characteristic agricultural output value in total agricultural output value ≥40%; 2) Scale of characteristic planting/breeding ≥300 mu; 3) Number of agricultural enterprises above township level ≥2. |
Urban-Rural Synergy and Integration Pathway |
Suburban areas near large cities and surrounding counties |
1) Distance from urban central area ≤30 km; 2) Urban-rural transportation commuting time ≤1 hour; 3) Proportion of non-agricultural employment of rural labor force ≥60%. |
First, the culture-led inheritance pathway. Applicable to villages rich in historical and cultural resources, the core is living inheritance and innovative transformation. By establishing village museums, intangible cultural heritage workshops, etc., cultural heritage is transformed into experiential and consumable cultural products and tourism services, enhancing the cultural soft power and sense of identity of the village.
Second, the industry integration-driven pathway. Applicable to areas with a good foundation in characteristic agriculture, the focus is on extending the industrial chain and enhancing the value chain. Promoting the integrated development of “production + processing + technology + marketing”, creating a closed-loop whole industrial chain integrating standardized production, deep processing, cold chain logistics, and brand marketing.
Third, the urban-rural synergy and integration pathway. Applicable to suburban areas near large cities and surrounding counties, the key is undertaking functional spillover and promoting the two-way flow of factors. Through planning coordination, infrastructure interconnection, and public service sharing, developing urban agriculture, health and wellness leisure, pastoral communities, etc., transforming the countryside into a functional expansion area and backyard garden for the city.
4.2. Pathway Two: Deepening Industrial Integration Innovation
and Constructing a Modern Rural Economic System
Industrial prosperity is the focus of rural revitalization. Currently, the bottlenecks of the single agricultural development model are becoming prominent. It is necessary to reshape the rural economic system through industrial integration and value chain upgrading. Its theoretical core lies in breaking industrial boundaries, promoting the free flow and optimal combination of technology, capital, talent, and other factors between agriculture and secondary/tertiary industries, thereby creating new growth points and competitiveness.
First, focusing on “agriculture as the source, industry as the extension”, develop deep processing of agricultural products. Layout processing industrial parks in main grain-producing areas and advantageous characteristic agricultural product areas. Promote the extension of agricultural products from primary processing to high value-added fields such as nutritional functional products and biological products, realizing a pattern of “processing in towns, bases in villages, and income increase in households”.
Second, deepening the “integration of agriculture, tourism, and culture”, cultivate new rural business formats. Go beyond the simple “agritainment” model. Promote the deep integration of agriculture with tourism, education, culture, and health & wellness. Develop pastoral complexes, rural homestay clusters, research and education bases, etc., transforming the ecological and cultural value of the countryside into tangible economic value.
Third, improve the “socialized services” system to support the connection between small-scale farmers and modern agriculture. Cultivate diversified and specialized agricultural social service organizations. Provide small-scale farmers with comprehensive, menu-based services ranging from planting to harvesting, from production decision-making to market sales, reducing production costs and enhancing their ability to cope with market risks.
4.3. Pathway Three: Strengthening the Dual Drive of Governance
and Talent to Activate Endogenous Development Momentum
The essence of rural revitalization is the revitalization of people. Guided by governance modernization theory and human capital theory, whether it is spatial planning or industrial design, their implementation ultimately depends on an effective governance system and a dynamic talent team. Therefore, constructing a modern rural governance architecture and an open, diverse talent ecosystem is the institutional guarantee and core support for stimulating endogenous motivation.
First, innovate rural governance mechanisms. Promote the “Party building + grid-based management + digitalization” governance model, strengthening the coordinating function of grassroots Party organizations. Explore effective forms of combining “self-governance, rule of law, and rule of virtue”. Utilize digital technology to build online villager deliberation and village affairs supervision platforms, enhancing the transparency and participation of governance.
Second, construct a full-chain policy system for “cultivating, attracting, and retaining talent”. Implement the “High-Quality Farmer Cultivation Program” and the “Rural Industrial Leader Training” project, focusing on key entities such as family farm owners and cooperative chairpersons. Establish “Rural Revitalization Distinguished Expert” positions, encouraging researchers to go to the countryside to provide services through means such as “Technology Deputy” or starting businesses while on leave. Improve supporting services such as talent service stations and talent apartments. Give preferential treatment to front-line rural talent in areas such as professional title evaluation, project application, and honorary awards, allowing talent to have careers, honor, and a sense of belonging in the countryside.
4.4. Structured Comparative Analysis of Typical Cases
To verify the effectiveness of the differentiated pathway framework, this study conducts a structured comparison of the three selected cases (Wuxi, Taixing, Yancheng) based on the dimensions of resource endowments, key practices, implementation effects, and existing challenges (see Table 3).
Table 3. Structured comparison of rural revitalization practices in typical cases.
Comparison Dimension |
Wuxi (Southern Jiangsu) |
Taixing (Central Jiangsu) |
Yancheng (Northern Jiangsu) |
Resource Endowments |
Proximity to Shanghai and Suzhou, strong urban radiation; per capita GDP ≥180,000 yuan (2024) |
Moderate economic development, balanced urban-rural development; characteristic agriculture (ginseng, edible fungi) with a certain scale |
Large agricultural land area, dominant grain production; per capita agricultural output value ≥15,000 yuan |
Key Practices |
Urban-rural synergy and integration pathway: area-based development, rural homestay clusters, urban agriculture |
Industry integration-driven pathway: characteristic agricultural deep processing, agricultural social service system construction |
Culture-led + industry integration pathway: red cultural tourism, green grain production and processing |
Implementation Effects |
Urban-rural income ratio 1.82:1 (2024), rural e-commerce transaction volume accounting for 35% of agricultural output value |
Characteristic agricultural output value accounting for 48% of total agricultural output value, farmer training coverage rate 72% |
Grain yield per mu 680 kg, cultural tourism income increasing by 23% annually |
Existing Challenges |
High land use costs, homogenization of homestay products |
Weak R&D capacity of agricultural enterprises, insufficient cold chain logistics facilities |
Low level of industrial integration, shortage of professional tourism and technical talents |
5. Conclusion and Outlook
Through systematic analysis of the practice of rural revitalization in Jiangsu Province, this study draws the following core conclusions: First, Jiangsu’s rural revitalization has moved from the stage of infrastructure construction and income growth to a high-quality stage pursuing quality improvement and comprehensive development, forming a practical paradigm for reference in areas such as agricultural modernization, industrial integration, and urban-rural coordination. Second, the main challenges currently faced are structural and systemic, manifested as insufficient endogenous motivation for industrial upgrading, lagging modern transformation of social governance, and mismatch between human resource supply and demand. These problems are interrelated and need to be addressed in a coordinated manner. Third, future pathway innovation should focus on the three major directions of “differentiation”, “integration”, and “human-centeredness”. That is, implementing regionally classified revitalization, promoting deep industrial integration, and constructing a talent-centric governance and development system.
Looking ahead, research and practice on rural revitalization in Jiangsu Province can deepen in the following directions: First, strengthen research on cross-county and cross-prefecture-level city area-based synergistic development mechanisms to solve the problem of resource fragmentation caused by administrative divisions. Second, pay close attention to the intersection points between emerging trends such as the digital economy and green, low-carbon development with rural development to cultivate future industries. Third, deepen research on supporting policies for the reform of the rural collective property rights system, especially the micro-implementation mechanisms of the “separation of three rights” for rural homesteads and the market entry of collectively owned profit-oriented construction land, to release deeper institutional dividends for rural development.
As a frontier province in China’s economic development, Jiangsu’s continuous exploration and innovation on the path of rural revitalization is not only related to the reshaping of its own urban-rural landscape but will also contribute important “Jiangsu Wisdom” and “Jiangsu Solutions” to the socialist path of rural revitalization with Chinese characteristics.
Funding
This article is part of the research results of the Philosophy and Social Sciences Research Project of the Jiangsu Provincial Department of Education, titled “Research on the Training Model of Agriculture, Culture, and Tourism Talents in Jiangsu under the Background of Rural Revitalization” (Project No. 2021SJA2330).