New theories are born in new practices.The new national conditions and new world conditions we live in require that political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics keep pace with the times.The development of new quality productive forces also provides technical conditions for the innovative development of political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics.Drawing on the logic system of Capital and taking the new quality productive forces as the underlying logic, this paper studies the historical evolution of political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics from five stages: theoretical tracing, theoretical reference, theoretical exploration, theoretical innovation and theoretical system innovation, to build a theoretical system with Marxist political economy as the theoretical core, the relationship between the government and the market as the basic relationship, the theory of socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics as the theoretical subject, and solving the major social contradictions and realizing the Chinese-style modernization as the goal.

The idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”is an important part of Xi Jinping's thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for the new era, as well as an important part of Xi Jinping's economic thought .It takes Marx's theory of world history as an ideological resource, and is a contemporary continuation and innovative development of Marx's theory of world history.The idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”was put forward against the backdrop of the profound evolution of the unprecedented changes of the past century, the major adjustment of international political and economic relations, and the many difficulties faced by all mankind, such as climate change and ecological and environmental crises.“Building a community with a shared future for mankind”is a multifaceted and multisystemic process of collaboration and co-construction in international politics, economy, science and technology, as well as in social and cultural relations and interactions among people of various countries. Therefore, the idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”is not only the basic principle of building a new type of international political relations, but also the basis of building a new type of international economic relations, which is a brand-new theory of the world system that conforms to the law of development of human history.In the sense of Marxist political economy, “building a community with a shared future for mankind”implies a higher level of development of national productive forces, a more rational international division of labor, more harmonious international relations of production, and a fairer sharing of international surplus value among countries. The basic goal is to establish a new world economic order in which peoples of all nations work together to address the various contradictions and challenges in the process of economic development and to achieve common prosperity for all countries, large and small.

The theory of new quality productive forces with Chinese characteristics contains the theoretical implication of the unity of inheritance and innovation, the epochal implication of the coherence between history and reality, and the methodological implication of the combination of theory and practice.The Marxist theory of productivity, combined with the characteristics of the times and specific practices of China's high-quality economic and social development in the new era, has led to the formation of the theory of new quality productive forces with Chinese characteristics.China's productivity development mode has gone through three stages: the traditional productivity development mode dominated by material accumulation, the crude productivity development mode prioritizing quantitative growth, and the new quality productive forces development mode oriented by high-quality development.The practical orientation of the development of new quality productive forces is to: clarify the source of productive forces, stimulate the growth of new quality productive forces by taking innovation as the main line; base the layout of the new quality productive forces industry system on the characteristics of productive factors, with quality as the key; solidify the foundation of productive forces development by promoting the sustainable development of new quality productive forces with a green tone; follow the laws of productive force movement and use new production relations as a guarantee to promote the progress of new quality productive forces.

By introducing space into Marx's theory of value, this article explores the general analytical framework of Marx's spatial political economy. The production of goods and the spatial transfer of goods belong to the field of production, with the latter affecting the value of goods by influencing the social norms of their use value. After considering spatial factors, the value of goods can be divided into two parts: production value and spatial value. The competition between commodity producers, in addition to technological competition, also includes spatial competition, and the interaction between the two forms a dynamic of spatial equilibrium and imbalance. The government is the subject of spatial production, and by changing the spatial pattern, it affects the competitive behavior of producers and the market competition situation. Expanding the spatial dimension of value theory has certain theoretical significance and practical value for developing Marxist spatial political economics and explaining spatial economic phenomena.

Since the early 2010s, China's economic growth, like the dominant global trend, has been on a continuous decline, with no signs of reversal to date. Existing research on the slowdown is diverse but can ultimately be attributed to two main themes: the insufficiency of demand and the decline in profit margins. The former hinges on identifying the determinants of productive investment, while the latter concerns the distribution of economic surplus and the profit-creating capacity of productive sectors. How to assess the relative validity of these explanations and integrate them into a coherent systemic interpretation is a significant challenge both academically and in terms of policy-making. This paper attempts to dissect the theoretical logic and empirical basis of these explanations. On this basis, it further clarifies the structural and institutional conditions involved in economic performance and explores the future direction of China's economic transformation. The concluding judgment of this paper can be summarized as follows: Whether China's economy can maintain a desirable growth rate ultimately depends on the contest between two modes of economic transformation, namely the production-oriented mode and the speculation-oriented mode. This contest has been a decisive factor in global development throughout the era of globalization and has dominated the direction of China's economic transformation since the beginning of the new century, especially since the 2010s.

中国自主经济学知识体系的建构过程是经济学知识生产方式的变革过程，需从科学知识社会学出发，明确其内涵与特征。经济学知识按效用属性可分为实证性、规范性、政策性知识，按适用范围可分为普遍性、类型性、地方性知识，按表达形态可分为显性知识和隐性知识。中国自主经济学知识体系是坚持中国立场、植根中国传统、立足中国实践、诠释中国经验、具备原始创新的知识体系，是知识类型多样、理论范式多元的综合知识体系，呈现为中国自主的经济学学科体系、学术体系、话语体系。建构中国自主的经济学知识体系需要准确把握其基本内涵，推动中国经济学知识生产方式及其治理体系的系统变革。

In capitalist countries, military expenditure is not only crucial for national security, but also an important component of national finances, which has a significant impact on the capitalist economy.The Marxist school is the earliest to conduct relevant research and has developed a series of findings from the perspectives of profit rates decline and value realization.The Neoclassical school primarily conducts research from the supply side, with the emergence of the Feder-Ram Model and the Augmented Solow Growth Model furthering research towards normalization and empirical analysis.The Keynesian school focuses on the demand side, exploring the role of military expenditure in creating additional demand, influencing resource redistribution, indirectly impacting the civilian economy and creating additional savings.This paper reviews relevant literature, outlines the development paths, theoretical innovations, and representative achievements of each school, and identifies cross-school similarities, differences, and future research directions.

Production and distribution are the basic economic problems of human society, and there are three ways or bases for modern society to solve the problems of production and distribution: market logic, government logic and social logic.These three institutional logics are embedded in the evolution of the economic development mode and determine the process and results of production and distribution.Looking back on the economic development of the People's Republic of China in the past 75 years, we can find that in the three stages of economic system changes in the standing up era(1949-1978), the rich era(1979-2012), and the strong era(since 2013), the ternary logics of market incentive, government regulation and social norms evolve interactively and tend to be integrated.Practical experience shows that the single logic of the market or of the government is difficult to ease the contradiction between efficiency and fairness, and the social logic can build social consensus and better reconcile the contradiction between efficiency and fairness in terms of reform effect, so as to continuously improve the equality degree of people's participation in production and the sharing degree of development achievements.The reform of China's economic system in the new era should further promote the integration and balance of the logics of market, government and society, adhere to the organic unity of top priority and affinity to the people, achieve high-quality development that combines production growth with equitable distribution, and promote common prosperity.

The party committee is an integral part of the corporate governance structure of an enterprise and plays a leadership role in the sustainable development of the enterprise. This paper analyzes the impact of party committee leadership on corporate ESG performance and its mechanism using data of A-share listed companies in China from 2011 to 2022. The results show that“two-way entry and cross-serving”of corporate leaders significantly improves corporate ESG performance.Mechanism analysis shows that the active implementation of national policies and the correction of managerial myopia under the leadership of Party committees are important reasons for the improvement of ESG performance.Further motivation analysis reveals that firms under the leadership of party committees improve their ESG performance for value motives rather than resource motives and compliance motives, and that firms' ESG practices can effectively improve their green development capability and reduce the risk of greenwashing.In addition, core firms under the leadership of party committees can generate significant positive ESG spillovers, which is conducive to improving the ESG performance of upstream suppliers, but not to promoting the ESG performance of downstream customers.This paper provides empirical evidence for giving full play to the political advantages of corporate governance with Chinese characteristics to promote steady improvement in corporate ESG performance and high-quality corporate development.

Under the continuous impact of the anti-globalization trend, the risk of“differentiation”and“fracture”in the global market has become increasingly prominent. The tension between the advanced capitalist countries and the increasingly strong willingness of the emerging powers to reform the existing international order has torn apart the global governance order, leading to the dilemma of the global market under the dilemma of global governance.A high-level big country market is a major strategic resource for a big country to grasp the initiative of future development in the period of turbulence and change in the world, and the logic of its transformation into economic advantage lies in the endogenous return increment mechanism established after the deepening of the division of labor and the expansion of the market scale, and then forms a comprehensive advantage that couple multiple effects of innovation incentives, economies of scale, spatial agglomeration and local market.Nowadays, China has fully equipped the conditions to use the domestic market to support the growth of the new era, and it is necessary to seek a scientific strategy to build a large market in the governance dimension and the practical dimension, and promote the strategic interaction and integration of domestic and international economic dual circulation with the development and expansion of the domestic market.

人工智能作为颠覆性技术深刻重塑全球就业结构，其影响通过替代、创造及产业结构变革引致三种机制体现。替代机制下，智能系统逐步取代制造业流水线作业、基础白领重复性工作等低技能岗位，导致这类岗位数量持续缩减；创造机制催生人工智能工程师等新兴职业，为高技能人才提供空间；产业结构变革引致机制推动劳动力在一二三产业间重新配置，向数字经济、现代服务业等领域转移。数据显示，我国传统制造业从业人员普遍缩减，劳动密集型行业尤为显著，服务业成为就业主力。高技能劳动力需求激增与中低技能劳动者转型压力形成反差，凸显就业市场结构性矛盾。面对结构性失业、技能提升压力及收入分配差距扩大等挑战，需通过政策引导、教育改革、企业培训、劳动者自主提升等多元路径，协同优化就业结构，实现高质量就业与经济社会协调发展。

By monopolizing the energy as the condition of production, contemporary imperialism has controlled socialized mode of production and established a new form of hegemony known as energy imperialism.Energy imperialism is essentially a social form derived from the social power shaped by the mode of production and its organization, mobilization, and operation.The era-specific characteristics of energy imperialism are still in accord with the five major features of imperialism analyzed by Lenin.As a secondary driving force in social reproduction, energy embodies the logic that conditions of production alter modes of production, permeates the entire process of the production mode transformation and indicates a new direction for the evolution of production modes.Comprehensively promoting Chinese-style modernization requires strategies to address energy imperialism.This involves, on one hand, breaking the renewable conditions of energy under the logic of monopoly capital through value revolution, and on the other hand, jointly advancing the construction of a community with a shared future for mankind through the international sharing of economic surplus.

In the history of economic thought, Marx and Keynes hold fundamentally divergent views on the impact of technological progress on working hours.Marx argues that technological progress does not necessarily reduce working hours, whereas Keynes optimistically contends that it significantly shortens them.This paper examines the“Marx-Keynes”proposition on working hours through theoretical analysis based on political economy and empirical testing using econometric methods.Employing data of China's A-share listed companies, the China Family Panel Studies(CFPS) data, and census data, this paper constructs a unique industry-level panel dataset on working hours spanning 2001-2017.Taking the 2008 financial crisis as an exogenous shock to demand, a difference-in-differences model is used to identify the causal relationship between the organic composition of capital and working hours.The empirical results reveal that industries with higher organic compositions of capital are more likely to increase working hours in response to demand shocks.Specifically, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, industries with higher organic compositions of capital experienced an average increase of 0.8 hours in working hours compared to those with lower compositions. These findings remain robust after a series of robustness checks, including alternative measurements, controlling for other policy interventions, and placebo tests. Furthermore, the paper identifies profitability, market power, and the industrial reserve army as three mechanisms through which the organic composition of capital affects working hours. The empirical evidence supports Marx's theoretical hypothesis rather than Keynes'.

The core functions of the state economy include three dimensions, namely the productive function of providing products and services, the institutional function reflecting the socialist mode of production, and the governance function as a tool for national macroeconomic governance. Under market economy conditions, due to the indirect social nature of production by state-owned enterprises, there can be conflicts between national macro-governance goals and corporate business objectives. The mechanisms for realizing these three functions are different and not coordinated, necessitating further reforms to the internal relationship between government and enterprises within the state economy to establish a mechanism for the coordination of multiple functions of the state economy. The classified management of state-owned enterprises is a preliminary exploration in this regard, but the issues have not been fully resolved. The reform needs to elevate from managing enterprises to managing capital, and the classified management of state capital and the pilot program for state capital investment trust funds should be put on the agenda.

A comprehensive and systematic exploration of Marx's theory of productive forces is of great significance for advancing the theoretical and foundational research on new quality productive forces. Marx and Engels' extensive discussions on productive forces are internally logically connected. This paper combs Marx and Engels' conception and categorical system of productive forces from the dialectical relationships between material and spiritual, social and individual, subject and object, general and particular, and society and nature; summarizes and concludes Marx and Engels' thought of the social character of productive forces from the “capitalist nature” and “social essence” of productive forces in capitalist society and their inherent contradictions; and further explains Marx's thought of the intrinsic connection between the two primordial relationships, human-nature relationship and human-society relationship, and introduces and develops key categories such as secondary and tertiary relations of production, as well as derived, transferred, and non-primordial relations of production proposed by Marx. Marx and Engels' conception of productive forces holds the important theoretical value for China's current efforts to cultivate and develop new quality productive forces and to construct new-type relations of production compatible with them.

数字经济的快速发展与全球格局的深刻变迁，正在重塑资本主义的生产方式与社会关系结构。数字技术与货币金融的深度融合推动了资本积累方式的重构，同时也对分配机制带来了新的影响与挑战，进一步加剧了资本主义经济的内在矛盾。2024年，政治经济学界的研究聚焦于资本主义经济在货币金融、分配机制、危机理论与数字经济等方面的演化特征及其内在矛盾，取得了丰硕成果，进一步拓展了对当代资本主义经济运行逻辑、危机本质及发展路径的理解。

The calculation of ownership structure has always been a difficult problem and the results obtained by some researchers are also controversial, due to the incomplete and discontinuous statistical data related to China's ownership structure. In recent years, the scope and types of relevant statistical data have changed, and most of the calculation methods proposed by the researchers in the past are no longer applicable or still have room for optimization. This article optimizes and improves the calculation method of ownership structure, based on the paid-in capital data and registered capital data from the national economic census and other relevant yearbooks. The ownership structure of China's secondary and tertiary industries from 2000 to 2018 is evaluated using the proportion of the public economy as an evaluation index. It is found that the proportion of public economy in China's secondary and tertiary industries has been continuously declining since 2000, and dropped to 25.7% in 2018. The view that public economy increased faster than private economy was proved to be wrong, and it was necessary to further strengthen, optimize, and expand the public economy. State-owned enterprises are the important part of the public economy, so developing state-owned enterprise is a task which brooks no delay.

The deepening of rural economic reform in the new era should adhere to the basic principle of institutional construction as the main line and institutional construction as the basic approach. Strengthening institutional construction is an inevitable requirement for developing and improving the rural market economy system and the basic rural economic system and constructing a high-level market economy system. It is an objective requirement for promoting high-quality development of the rural economy, advancing agricultural modernization, and promoting urban-rural integration in the new era. We should vigorously strengthen institutional construction and lay a solid institutional foundation and provide reliable institutional guarantees for building a high-level socialist market economy system and promoting rural agricultural development. Strengthening the institutional construction of rural market economy should implement the principle of “upholding integrity and innovation,” adhere to and improve basic systems, reform and innovate specific systems, and build a rural economic system with Chinese characteristics. The institutional construction of the rural market economy in the new era should strive to focus on three key aspects, namely strengthening the construction of the agricultural management system, rural factor market system, and rural property rights system.

After the end of World War I, despite the economic downturn in the UK, the UK Treasury still adhered to the principle of sound fiscal budgeting and, in response to the challenges posed by the Liberal Party's public works plan, put forward the “Treasury View” centered on the “crowding out” theory. Keynes challenged the laissez-faire policy upheld by the British Treasury, opposing the gold standard system and advocating for active government management of the economy. By developing the theory of effective demand and incorporating government budgets into national income decisions, Keynes achieved a transformation from the balanced budget principle to the full employment budget principle. Keynes’ fiscal theory revolutionizes the traditional concept of sound fiscal budgeting and has important reference significance for the construction of China's current fiscal system and the formulation of fiscal policies.

<正>2015年11月23日,习近平总书记在主持十八届中共中央政治局第二十八次集体学习时,提出了“中国特色社会主义政治经济学”这一范畴,并强调“要立足我国国情和我们的发展实践,深入研究世界经济和我国经济面临的新情况新问题,揭示新特点新规律,提炼和总结我国经济发展实践的规律性成果,把实践经验上升为系统化的经济学说”。（1）2022年4月25日,习近平总书记在中国人民大学考察时,进一步指出:“加快构建中国特色哲学社会科学,归根结底是构建中国自主的知识体系。”（2）由此,中国特色社会主义政治经济学的研究进入体系化建设阶段。

本文以马克思生产社会化理论为视角，剖析数智时代劳动者分化的社会历史根源及其经济社会影响。研究发现，数字化、智能化技术推动的生产社会化使资本主义分工突破了以工厂、企业为代表的生产组织形式，导致劳动者分化现象。这一分化并非单纯源于技术进步或个体技能差异，而是资本主义分工体系在社会生产中的扩展结果：高技能劳动者通过生产资料间接指挥低技能劳动者，形成“指挥-服从”的生产过程，其本质是生产资料私有制下资本积累逻辑的延续。该结构短期通过外包、弹性雇佣等方式转移劳资矛盾并提高资本利润率；长期则加剧教育投资效率降低、影响劳动力再生产，导致中等收入陷阱与生育率下降等问题。我国需通过调整分配结构、优化教育导向等措施化解矛盾，避免陷入劳动者分化导致的困境。

当前，新一轮工业革命在全球深入推进，我国也以形成新质生产力为指向扎实推进新型工业化。如何发挥好政府和市场两种力量不断为新型工业化赋能增效对于推进强国建设、民族复兴伟业至关重要。本文全面梳理了新型工业化相较于传统工业化的新特征，指出政府与市场赋能新型工业化并非线性、完全排他性关系。在此基础上，本文基于“自组织”理论，从理论逻辑、历史逻辑和实践逻辑三个方面阐释了我国新型工业化的赋能逻辑，强调市场作为一种“自组织”力量与政府作为一种“他组织”力量在赋能新型工业化的过程中是动态变化的，需要协同配合。而产业政策的制定和实施必须从推进我国新型工业化的实际出发，避免陷入“产业政策等同于计划经济”,或者“不实施产业政策才是真正意义的市场经济”等话语窠臼。

In response to the debate and disagreement in the academic community over the logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system, this article returns to Marx’s basic idea of establishing the logical mainline of political economy, and clarifies the basic principle that the establishment of the logical mainline of political economy must be consistent with the research method, research object, and research assumptions of political economy. The logical mainline of Marx’s political economy is the liberation of the proletariat, which includes ideological liberation, political liberation, economic liberation, free and comprehensive development, and it has stages. This provides the basic principles of Marxism for the establishment of the logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system. The logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system is the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, which has gone through different stages of development, demonstrating the innovative development of our Party’s advancement of the sinicization and modernization of the logical mainline of Marx’s political economy.

Mathematical Marxist political economy is the theoretical discipline that systematically applies mathematical methods to express and study the theories of Marxist political economy. It is based on the principles of political economy, uses mathematical methods as tools, and has effectively promoted the innovation and development of political economy. Both political economy and western economics employ mathematical modeling, but there are essential differences between the two. At the “assumption” level, political economy is based on specific production relations, positing that the ownership of means of production exogenously determines distribution relationships. At the “model” level, in addition to examining relative prices, resource allocation, and economic growth, it also develops a unique value system and related models based on the Labor Theory of Value. At the level of “conclusion,” it is asserted that the fundamental contradictions of capitalism lead to inherent instability in the capitalist economy, suggesting that economic fluctuations are not merely the result of exogenous shocks. Mathematical Marxist political economy primarily focuses on three major issues: mathematical modeling, data calculation, and empirical research, which enrich and perfect the research paradigm of Marxist political economy. Under the guidance of Xi Jinping’s economic thought, it can expand in ten dimensions: ownership, distribution, economic system, market, government, industrial economy, spatial economy, open economy, resource and environmental economy, and productive forces. And it will contribute to the construction of an independent theoretical system for the political economy of Socialism with Chinese characteristics.

2024 is the crucial year for achieving the goals and tasks set out in the 14th Five-year Plan. China actively responds to the impacts brought about by changes in the domestic and international environment, solidly promotes high-quality development, and promotes the economic recovery and improvement. New quality productive forces have been cultivated in accordance with local conditions, and new industries, new business forms and new models have emerged one after another. To specifically address the difficulties and challenges faced by China’s economic operation and deepen the understanding of the regularity of economic development, the political economic circles in China have carried out systematic and in-depth research and achieved a series of representative results. 

2024年7月18日召开的中国共产党第二十届中央委员会第三次全体会议通过了《中共中央关于进一步全面深化改革推进中国式现代化的决定》（以下简称《决定》），对进一步全面深化改革需要重点应对的十四个方面工作进行了全面部署，其中第一项就是“构建高水平社会主义市场经济体制”。社会主义市场经济是中国共产党在团结带领全国各族人民进行社会主义建设的过程中确立的改革目标和基本框架，是我们党的重大理论创新，是马克思主义中国化时代化的重要成果。社会主义市场经济理论有其独特的演进脉络，也必须不断经受中国经济发展和社会建设的实践检验，在实践中不断确证自己的真理性，在实践中不断取得理论的新发展。站在中华民族伟大复兴战略全局和世界百年未有之大变局两个大局的交汇口，如何更好构建高水平社会主义市场经济体制，打好进一步全面深化改革的攻坚战，为中国式现代化提供制度保障和经济动能，是亟待学界深化研究的重大理论和实践问题。

本文基于依附理论和世界体系理论，构建全球税收治理演进的政治经济学分析框架。在此框架下，运用社会网络分析方法揭示税收协定网络演进的阶段和影响机制。全球税收协定网络经历了从“核心-边缘”结构到“核心-半边缘-边缘”结构的转变，并逐步向多边税收治理模式转型，其本质是新兴经济体通过重构税收协定网络，打破了发达国家主导的规则垄断和传统依附关系，推动全球治理由单向剥削向多极博弈转变，印证了资本全球化与政治经济权力再平衡之间的深层互动逻辑。签订税收协定的数量、外商直接投资水平和地理邻近性等因素，是影响国家(地区)间税收协定关系建立的重要因素。面对数字经济带来的跨境避税新挑战，基于全球税收协定网络构建多边税收治理的积极力量，对于协调全球税收治理和建立新型国际税收关系具有重要意义。

在2024年度的国外政治经济学研究新进展报告当中，我们将以劳动价值论与剩余价值论、政治经济学的制度分析、劳动时间、土地、地租与食利者、政治经济学的定量经验分析方法五个专题对英语世界的政治经济学研究进行介绍。相比于往年的报告，2024年度的报告在选题和写作思路方面进行了一些调整，其核心在于缩小专题的讨论范围和报告总体的话题覆盖面。之所以进行这样的调整，原因在于一方面国内政治经济学界已经对国外政治经济学的研究有了非常多的了解和接触，这表现为政治经济学英文文献在国内引用数量的提高和中国学者在政治经济学的外文期刊发文数量的持续上升，全景式介绍的必要性正在下降；另一方面，过去一年中不同领域的英文政治经济学文献发表是不平衡的，全景式的介绍必然遇到一些领域新进展乏善可陈而另一些领域文献汗牛充栋、难窥全豹的问题。因此，在新一年度的报告中，课题组选择2024年一些关注度较高、讨论较为集中、进展较为丰富且对国内政治经济学研究借鉴意义较大的专题进行讨论。专题的题目也不再主要使用代表研究领域的范畴，而是更多地采取以问题为导向的方式。

党的二十届三中全会明确指出，“加快构建促进数字经济发展体制机制，完善促进数字产业化和产业数字化政策体系”。数字经济的兴起不仅是数据资源积累和数字技术革新的必然产物，也是生产力发展与全球经济结构转型的重要体现。在马克思主义政治经济学视域下，数字经济作为继农业经济、工业经济之后的新型经济形态，本质上是以数据资源为核心要素，由数字技术进步和平台化发展引领的生产力革命，并推动生产关系发生相适应的系统性变革。随着人工智能为代表的数字技术持续创新，数字经济发展已经成为各国在全球经济竞争中重新定位的重要契机。

Building an agricultural power is an inherent requirement of Chinese modernization. Compared to globally recognized agricultural powers, China faces significant gaps in critical indicators such as agricultural resource endowments, crop yield per unit area, and agricultural labor productivity. Accelerating the development of new quality productive forces, overcoming constraints imposed by agricultural resource endowments limitations and enhancing crop yields and labor productivity through original, disruptive, and cutting-edge technological innovations, represents an effective pathway to address the shortcomings in constructing an agricultural power. However, the formation of new quality productive forces necessitates the establishment of corresponding new relations of production. Within the institutional framework that constrains the development of agricultural new quality productive forces, land institutions hold a foundational role, exerting systemic and pivotal influence. To this end, reforms should prioritize aligning land institutions with the demands of advancing new quality productive forces. Key measures include advancing market-oriented allocation reforms for industrial land, refining the rural land property rights transfer system, establishing mechanisms to revitalize collective construction land, and enhancing the innovation-incentivizing function of cultivated land protection policies. These steps aim to foster synergistic evolution between land institution reforms and technological innovation, thereby accelerating the construction of an agricultural power.