Quantitative analysis demonstrates division of labor and underdeveloped distribution mechanisms in China's data policies, suggesting optimization opportunities.
The market-based allocation of data elements is critical for unlocking economic value in the digital economy. Using policy tools theory, this study examines China’s institutional framework for data marketization through a three-dimensional framework: policy issuers × policy tools × configuration paths. Based on a quantitative analysis of 569 policy units from 113 central and local documents (2020–2025), the study reveals key insights. First, central and local governments exhibit a clear division of labor: the central government prioritizes governance and ownership using information and regulatory tools, while local governments focus on circulation via service and environmental creation tools. However, distribution mechanisms remain underdeveloped, hindering operational effectiveness. Second, policy paths emphasize circulation and governance, with ownership and distribution systems lagging, leading to continuous infrastructure expansion but difficulties in market transactions. Third, service and environmental creation tools dominate, while regulatory and incentive tools are weaker. It reflects that the government prefers low-cost, low-conflict tools rather than transformative ones. These findings illuminate institutional complexities in data marketization and provide actionable recommendations for optimizing policy frameworks to balance ownership, circulation, distribution, and governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qiu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: