Research Report on Industrial Upgrading of Agricultural and Forest Plant‑Protection UAVs: Operation Service Modes and the Construction of Socialized Service System

Research Report on Industrial Upgrading of Agricultural and Forest Plant‑Protection UAVs: Operation Service Modes and the Construction of Socialized Service System

Compilation Entities: Buckhouse Intelligent Technology (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Economy Research Institute, Buckhouse Global Low‑Altitude Economy Industry Network, Buckhouse China Low‑Altitude Economy Industry Network, Buckhouse International Low‑Altitude Economy Cooperation Network, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Manufacturing Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Flight Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Support Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Infrastructure Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Industry Supporting Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Cross‑Boundary Integration Platform
Report Date: August 2026
Word Count: Approximately 9,800 words

Abstract

Against the macro backdrop of China’s comprehensive advancement of rural revitalization and the building of an agricultural powerhouse, as well as low‑altitude economy evolving into a national strategic emerging industry, agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs have developed from single agricultural operation tools into core infrastructure for smart agriculture and the agricultural socialized service system. Sustained outflow of traditional agricultural labor force and aging rural population, co‑existence of land fragmentation and large‑scale operation, have forced plant‑protection operations to transform from manual work to mechanization, intelligence and servitization. The industrial upgrading of agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs is not limited to technical iterations such as payload, endurance, obstacle avoidance and AI recognition of hardware. More importantly, it lies in the reconstruction of operation service modes and the systematic development of socialized service systems targeting multi‑level demands from small‑scale farmers, family farms, farmers’ cooperatives and leading agricultural enterprises.

Based on the real‑world development of China’s agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAV industry, this report sorts out industrial development status and technical iteration paths, analyzes the operating logic, strengths and practical shortcomings of mainstream operation service modes. From dimensions including cultivation of organizational entities, formulation of standards and specifications, talent training, construction of digital platforms, guarantee of policy mechanisms and industrial‑chain coordination, it systematically studies pathways for building the socialized service system for agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs, identifies practical contradictions in industrial upgrading, and puts forward implementable development countermeasures. The report also researches and judges medium‑ and long‑term industrial development trends, providing references for competent government authorities, industrial operators, research institutions and agricultural business entities.

Keywords: Agricultural and Forest Plant‑protection UAV; Industrial Upgrading; Operation Service Mode; Agricultural Socialized Service; Low‑Altitude Economy; Smart Agriculture

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Background

Food security constitutes a cornerstone of national security. Improving the modernization level of agricultural and forest pest and disease prevention and control is critical to guaranteeing the supply of grain and key agricultural products. With the official implementation of the Interim Regulations on the Administration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, the compliance management framework for agricultural UAVs has taken initial shape. Enabled by two‑way empowerment between low‑altitude economy and agricultural modernization, the agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAV industry is entering a phase featuring overlapping dividends from policy, market and technology.

China’s agricultural production pattern presents dual characteristics. On the one hand, continuous land transfer has expanded the scale of family farms and large‑scale planting bases. On the other hand, a large number of small‑scale farmers still exist extensively with fragmented plots and small operation scales, making it economically unfeasible for them to purchase large‑scale intelligent agricultural machinery. Traditional manual plant‑protection features high labor intensity, low pesticide application efficiency and high risk of pesticide drift. Meanwhile, the supply of young and middle‑aged agricultural labor keeps shrinking and manual plant‑protection costs keep rising. Traditional plant‑protection modes can hardly meet the requirements of modern agricultural production.

Featuring high operation efficiency, adaptability to complex terrains and capabilities such as variable‑rate pesticide application, sowing and fertilization as well as crop growth monitoring, agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs have gained rapid popularity in scenarios including plain farmland, hilly and mountainous areas, fruit forests and tea gardens. In the early stage of industrial development, hardware equipment sales served as the core business. Market focus has gradually shifted to operation services, trusteeship operation and data value‑added services, breaking the old pattern of “emphasizing hardware while neglecting services”. Nevertheless, the industry still faces prominent problems including scattered service entities, inconsistent operation standards, shortage of UAV operators, seasonal equipment idleness, difficulties in cross‑regional scheduling and insufficient service coverage for small‑scale farmers, which restrict high‑quality industrial upgrading. The core of promoting industrial upgrading is to bridge the gap between technical equipment and agricultural production scenarios, innovate business models for operation services, build a multi‑level and sustainable socialized service system for agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs, and translate technical equipment capabilities into tangible agricultural production benefits.

1.2 Research Significance

Theoretically, this report integrates industrial upgrading of low‑altitude equipment with theories of agricultural socialized services, clarifies the internal logic behind the evolution of plant‑protection UAVs from hardware products to carriers of socialized services, enriches research on the service‑oriented transformation of smart agricultural equipment, and offers theoretical references for constructing the framework of socialized service systems for agricultural low‑altitude equipment.

Practically, it sorts out applicable scenarios and pain points of various operation service modes, analyzes bottlenecks in building socialized service systems. It provides practical references for service organizations to optimize operation modes, governments to improve supporting policies and research institutions to promote the application of technical achievements. It helps solve difficulties for small‑scale farmers in accessing modern agricultural machinery, raises the coverage rate of socialized services for unified pest and disease prevention and control in agriculture and forestry, facilitates agricultural cost reduction and efficiency improvement as well as pesticide reduction, and supports the development of green agriculture.

1.3 Research Methods and Data Sources

This report adopts literature research, case study of industry practices and industrial comparative analysis. It sorts out policy documents issued by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs and the Civil Aviation Administration of China, integrates publicly available industrial statistics, white papers released by leading enterprises, practical cases of local socialized services, and conducts comprehensive analysis combined with research findings on low‑altitude economy.

Data sources include: public statistical communiqués released by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, documents on UAV administration issued by the Civil Aviation Administration of China, industrial research reports from Guanyan Tianxia and Analysys, publicly disclosed data from leading domestic agricultural UAV enterprises, publicly available materials on agricultural socialized service projects of provincial‑ and municipal‑level authorities, pilot cases released by local supply‑and‑marketing cooperatives and agricultural‑rural competent departments, and experimental data published in academic journals.

Chapter 2 Development Status and Internal Logic for Industrial Upgrading of China’s Agricultural and Forest Plant‑protection UAV Industry

2.1 Overall Industrial Development Profile

After more than ten years of development, China’s agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAV industry has completed a full course from technology introduction and prototype testing to large‑scale commercial application. A mature domestic supply chain has taken shape for complete‑machine manufacturing. Domestic leading enterprises occupy most of the domestic market share and achieve large‑scale overseas exports, with products sold to many agricultural countries and regions across the globe.

In terms of inventory and operation scale, the inventory of agricultural UAVs nationwide keeps growing. Operation scenarios have expanded from three major staple crops including rice, wheat and corn to more than 40 types of agricultural and forest crops such as soybean, cotton, various fruit trees, tea and Chinese medicinal herbs, as well as forest protection. The proportion of operations in complex terrains such as hilly‑mountain regions and orchards has risen rapidly, breaking the early stereotype that plant‑protection UAVs are only applicable to plain farmland. Operation contents have expanded from single pesticide spraying to foliar topdressing, seed sowing, solid fertilizer spreading, remote sensing monitoring of pests and diseases, crop growth assessment, short‑distance transportation of materials and other composite functions. Multi‑purpose application of single equipment has become a key direction for product iteration.

The industrial value chain keeps evolving. Complete‑machine hardware sales once constituted the absolute core source of industrial revenue. In recent years, operation services, UAV operator training, maintenance and repair, insurance and agricultural data value‑added services have accounted for an increasing proportion, with industrial value shifting toward the service side. However, industrial competition shows obvious differentiation. Leading manufacturers boast strong technical iteration capabilities, while a large number of small‑ and medium‑sized plant‑protection service entities operate on a small scale, and numerous individual UAV operators participate in the market in a scattered manner. The industrial pattern of “large‑scale manufacturing yet under‑developed services” has not been fully reversed.

In terms of policies, plant‑protection UAVs have been continuously included in the catalogue of agricultural machinery purchase subsidies. Many regions provide special operation subsidies for UAV‑based unified pest and disease prevention and control. Meanwhile, systems for air‑space administration and operator qualification management have been improved, laying an institutional foundation for standardized industrial development.

2.2 Three‑Tier Connotation of Industrial Upgrading

Industrial upgrading of agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs is not merely performance improvement of equipment, but a systematic upgrading integrating technology, business models and socialized service systems.

The first tier refers to upgrading of hardware technology and platform capabilities. Payload, endurance and wind‑resistance performance keep improving. Machine vision and LiDAR obstacle avoidance are widely applied. Technologies including AI‑enabled pest and disease identification, prescription map generation, variable‑rate pesticide application, fully autonomous operation and cluster collaborative operation are continuously implemented. Equipment adaptability to complex scenarios such as mountainous areas and orchards keeps improving. Supporting iteration of special‑purpose pesticides and plant‑protection adjuvants provides underlying technical foundation for innovation of service modes.

The second tier is the upgrading of operation service modes. It evolves from early scattered order‑taking by UAV operators and simple pesticide application by mu to diversified modes including trusteeship services, platform scheduling, equipment leasing and sharing, and full‑chain agricultural services. Services extend from single pesticide application to the whole process including pest monitoring, scheme formulation, pesticide matching, operation implementation and effect review, continuously enhancing service value.

The third tier is the upgrading of socialized service systems. A multi‑party collaborative service supply network guided by the government and dominated by market entities shall be built. Standards and specifications, talent cultivation, digital scheduling, risk guarantee and industrial‑chain supporting facilities shall be improved to complete the link from equipment supply to farmer demands, realize inclusive services for large‑scale farms and small‑scale farmers, and build a sustainably operating industrial ecosystem.

2.3 Major Existing Contradictions in Industrial Development

First, technical products iterate rapidly while supporting construction of socialized services lags behind. Despite fast improvement of hardware performance, progress in building operation acceptance standards, service pricing mechanisms, accident liability division and pesticide adaptation systems is slow, which prevents advanced equipment from giving full play to its efficiency.

Second, prominent resource mismatch caused by seasonal equipment utilization. Plant‑protection operations are highly concentrated in critical farming windows with frequent pest outbreaks. Equipment remains largely idle in off‑seasons, resulting in low asset utilization rate and higher unit operation costs, and undermining profitability of service entities. Cross‑regional operation scheduling faces multiple practical obstacles including air‑space filing, personnel transfer and logistics support.

Third, differentiated demands from business entities and insufficient supply‑demand matching. Large‑scale bases can afford complete sets of services, while numerous small‑scale farmers own scattered plots with small individual area, bringing fragmented orders. It is costly for traditional plant‑protection services to serve such groups, and channels for small‑scale farmers to obtain professional plant‑protection services remain inadequate.

Fourth, prominent shortage of talent. Qualified UAV operators shall not only master flight operation skills, but also possess agricultural and plant‑protection expertise including knowledge of crops, pests and diseases as well as pesticide proportioning. There is a shortage of compound talents with high personnel turnover, hindering stable operation of service organizations.

Fifth, market standardization needs improvement. Cut‑throat low‑price competition exists in the market. Some service teams win orders by shortening operation time and reducing pesticide dosage, leading to unsatisfactory prevention and control effects. Pesticide‑damage disputes occur from time to time, and unified inspection mechanisms for operation quality are absent, impairing overall industrial reputation.

Chapter 3 Analysis of Mainstream Operation Service Modes for Agricultural and Forest Plant‑protection UAVs

Along with industrial development, multiple operation service modes adapted to different business entities and geographical conditions have emerged across China. Each mode has its applicable boundaries and there exists no universally optimal solution.

3.1 Scattered Order‑taking by Individual UAV Operators

This basic mode took shape in the early industrial stage. Individual UAV operators purchase UAVs by themselves, acquire orders from surrounding farmers through social connections and offline promotion, and charge service fees by operation mu. Their service radius is generally limited to counties and surrounding towns.

Strengths: Low organizational cost, flexible response to scattered local small‑sized orders, close connection with grassroots farmers and wide coverage in county‑level rural markets.
Weaknesses: Small scale and poor risk resistance; order overload in peak farming seasons and equipment idleness in off‑seasons; non‑standard operation procedures and uneven pesticide schemes; inadequate after‑sales support and limited compensation capacity in case of pesticide‑damage disputes; incapability of undertaking large‑scale contiguous operation tasks and poor cross‑regional operation capacity.
Applicable Scenarios: Scattered small‑scale farmers in county‑level regions and fragmented plots of small‑sized family farms. It serves as a supplementary supply force for the socialized service system.

3.2 Full‑process Operation by Professional Plant‑protection Service Enterprises

Professional plant‑protection service enterprises deploy multiple UAVs and full‑time UAV operator teams supported by technical staff. They undertake orders from large‑scale growers, cooperatives and large‑scale bases, providing full services including pest and disease analysis, pesticide matching and UAV‑enabled pesticide application, and charge comprehensive service fees by mu. Some enterprises also offer equipment sales and training value‑added businesses. Certain enterprises set up cross‑regional operation teams to conduct operations across cities and counties following pest occurrence cycles.

Strengths: Higher team professionalism, capacity for large‑batch operations, capability to undertake large‑scale contiguous farmland projects and certain technical scheme competence.
Weaknesses: Obvious asset‑heavy attributes with high fixed costs for equipment procurement and personnel salaries; high costs for logistics supply, air‑space filing and personnel management in cross‑regional operations; highly seasonal business subject to farming cycles with volatile profitability.
Applicable Scenarios: Large‑scale contiguous farmland, large‑scale planting bases and government procurement projects for unified pest and disease prevention and control.

3.3 Equipment Leasing and Sharing (RaaS) Mode

Platforms or service enterprises hold UAV assets and provide time‑sharing leasing and hire‑purchase services for UAV operators, cooperatives and small‑scale service providers. Users are exempt from large‑sum one‑off equipment procurement and pay usage fees according to operation cycles or leasing duration. Service providers also offer maintenance, repair and spare‑part replacement services to lower market entry thresholds.

Strengths: Reduced asset investment pressure for small‑ and medium‑sized entities and alleviated equipment idleness by enabling asset circulation among multiple users.
Weaknesses: Difficult control over equipment wear and tear; well‑defined mechanisms for leasing pricing and liability for equipment damage are required; high requirements for layout of operation‑maintenance outlets with limited response efficiency in remote areas.
Applicable Scenarios: Start‑up plant‑protection service teams, seasonal temporary operation demands and cooperatives with limited economic conditions.

3.4 Digital Platform Matching and Scheduling Mode (“Didi‑style Plant‑protection Service”)

Online digital service platforms are built to gather operation demands from farmers. Certified UAV operators and plant‑protection service teams settled on the platform undertake orders. The platform intelligently matches service resources according to geographical location, crop types and order scale, realizing integrated scheduling covering order release, intelligent order dispatching, operation process feedback, service evaluation and payment settlement. It digitally matches scattered demands and scattered supplies. Some platforms automatically combine fragmented small‑sized orders to reduce empty‑travel losses for UAV operators.

Strengths: Effectively addresses information asymmetry between supply and demand, aggregates numerous scattered demands from small‑scale farmers, improves order‑taking efficiency for UAV operators, promotes transparency of service processes and enables accumulation of operation data.
Weaknesses: High platform operation costs requiring continuous expansion of both supply and demand‑side users; great difficulties in offline service quality control as online platforms cannot fully constrain offline practical operations; requirement for local operation teams.
Applicable Scenarios: Supply‑demand matching across counties and regions, especially for regions with a high proportion of small‑scale farmers.

3.5 Integrated Agricultural Production Trusteeship Service Mode

Service entities provide not only single‑link UAV‑enabled plant‑protection operations, but also undertake partial or full land trusteeship. They package UAV‑enabled plant‑protection with ploughing, sowing, fertilization and harvesting. Farmers entrust their land to service organizations for unified management, with UAV‑enabled plant‑protection serving as one module of trusteeship services. Supply‑and‑marketing cooperatives and large‑scale agricultural service companies are major implementers of this mode, which has gained rapid promotion in major grain‑producing areas.

Strengths: Breaks seasonal limitations of single plant‑protection businesses, expands business scenarios throughout the whole year, delivers high service value and facilitates the integration of small‑scale farmers into large‑scale modern agricultural systems.
Weaknesses: Extremely high comprehensive competence requirements for service organizations, which shall master full‑chain agricultural production; high capital occupation and multiple operational risk points.
Applicable Scenarios: Major grain‑producing areas, towns with concentrated small‑scale farmers and clusters of family farms.

3.6 Self‑built Service Teams by Cooperatives and Village Collectives

Farmers’ professional cooperatives and village collective economic organizations raise funds to purchase plant‑protection UAVs and set up internal plant‑protection teams. They prioritize services for cooperative members and local villagers at preferential prices, and meanwhile undertake external businesses in surrounding markets. Supply‑and‑marketing cooperative systems in many regions vigorously promote this mode to build grassroots service forces rooted in rural areas.

Strengths: Service entities are rooted in rural communities with close connections to farmers and solid trust foundation, enabling stable services for local small‑scale farmers; collective benefits can also be achieved, serving as an important carrier for grassroots socialized services.
Weaknesses: Some cooperatives suffer from shortage of professional talents and poor equipment maintenance capacity; equipment idleness caused by insufficient business volume.
Applicable Scenarios: Administrative villages with sound collective‑economy foundations and large‑scale planting cooperatives.

3.7 Government Procurement of Services

Competent agricultural‑rural departments procure plant‑protection UAV operation services from various plant‑protection service entities through government procurement for public tasks including emergency prevention and control of major agricultural and forest pests and diseases, so as to accomplish regional centralized prevention and control tasks. It constitutes an important form of public plant‑protection.

Strengths: Enables rapid completion of emergency prevention and control tasks over large‑scale areas, safeguards public interests in grain production and drives the growth of local plant‑protection service organizations.
Weaknesses: It is task‑oriented orders with poor sustainability, and cannot fully support the survival and development of service organizations.

3.8 Comprehensive Comparison and Summary of Various Modes

No mode is absolutely superior to others. The direction of industrial upgrading is not to replace other modes with one single mode, but to build a diversified and complementary mode matrix. Large‑scale professional enterprises undertake large‑scale base orders and government projects; digital platforms integrate scattered supply and demand; village‑level collectives and cooperatives‑affiliated service teams serve small‑scale farmers at grassroots level; leasing modes lower industrial entry thresholds. Multiple modes work synergistically to form a complete supply network for operation services.

Chapter 4 Construction Framework and Practical Bottlenecks of the Socialized Service System for Agricultural and Forest Plant‑protection UAVs

The socialized service system for agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs is an organic whole targeting multi‑level plant‑protection demands of agricultural and forest business entities. It consists of service supply entities, digital service platforms, standards and specification systems, talent cultivation systems, policy guarantee mechanisms and industrial‑chain supporting services. Its core objective is to resolve the contradiction of “high‑performance equipment yet difficult service implementation”, realize inclusive application of technical equipment, and satisfy production demands of both large‑scale business entities and numerous small‑scale farmers.

4.1 Core Constituent Modules of the Socialized Service System

4.1.1 Matrix of Diversified Service Supply Entities

Supply entities fall into four categories: first, market‑oriented professional plant‑protection enterprises undertaking large‑scale commercial orders; second, service teams of cooperatives and village collective economic organizations serving as grassroots inclusive service pivots; third, individual certified UAV operators aggregated by platforms as supplementary forces; fourth, public‑oriented guiding entities such as supply‑and‑marketing systems and agricultural socialized service centers undertaking public tasks and demonstration promotion. The four categories develop in a dislocation‑based manner, forming a supply pattern featuring public guidance and market dominance.

4.1.2 Standards and Quality Control System

It includes equipment access standards, qualification administration for plant‑protection operators, technical operation specifications for different crops, acceptance standards for operation quality, disposal and liability‑division mechanisms for pesticide‑damage accidents, and service price guidelines. At present, hardware standards are relatively complete, yet implementation of field‑oriented operation acceptance standards is insufficient. There exist no universally recognized judgment criteria for qualified plant‑protection operations among farmers and service providers.

4.1.3 Digital Scheduling and Data Service System

County‑ and regional‑level plant‑protection UAV scheduling platforms realize demand collection, order distribution, operation track feedback and operation quality traceability. They connect with pest‑monitoring and meteorological data to support decision‑making for plant‑protection operations. Meanwhile, rules for data security management shall be formulated to standardize collection, storage and application of farmland production data and protect data rights and interests of agricultural business entities.

4.1.4 Multi‑level Talent Cultivation System

Talents include three types: certified UAV operators, plant‑protection technical consultants and service operation managers. Training shall not be limited to flight operations. Agricultural and plant‑protection knowledge shall be emphasized. A compound talent cultivation path of “flight operation plus crop plant‑protection” shall be established, covering vocational training, practical‑training bases and skill evaluation.

4.1.5 Industrial‑chain Supporting and Guarantee System

It covers local equipment maintenance and repair outlets, supply of special‑purpose plant‑protection pesticides and adjuvants, special‑purpose insurance for agricultural UAVs (flight accident insurance and pesticide‑damage liability insurance), and financial credit support. These address practical problems including long maintenance distance for broken equipment, insufficient compensation capacity in case of accidents and high pressure for equipment procurement funds.

4.1.6 Policy Guidance and Regulatory Coordination Mechanism

Agricultural machinery purchase subsidies, operation subsidies, procurement of public projects, air‑space collaborative administration and industrial self‑regulation shall guide sound industrial competition, curb cut‑throat low‑price competition, and promote appropriate shift of subsidy focus from hardware procurement to service provision.

4.2 Prominent Bottlenecks in Constructing the Socialized Service System

First, unbalanced development of grassroots service entities. Many regions lack stable service organizations rooted at county level and rely heavily on mobile external plant‑protection teams which arrive in peak farming seasons and leave in off‑seasons. Small‑scale farmers can hardly obtain stable services. Some service teams affiliated with village‑level collectives and cooperatives prioritize equipment procurement over operation, resulting in long‑term equipment idleness due to shortage of competent operators.

Second, insufficient implementation of standards. Certain specifications have been issued at national and industrial levels, yet supporting implementation rules for county‑level field scenarios are absent. On‑site inspection means are lacking for key operation parameters such as flight altitude, flight speed, droplet sedimentation effect and pesticide dosage per mu. In case of unsatisfactory prevention‑control effects or pesticide damage, liability is hard to define. Farmers face high difficulties in rights protection while service providers also face risks of groundless disputes.

Third, obvious shortcomings in talent systems. Existing training mostly focuses on flight operations with inadequate teaching of agricultural and plant‑protection knowledge. UAV operators suffer from poor occupational guarantees, heavy workload and harsh field working conditions, leading to high personnel turnover. Normalized practical‑training bases are scarce at county level, and there are no continuous channels for technical updating after training.

Fourth, fragmentation of digital platforms. Multiple local scheduling platforms exist yet they are isolated from one another with disconnected data, hindering cross‑regional circulation of order resources. Some platforms attach importance to construction yet neglect operation. Lacking continuous maintenance after completion, they are reduced to static display systems and fail to give play to scheduling and matching functions.

Fifth, deficiencies in supporting guarantee systems. Insufficient county‑level maintenance outlets lead to long repair cycles for faulty equipment and missed farming windows. Low penetration of plant‑protection pesticide‑damage liability insurance easily triggers conflicts once pesticide‑damage accidents occur. Financial products are poorly adapted, and light‑asset small‑ and medium‑sized service organizations lack suitable credit products for business expansion.

Sixth, economic feasibility challenges in serving small‑scale farmers. Small‑scale farmers own fragmented plots with small individual area and high round‑trip scheduling costs. Pure market‑driven mechanisms bring low returns for service providers serving small‑scale farmers. Appropriate policy guidance is required to resolve the dilemma that “serving large‑scale farmers is profitable while serving small‑scale farmers is not”.

Seventh, room for improvement in air‑space administration and cross‑regional operation coordination. Cross‑county‑and‑city operations of plant‑protection UAVs require flight filing. Cumbersome filing procedures for multi‑region transfer increase operating costs for cross‑regional operation teams and impair efficient allocation of resources through cross‑regional scheduling.

Chapter 5 Implementation Pathways for Industrial Upgrading and Construction of Socialized Service System for Agricultural and Forest Plant‑protection UAVs

Combined with industrial status and practical bottlenecks, implementation pathways are proposed from seven dimensions: entity cultivation, mode innovation, standard construction, digital infrastructure, talent development, industrial‑chain improvement and policy optimization.

5.1 Tiered and Classified Cultivation of Diversified Service Supply Entities

First, support and expand professional plant‑protection service enterprises. Encourage leading enterprises to set up county‑level branches, and support local plant‑protection enterprises to grow stronger. Guide enterprises to upgrade from simple operations to full‑chain services covering “monitoring‑scheme‑operation‑effect evaluation”. Promote the development of cross‑regional operation capacity and participation in major unified pest‑prevention‑and‑control projects.

Second, strengthen grassroots service pivots of village‑level collectives and cooperatives. Encourage qualified village collective economic organizations and farmers’ cooperatives to build village‑level plant‑protection service stations, purchase equipment and set up local service teams prioritizing services for local small‑scale farmers. Blind equipment procurement shall be avoided. Priority shall be given to team building over equipment purchase. Supporting operating funds shall be allocated to prevent equipment idleness. For village‑level collectives without conditions for self‑owned equipment, cooperation contracts with external service providers can be adopted instead of blind heavy‑asset investment.

Third, standardize the development of individual UAV operators. Promote certified employment for UAV operators, bring individual operators under organizational management of platforms and cooperatives to end complete scattered survival status. Establish credit‑evaluation files for UAV operators and guide individual operators toward organizational development.

Fourth, give play to the bridging role of supply‑and‑marketing systems and agricultural socialized service centers. Leverage existing grassroots agricultural‑service networks to integrate various plant‑protection service resources, act as a connector between government public services and market‑oriented services, undertake public prevention‑and‑control tasks and connect demands from small‑scale farmers.

5.2 Continuous Innovation and Iteration of Diversified Operation Service Modes

No one‑size‑fits‑all mode shall be adopted. Multiple modes shall be combined according to local conditions. In major grain‑producing areas, integrated modes combining trusteeship with UAV‑enabled plant‑protection shall be vigorously promoted. In hilly‑mountainous regions with numerous small‑scale farmers and fragmented plots, digital platform order‑combining and scheduling modes shall be prioritized to aggregate fragmented small‑sized orders. For economic fruit‑tree producing areas, local cooperative‑affiliated service teams shall be developed. Leasing and sharing modes shall be promoted to lower asset‑related thresholds for small‑ and medium‑sized entities.

Innovate and extend service modes. Promote plant‑protection UAV services to extend forward to pest monitoring and backward to agricultural‑product quality traceability. Convert crop‑growth and pest‑disease data collected by UAVs into value‑added service points, changing the single profit‑making structure relying merely on mu‑based charges. Meanwhile, guide service entities to treat cross‑regional operations rationally, improve logistics support schemes for cross‑regional operations, and deploy supporting maintenance, spare‑part supply and personnel rotation mechanisms to enhance sustainability of cross‑regional operations.

5.3 Improve Standards, Specifications and Ground‑oriented Quality Control Mechanisms

Promote implementation of standards from documents to field practices. For different crops and terrains, refine local implementation specifications for UAV‑enabled plant‑protection operations, clarifying flight parameters, pesticide dosage, operation time and acceptance indicators. Explore simple and implementable operation‑inspection means, and realize traceability of operation processes relying on UAV‑fed‑back operation tracks and images.

Establish service‑disposal mechanisms for disputes, define judgment procedures for pesticide‑damage accidents, and clarify liabilities of farmers, service providers and pesticide suppliers. Promote industrial self‑regulation, set up local plant‑protection service alliances, establish blacklists for credit evaluation of service providers, curb cut‑throat low‑price competition, and guide the industry to shift from price competition to service‑quality competition. Explore linking financial operation subsidies with inspection results of operation quality, so that high‑quality services obtain priority subsidy support and force improvement of service quality.

5.4 Build Pragmatic and Efficient Digital Service Infrastructure

Coordinate the construction of county‑level scheduling service platforms for plant‑protection UAVs and avoid redundant construction. The core functions of platforms lie in order collection, resource scheduling, operation traceability as well as push of pest‑monitoring and meteorological information rather than fancy technologies. Encourage inter‑platform interface interoperability to break data silos and support cross‑county order circulation.

Adhere to the principle of “building platforms while prioritizing platform operation”. Deploy local operation staff to connect with towns and villages, channel offline farmer demands online and prevent platform idleness. Meanwhile, strictly implement data security, clarify ownership of farmland production data, standardize data collection and utilization, and prohibit unauthorized excessive collection of agricultural production data from farmers.

5.5 Improve Compound Talent Cultivation Systems

Change the training misconception of “prioritizing flight skills over agronomic knowledge”. Build dual‑core training content covering “flight operation plus plant‑protection agronomy”. Rely on agriculture‑related universities and colleges, social training institutions and enterprise practical‑training bases to build regional practical‑training bases for agricultural UAVs. For UAV operators, besides flight qualifications, practical teaching on crop pest‑disease identification, pesticide knowledge and pesticide‑damage risk avoidance shall be strengthened.

Improve talent incentives, explore skill‑grade evaluation for UAV operators, broaden career‑development paths and promote professionalization of agricultural UAV operators. Encourage the mentorship mode of “senior operators mentoring new‑comers” to reduce personnel turnover. Organize regular rotation training for service teams affiliated with cooperatives and village‑level collectives to update technical knowledge continuously.

5.6 Make Up Shortcomings in Industrial‑chain Supporting Services

Deploy local operation‑maintenance networks at county level. Encourage manufacturers and service providers to set up maintenance service outlets in key agricultural counties to shorten response time for equipment breakdown repair. Vigorously promote special‑purpose insurance for agricultural UAVs, popularize third‑party liability insurance and pesticide‑damage liability insurance to reduce operational risks for service entities.

Optimize financial supply, develop adapted credit products for light‑asset plant‑protection service organizations and support the development of equipment‑leasing businesses. Accelerate research, development and promotion of special‑purpose plant‑protection pesticides and adjuvants adapted to UAV low‑volume spraying technologies to reduce drift and pesticide‑damage risks from the pesticide end.

5.7 Optimize Policy Coordination and Guarantee Mechanisms

Optimize subsidy structures. On the basis of continuing to implement agricultural machinery purchase subsidies, appropriately increase subsidies for socialized service operation links, with priority tilted toward counties with concentrated small‑scale farmers and hilly fruit‑tree producing areas. For government procurement of unified pest‑prevention‑and‑control projects, prioritize entities with sound quality control and local service capabilities instead of merely considering quotation.

Strengthen coordination between air‑space policies and agricultural operations. Simplify filing procedures for seasonal cross‑regional operations of plant‑protection UAVs and establish convenient filing channels for agricultural and forest plant‑protection scenarios. Meanwhile, strengthen grassroots publicity and promotion, popularize knowledge on UAV‑enabled plant‑protection among farmers, help farmers identify qualified plant‑protection services and raise farmers’ acceptance of professional socialized services.

Chapter 6 Research and Judgment on Industrial Development Trends

First, at the technical level: hardware equipment will keep evolving toward large payload, full autonomy and cluster collaboration. AI‑enabled identification and multi‑spectral remote‑sensing capabilities will be further popularized. Equipment adaptability to complex scenarios such as mountains and orchards will continuously improve. Overall costs of hardware equipment will keep declining, yet industrial competition focus will keep shifting toward the service side.

Second, in terms of service modes: the proportion of plant‑protection businesses charging merely by mu will gradually decrease. The proportion of integrated trusteeship services and data value‑added services will rise. Comprehensive service solutions of “hardware plus operation plus data” will become mainstream. Equipment leasing and sharing modes will gain further popularity, realizing separation of assets and operations and lowering industrial entry thresholds.

Third, socialized service pattern: socialized service systems will evolve from pilot sites to systematic network‑based layout. County‑town‑village three‑level service nodes will gradually take shape. The value of grassroots service pivots of village‑level collectives and cooperatives will be further highlighted. Service coverage for small‑scale farmers will increase significantly, resolving difficulties for small‑scale farmers in accessing modern agricultural machinery.

Fourth, expansion of industrial boundaries: the socialized service system for plant‑protection UAVs will not be limited to agricultural and forest pest and disease prevention and control. It will further undertake tasks including forest protection, grassland governance and short‑distance transportation of agricultural materials. The low‑altitude‑equipment‑based socialized service network will become important infrastructure for rural low‑altitude economy.

Meanwhile, it shall be objectively noted that industrial upgrading cannot be accomplished in the short term. Long‑term adaptation is required among equipment, modes, institutions and talents. One‑step accomplishment shall not be pursued. Local agricultural realities shall be respected and system construction shall be advanced in a gradual manner.

Chapter 7 Conclusion

Industrial upgrading of agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs constitutes a systematic project integrating hardware technical iteration, innovation of operation service modes and construction of socialized service systems. At present, China has achieved a relatively high level in hardware manufacturing, yet supply of operation services and construction of socialized service systems remain shortcomings.

Diversified operation modes have emerged in the market including scattered order‑taking, professional‑enterprise‑led operations, equipment leasing and sharing, digital platform matching, production trusteeship, service teams of cooperatives and village‑level collectives, and government procurement of services. Each mode has its applicable scenarios. Complementary coexistence of multiple modes shall be promoted to build a multi‑level supply matrix.

Building the socialized service system for agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs requires simultaneous efforts in multiple dimensions including cultivation of service entities, mode innovation, standard implementation, digital‑platform operation, compound talent training, industrial‑chain improvement and policy coordination. Its core objective is to bridge the “last mile” from technical equipment to farmland, satisfy demands of both large‑scale business entities and numerous small‑scale farmers. It shall give full play to the core role of market entities as well as the guiding and underpinning function of policies, and resolve practical bottlenecks including seasonal equipment idleness, talent shortage, absence of standards and difficulties in serving small‑scale farmers.

Looking ahead, agricultural and forest plant‑protection UAVs are more than agricultural machinery. They serve as important carriers for smart‑agriculture‑oriented socialized services. A sound socialized service system can translate technical advantages of low‑altitude equipment into tangible capacity for safeguarding food security and improving agricultural cost‑benefit performance, providing strong support for China’s agricultural modernization and rural revitalization.

Data Sources

1. National Agricultural Mechanization Development Statistical Communiqué, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of China

2. Supporting documents for Interim Regulations on the Administration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Trial Provisions on the Administration of Training for Operators of Agricultural Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Civil Aviation Administration of China

3. Public industrial research reports on China’s low‑altitude economy and agricultural UAV industry from Guanyan Tianxia and Analysys

4. Public white papers and publicly disclosed operational data released by leading domestic agricultural UAV enterprises

5. Public policy documents on agricultural‑machinery purchase subsidies and unified pest‑prevention‑and‑control operation subsidies issued by provincial‑ and municipal‑level departments of agriculture and rural affairs

6. Public pilot cases of plant‑protection‑oriented socialized services released by supply‑and‑marketing cooperatives and agricultural‑rural authorities across China

7. Relevant experimental research literature from the Plant‑protection Machinery and Pesticide Application Technology Center of China Agricultural University

8. Public industrial survey reports from Agrochemical & Market Media and 21st Century Business Herald

Disclaimer

This report is jointly compiled by relevant platforms under Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Economy. All data adopted in this report are derived from public channels. The compiling entities assume no guarantee for the authenticity and completeness of original data. This report serves merely as a reference for industrial research and analysis, and shall not constitute any investment suggestion, commercial decision‑making guideline or policy‑implementation basis. Views and judgments in this report are formulated based on current industrial environment conditions. Subject to technical iteration, policy adjustment and market changes, relevant conclusions feature timeliness and limitations. Without written permission, distortion or excerpt‑based misquotation of this report is prohibited. Complete citation of compiling entities shall be marked when quoting contents from this report.

...................................