A Study on the Co-evolution of New Quality Productivity and New Urbanization in China

Gao Shuai, Zhang Wuwei
School of Economics and Management, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, Shandong, China

Abstract

This study aims to explore the co-evolution mechanism between new quality productivity and new urbanization, alleviate contradictions between them, and contribute to achieving Chinese-style modernization. Taking 31 provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) in China as research objects, we construct a theoretical framework for the "new quality productivity–new urbanization" synergy, and employ the CRITIC weight analysis method and the Haken co-evolution model to measure the levels of new quality productivity and new urbanization and analyze their co-evolution mechanisms. The results show that: (1) During the observation period, the levels of new urbanization and new quality productivity significantly improved, with increasingly obvious spatial differentiation characteristics, presenting a regional development pattern of "the east leading, the middle catching up, and the west lagging behind." (2) New quality productivity plays a dominant role in the dual-new complex system and serves as the core variable leading the system's orderly evolution. Meanwhile, positive feedback mechanisms exist both within and between systems, and the cumulative and self-reinforcing nature of internal system elements constitutes the key driving force for forming positive feedback mechanisms. (3) The co-evolution of the dual-new system has undergone two stages: rapid advancement (2014–2020) and stable operation (2020–2023). Spatially, it continues to exhibit a distribution characteristic of "strong in the east and weak in the west." Cultivating new quality productivity and building new urbanization according to local conditions, optimizing the dual-new synergy mechanism, and continuously injecting emerging elements into the dual-new system are key paths to achieving upward evolution of the system. The findings provide a reference for achieving coordinated development of new quality productivity and new urbanization, resolving contradictions between economic efficiency and social equity, and attaining Chinese-style modernization.

Keywords: new quality productivity; new urbanization; co-evolution; Haken model

Within the strategic framework of Chinese-style modernization, new quality productivity and new urbanization constitute dual engines of high-quality development, exhibiting a dialectical relationship that is both contradictory and unified \cite{}. From the perspective of contradiction, new quality productivity relies on artificial intelligence, digital technology, and other elements to reconstruct production modes. While driving total factor productivity improvement, it expands the labor skill gap and creates a low-end employment crowding-out effect \cite{}, inadvertently raising the threshold for rural migrant workers' integration into cities \cite{}, which conflicts with new urbanization's important task of resolving the "semi-urbanization" dilemma and promoting integrated urban-rural development \cite{}. From the perspective of unity, the cultivation of new quality productivity generates new production factors that can both directly empower high-quality economic development by assisting industrial upgrading \cite{} and indirectly form an equitable distribution model through the digital transformation of public services, injecting innovation momentum into "people-centered" new urbanization \cite{}. Conversely, new urbanization improves digital infrastructure and concentrates production factors \cite{}, generating agglomeration effects that provide spatial carriers and factor support for new quality productivity development \cite{}. How to alleviate contradictions and strengthen the unified relationship to achieve coordinated development between them is a proposition worthy of in-depth exploration.

Existing scholarship has discussed the connotations of new urbanization and new quality productivity. The former focuses more on social equity compared to traditional urbanization, with its core lying in promoting people-centered transformation of production modes, lifestyle changes, and social relationship reconstruction to enable citizenization of agricultural transfer populations \cite{}. The latter emphasizes economic quality and efficiency. While traditional productivity mainly relies on scale expansion of resource factors to achieve extensive economic growth \cite{}, new quality productivity emphasizes scientific and technological innovation as a new engine and new industries as carriers, generating new models of economic development to promote high-quality economic transformation \cite{}. New urbanization emphasizes fairness and inclusiveness at the social level, while new quality productivity highlights the driving effect of innovation factors on economic quality and efficiency. Both constitute important content of development model transformation in the new era.

Some scholars have already noted the positive impact of representative elements of new quality productivity, such as the digital economy \cite{} and industrial structure upgrading \cite{}, on new urbanization. Others have explored the reverse effect of new urbanization on new quality productivity. For instance, Li Junming et al. \cite{} used provincial panel data from 2011–2021 to empirically find that new urbanization construction can facilitate digital economy development. Jing Qinlei et al. \cite{} used the quasi-natural experiment of new urbanization comprehensive pilot policies to verify that new urbanization construction can accelerate urban-rural factor flow and promote traditional industry upgrading and advantageous industry development.

The above literature has revealed the mechanism between new urbanization and new quality productivity from a one-way driving perspective. On this basis, some scholars have revealed the two-way interactive relationship. Wen Feng'an et al. \cite{} demonstrated from the perspective of digital villages that new quality productivity accumulates emerging production factors for new urbanization, while new urbanization provides a development carrier for new quality productivity, forming a logical framework of mutual promotion and two-way driving. Liu Wei \cite{} pointed out by analyzing the spirit of the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee that the new urbanization process will further unleash the potential of new quality productivity.

In summary, existing research has confirmed the one-way or two-way interaction between new quality productivity and new urbanization from empirical and theoretical perspectives. However, the synergy mechanism has not yet been revealed. Therefore, this study, supported by synergetics theory, constructs an analytical framework for the coordinated development of "new quality productivity–new urbanization," introduces the Haken model, and deeply analyzes the co-evolution mechanism of this complex system to break the "black box" of the synergy mechanism between new quality productivity and new urbanization. The aim is to provide ideas and suggestions for resolving contradictions between economic efficiency and social equity and better achieving Chinese-style modernization.

1 Theoretical Analysis

1.1 Theoretical Framework

The dual-new system is a complex system composed of two subsystems: new quality productivity and new urbanization. This system continuously enriches its internal elements with economic and social development, achieving evolution from disorder to order and from non-synergy to dynamic stable synergy \cite{}. According to synergetics theory, based on the degree of influence of each subsystem on the complex system, subsystems can be divided into order parameters (dominant subsystems) and servo parameters (controlled subsystems). Identifying system order parameters is crucial for analyzing system co-evolution mechanisms. To identify system order parameters and analyze the co-evolution mechanism between new quality productivity and new urbanization, this study constructs the following theoretical analysis framework [FIGURE:1].

New quality productivity generates new engines, new business forms, and new models that directly empower new urbanization. In the initial stage, new quality productivity mainly promotes the start of new urbanization through technological innovation that generates new engines. Technological innovation drives the development of high-end manufacturing and high-tech industries, creating large numbers of high-quality employment opportunities in cities, attracting rural populations to urban areas, and advancing population urbanization. Simultaneously, technological innovation optimizes urban industrial structure, improves resource utilization efficiency, and injects new momentum into economic urbanization \cite{}. As technological innovation deepens, new business forms gradually emerge. On the one hand, intelligent life industries such as smart healthcare, intelligent transportation, and online education initially take shape, optimizing the urban industrial system, improving urban residents' quality of life, enhancing urban economic attractiveness and radiation capacity, and promoting economic and life urbanization \cite{}. On the other hand, digital economy industries such as digital finance, e-commerce, and smart agriculture develop rapidly, blurring urban-rural boundaries, breaking urban-rural barriers, smoothing channels for production factor circulation between urban and rural areas, narrowing urban-rural gaps, and achieving integrated urban-rural development \cite{}. Driven by new engines and new business forms, the economic growth model transforms toward green and digital development, boosting economic and ecological urbanization \cite{}.

New urbanization indirectly feeds back to new quality productivity through factor agglomeration and market expansion. Life urbanization can stimulate residents' innovation vitality and create a social environment conducive to cultivating new quality productivity. Urban residents' continuous demand for high-quality life services can enhance their subjective initiative in participating in the cultivation process of new quality productivity, accelerating economic digitalization and green transformation to generate new models of economic growth \cite{}. Population urbanization can strengthen population agglomeration effects, injecting sustained growth momentum into new quality productivity. On the one hand, large numbers of labor forces entering cities can unleash urban innovation potential, concentrate innovation factors, enhance technological innovation levels, and activate new engines for economic development \cite{}. On the other hand, population agglomeration expands demand for modern services, digital economy, and other emerging industries, broadening the development space for new business forms \cite{}. Economic urbanization enhances economic vitality and lays a solid material foundation for new quality productivity development. The expansion of urban economic scale and improvement of industrial systems promote the development of new business forms such as digital economy and intelligent manufacturing, enhance innovation diffusion capacity and application transformation efficiency, and accelerate the generation of new quality productivity \cite{}. Ecological urbanization stimulates green innovation demand and application scenarios, effectively guiding economic development toward green transformation. The green development concept of ecological urbanization has spawned demand for green technology innovation, providing broad development space for new business forms such as green patents and green manufacturing \cite{}. Urban-rural integration promotes new quality productivity development through income synchronization and social security integration. Income synchronization narrows the urban-rural income gap, enhances rural consumption capacity, promotes the extension of emerging consumption forms derived from new business forms to rural areas, expands the development scale of new business forms \cite{}; social security integration improves rural residents' social security levels, reduces life uncertainties, stimulates rural residents' enthusiasm for integrating into cities and participating in emerging industries, promotes factor flow, and feeds back to new quality productivity \cite{}.

1.2 Indicator System Construction

New Urbanization Evaluation Indicator System: Existing research mostly proceeds from the core concept of "people-oriented" and evaluates new urbanization levels from four dimensions: citizenization of agricultural transfer populations, improvement of urban social governance, achievement of sustainable urban development, and integrated urban-rural development \cite{}. In addition to referencing existing research, this study also refers to the core connotation of new urbanization and constructs a new urbanization evaluation indicator system from five dimensions: population, economy, life, ecology, and urban-rural integration [TABLE:1].

New Quality Productivity Evaluation Indicator System: New quality productivity is an advanced productivity centered on high technology, high efficiency, and high quality. It uses innovative technology as a power engine to reconstruct the combination situation of technology, industry, and factors, derives new business forms and models, and transforms economic development goals from "increment" to "quality improvement" \cite{}. Referring to relevant research, this study constructs a new quality productivity evaluation indicator system from three dimensions: new engines, new business forms, and new models [TABLE:2].

2 Research Methods

2.1 Data Sources

The data in this study are derived from the China Statistical Yearbook, China Science and Technology Statistical Yearbook, China Population and Employment Statistical Yearbook, provincial statistical yearbooks, and statistical bulletins from 2014–2023. Missing data are supplemented using interpolation methods.

2.2 Methodology

2.2.1 CRITIC Weight Analysis Method

Indicators within and between the "new quality productivity–new urbanization" complex system have multidimensional correlations. Directly using single dispersion methods (coefficient of variation method, range method) or entropy weight method would ignore indicator correlations, leading to duplicate information calculation and affecting weighting accuracy \cite{}. Therefore, this study adopts the CRITIC method to assign weights to each indicator.

2.2.2 Haken Model

The Haken model can accurately identify key driving factors for coordinated development by distinguishing controlled variables and order parameters. It can identify dominant and controlled variables in the dual-new system. Compared with commonly used coupling coordination models, it can analyze the interaction relationship between subsystems \cite{}. Therefore, this study adopts the Haken model to deeply analyze the synergy mechanism between new urbanization and new quality productivity. The specific steps are as follows:

(1) Constructing System Evolution Equations

New quality productivity and new urbanization constitute a complex synergy system. The principle of using the Haken model in this study is to investigate the system's evolution mechanism through approximated slow variables (order parameters) and fast variables (servo parameters). The specific modeling steps are as follows: Assume $q_1$ is the dominant slow variable (order parameter) that drives system evolution, and $q_2$ is the fast variable (servo parameter). $q_1$ and $q_2$ jointly constitute the co-evolution system. The relationship between $q_1$ and $q_2$ is as shown in Equation (1):
$$
\begin{cases}
\dot{q}_1 = -\gamma_1 q_1 - a q_1 q_2 \
\dot{q}_2 = -\gamma_2 q_2 + b q_1^2
\end{cases}
$$
where $\dot{q}_i$ is the derivative function of the state variable with respect to time; $q_1$ and $q_2$ are the order parameter and servo parameter in the system, respectively; $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ are control parameters; and $a$ and $b$ are the interaction intensities of state variables. If the "adiabatic approximation assumption" that $\dot{q}_2 = 0$ holds, then $q_2$ can be expressed as $q_2 = (b/\gamma_2) q_1^2$. Substituting this into Equation (1) yields the evolution equation of the order parameter:
$$
\dot{q}_1 = -\gamma_1 q_1 - \frac{ab}{\gamma_2} q_1^3
$$

(2) Constructing Potential Function

Equation (3) shows that the change in $q_1$ varies with $q_1$ itself, so $q_1$ is the order parameter of the system and dominates the system's co-evolution process. Performing opposite-number and integration operations on Equation (3) yields the system's potential function $V(q_1)$. $V(q_1)$ represents the system's evolution path under the control of $q_1$:
$$
V(q_1) = \frac{1}{2} \gamma_1 q_1^2 + \frac{ab}{4\gamma_2} q_1^4
$$

When $\gamma_1 > 0$, the equation has a unique stable solution $q_1^ = 0$. When $\gamma_1 < 0$, the equation has two solutions: $q_1^ = 0$ and $q_1^* = \pm \sqrt{-\gamma_2 \gamma_1 / ab}$. Since the stable solution is a non-zero solution, the model holds when $\gamma_1 < 0$.

(3) Solving System Synergy Values

The Haken model is designed for continuous random variables, while the data used in this study are annual discrete data. Therefore, the model's motion equation expression needs to be discretized. The discretization method involves introducing discrete time $(t)$ into Equation (1) and moving $t$ forward by one period $(t-1)$, forming Equation (5):
$$
\begin{cases}
q_1(t) = (1 - \gamma_1) q_1(t-1) - a q_1(t-1) q_2(t-1) \
q_2(t) = (1 - \gamma_2) q_2(t-1) + b q_1^2(t-1)
\end{cases}
$$

Let $q_1^$ be the stable point where $\dot{q}_1 = 0$, obtaining the unique stable solution $q_1^ = 0$. Since both new urbanization and new quality productivity levels are positive values, the order parameter must be positive. Therefore, the calculation yields $q_1^* = -0.915$. The stable point of the new urbanization–new quality productivity complex system is at $(-0.915, 0)$. The distance from any point within the system to this stable point represents the state trend, which is the synergy value of new urbanization and new quality productivity. Its expression is:
$$
h = \sqrt{(q_1 + 0.915)^2 + q_2^2}
$$

3 Results and Analysis

3.1 Measurement of New Urbanization and New Quality Productivity Levels

This study uses the CRITIC weight analysis method to measure new quality productivity and new urbanization levels and employs the natural breaks classification method to classify them into high-level regions, relatively high-level regions, medium-level regions, relatively low-level regions, and low-level regions. Finally, ArcGIS software is used for visualization analysis [FIGURE:2].

China's new urbanization level shows a low-speed fluctuating upward trend with significant spatial differentiation characteristics. From the temporal dimension, the national new urbanization index mean value increased by 34.1%, lagging behind the 37.6% growth rate of permanent resident urbanization rate, reflecting the "semi-urbanization" dilemma. The Northeast region is particularly prominent, with Heilongjiang and Liaoning decreasing by 16.6% and 35.5% respectively, showing an urbanization inverse growth crisis; Shandong achieved a leap of 83.28% by relying on the old-to-new kinetic energy conversion strategy, while other provinces mostly experienced slow and low-speed growth. From the regional dimension, coastal areas form a high-value agglomeration belt, with the two river basins showing a "belt-shaped" distribution feature, and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River's new urbanization level being significantly higher than that of the Yellow River's middle reaches. The Southwest and Northwest regions (except Sichuan) are generally in low-value areas, while the three Northeastern provinces, relying on their industrial foundation, remain in medium-value areas.

China's new quality productivity level has significantly improved, but regional imbalances have intensified. From the temporal dimension, the national mean value increased by 83.28% during 2014–2023, with all provinces showing growth but with clear differentiation. Coastal areas lead the nation, with Jiangsu's increase of 0.2~0.3 ranking first, followed by Zhejiang and Guangdong; Beijing, Shanghai, and Shandong are between 0.2~0.3, highlighting the strong momentum in the east; the Northwest and Northeast regions have growth rates below 0.25, exposing lagging industrial transformation and weak innovation. From the regional dimension, the spatial distribution shows an "east-high, west-low" block agglomeration pattern. The eastern coastal region is in a断层领先地位 (fault-block leading position), constituting the first echelon; the middle reaches of the Yangtze River and Southwest region constitute the second echelon with significant internal differences; the Northeast, constrained by industrial decline and resource depletion, has slipped to the third echelon; the Northwest and middle reaches of the Yellow River region are at the bottom, becoming key areas for tackling difficulties. These results indicate that new quality productivity development highly depends on location advantages and industrial foundations, urgently requiring the establishment of a cross-regional collaborative innovation mechanism to resolve gradient solidification contradictions.

3.2 Identification of Dual-New Co-evolution Mechanism

This study uses EViews13 software to construct regression models to test the suitability of new urbanization and new quality productivity as system order parameters. As shown in Table 3, in the model with new urbanization as the potential order parameter, $\gamma_1 = 0.295 > 0$, violating the "adiabatic approximation assumption." Therefore, new urbanization cannot serve as the order parameter of the complex system. In contrast, when new quality productivity serves as the order parameter, the control parameters are $\gamma_1 = 0.225 > 0$, $\gamma_2 = -0.256 < 0$, $a = -0.256 < 0$, and $b = 0.301 > 0$, meeting the "adiabatic approximation assumption" conditions. Thus, new quality productivity is identified as the order parameter of the new urbanization–new quality productivity complex system [TABLE:3].

Based on the above conclusion, this study further derives the nonlinear evolution equation for the interaction between new urbanization and new quality productivity:
$$
\dot{q}_1 = -0.225 q_1 - 0.256 q_1 q_2
$$

3.3 Analysis of Dual-New Co-evolution Mechanism

In the "new quality productivity–new urbanization" complex system, the new quality productivity subsystem is the order parameter that dominates system evolution. The control parameters reflect the phased interaction mechanism between the two subsystems. Among them, $a = -0.256$ indicates that new urbanization plays a promoting role in the cultivation of new quality productivity. This further verifies that new urbanization construction can agglomerate production factors and accelerate innovation transformation, feeding back to the cultivation process of new quality productivity. $b = 0.301$ indicates that new quality productivity has a promoting effect on new urbanization. New quality productivity creates numerous employment opportunities and significantly enhances urban inclusiveness by promoting technological innovation and optimizing industrial structure, thereby exerting a positive promoting effect on new urbanization. $\gamma_1 = 0.225$ indicates that the new quality productivity subsystem has a positive feedback mechanism to continuously improve its own orderliness, showing that the subsystem can continuously accumulate scientific and technological innovation achievements, laying foundations for subsequent technological upgrading and industrial development, thereby continuously promoting the improvement of subsystem orderliness. $\gamma_2 = 0.286$ indicates that the current level of new urbanization has a significant positive impact on its next-period level, meaning the subsystem has a self-reinforcing positive feedback mechanism internally. The main reason is that preliminary investments in infrastructure construction and public service supply can enhance urban attractiveness, promote continuous population and industry agglomeration, continuously release economic vitality, expand new urbanization construction demand, and improve system orderliness.

3.4 Analysis of Dual-New Co-evolution Process

This study uses Equation (6) to calculate the synergy level of new urbanization and new quality productivity, classifying the synergy level into premium synergy ($>0.50$), intermediate synergy ($[0.35, 0.50]$), primary synergy ($[0.25, 0.35)$), and system disorder ($<0.25$). To analyze regional characteristics of dual-new synergy levels and better achieve regional coordinated development, this study follows the classification standards of China's eight comprehensive economic zones by the Development Research Center of the State Council to analyze dual-new co-evolution characteristics by region. The specific results are shown in Table 4 [TABLE:4].

From the national perspective: The overall national synergy level of new urbanization and new quality productivity has improved significantly, with the proportion of provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) achieving premium synergy increasing from 35.5% to 37.6%. During the observation period, the overall evolution process of China's new urbanization and new quality productivity synergy level can be divided into two stages with 2020 as the inflection point: The first stage (2014–2020) is the rapid advancement period, with dual-new synergy level increasing by 16.6%, and 16 provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) jumping out of the system disorder zone, achieving good symbiotic integration of new urbanization and new quality productivity. The second stage (2020–2023) is the stable operation period, with the dual-new synergy level growth rate slowing down compared to the previous stage, and even some provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) showing negative growth, reflecting that after 2020, new quality productivity and new urbanization construction have begun to show results, marginal effects have weakened, and the synergy level growth has entered a stable state.

From the regional perspective: The spatial-temporal pattern of China's dual-new synergy level shows a transformation characteristic from "eastern unipolar advancement" to "multi-regional synergy in the east, middle, and west." The ranking of mean dual-new synergy levels is: eastern coastal > northern coastal > southern coastal > Northeast > middle reaches of the Yangtze River > middle reaches of the Yellow River > Southwest > Northwest. Specifically, during the observation period, the eastern coastal region had the highest dual-new synergy level, always in a "leading" position. In 2023, Shanghai's dual-new synergy level was the first to exceed 0.50, always located in the premium synergy zone and ranking first nationally. The northern coastal region also showed strong development momentum, with all provinces (regions) within its jurisdiction entering the premium synergy zone in 2023 except Hebei, entering a stable synergy stage. However, it is noteworthy that after 2020, the upward momentum of dual-new synergy level in the northern coastal region weakened, showing a downward trend. The southern coastal region as a whole entered the synergy development stage, but with large internal differences. Hainan's dual-new synergy level significantly lags behind Guangdong and Fujian. In this regard, Hainan should utilize the economic advantages of the free trade port to achieve economic quality and quantity improvement, further realizing the "dual-new integrated development" of new urbanization and new quality productivity. The middle reaches of the two rivers remain in the non-synergy stage, but Hunan and Henan provinces have emerged as dark horses showing strong development momentum, indicating that these two provinces are at the forefront of industrial transformation and upgrading and urban inclusive development, and their development models are worth promoting. The Northeast region's development is sluggish, with growth of only 0.25 during the observation period, especially Heilongjiang Province's 0.25, which further demonstrates that the Northeast's resource-dominated, inefficient, and high-energy-consumption industrial form is no longer adapted to the reality of "quality and quantity improvement" in economic development, and industrial transformation is imperative. From the perspective of dual-new synergy level trends, the Southwest region has a low overall level with large fluctuations, and its evolution can be roughly divided into two stages: 2014–2018 with high-speed growth across the region; 2018–2023 with regional fluctuation and differentiation, where provinces within the jurisdiction successively experienced declines. These phenomena indicate that the dual-new synergy in the Southwest region remains in a non-synergy stage with unstable internal development and faces significant obstacles. The Northwest region, constrained by resource endowments and geographical conditions, has always ranked last during the observation period, with all provinces consistently located in low-level synergy and below regions.

4 Conclusions and Implications

4.1 Conclusions

(1) Measurement results of new urbanization and new quality productivity levels show: China's new urbanization shows a low-speed fluctuating upward trend, with an average growth of 34.1% during the observation period. Under the influence of multiple factors such as economic foundation and resource endowments, it exhibits regional characteristics of high-value agglomeration in coastal areas and widespread lagging in central and western regions. China's new quality productivity average level increased by 83.28% during the observation period, but the gap between the Northwest and middle reaches of the Yellow River and other regions continues to widen, showing a spatial distribution pattern of "the east leading, the middle catching up, and the west lagging behind."

(2) Empirical analysis results of the Haken model show: New quality productivity is the order parameter of system co-evolution, not only guiding the orderly development of the new urbanization subsystem but also dominating the evolution process of the complex system. This finding reveals the important position of new quality productivity in new urbanization construction and high-quality economic development, providing a reference for optimizing new quality productivity cultivation paths and building new urbanization.

(3) From the synergy mechanism between new quality productivity and new urbanization: The Haken model coefficient $a = -0.256$ indicates that there is a positive feedback mechanism within the new urbanization subsystem, which also helps promote the development of the new quality productivity subsystem. This shows that infrastructure improvement and public service capacity enhancement can not only achieve the benign development of new urbanization itself but also promote the cultivation process of new quality productivity. The Haken model coefficient $b = 0.301$ indicates that new quality productivity has a promoting effect on both its own internal subsystem and the new urbanization subsystem, further demonstrating the important position of new quality productivity in new urbanization construction and high-quality economic development.

(4) From the dual-new co-evolution process: The co-evolution of new quality productivity and new urbanization has obvious spatial-temporal characteristics. From the temporal dimension, the dual-new synergy level shows an upward trend, and its co-evolution process can be divided into rapid advancement (2014–2020) and stable operation (2020–2023). After 2020, the growth rate of dual-new synergy level slowed down compared to the previous stage, indicating that the dual-new system has entered a stable evolution track and reached a relatively dynamic balance. Currently, there is an urgent need to inject new driving elements to stimulate the continuous growth potential of the dual-new complex system. From the regional dimension, China's dual-new synergy level spatial-temporal pattern has transformed from "eastern unipolar advancement" to "multi-regional synergy in the east, middle, and west," with regional differences converging. However, the overall pattern at the end of the period still shows a spatial differentiation characteristic of "strong in the east and weak in the west," successively manifested as eastern coastal > northern coastal > southern coastal > Northeast > middle reaches of the Yangtze River > middle reaches of the Yellow River > Southwest > Northwest, reflecting the key role of economic foundation, innovation factors, and regional characteristics in dual-new co-evolution.

4.2 Implications

(1) Strengthen the leading role of new quality productivity and consolidate the foundation of new urbanization construction. The study finds that new quality productivity is the order parameter driving the orderly evolution of the dual-new system, occupying a dominant position in the system evolution process, while new urbanization is the servo parameter of the system with less intervention in system evolution. This indicates that new quality productivity is an important driving force for future new urbanization construction and economic development. Therefore, the government should increase support for new quality productivity through innovation policies and capital investment to promote breakthroughs and applications of key technologies and enhance its core role in the dual-new system. Simultaneously, it should promote the deep integration of new quality productivity with industrial upgrading, promote the landing and transformation of scientific and technological innovation achievements, and provide strong support for new urbanization construction. Ultimately, by building a benign ecology driven by innovation, ensure that new quality productivity can continuously lead the orderly evolution of the dual-new system.

(2) Optimize the dual-new interaction relationship and enhance system synergy levels. The study finds that both within and between subsystems are positive feedback mechanisms without negative feedback mechanisms, mainly because elements such as scientific and technological innovation, infrastructure, and institutional guarantees within the dual-new system have significant cumulative and self-reinforcing characteristics that can continuously generate positive effects on later subsystem development, pushing the dual-new system to evolve continuously toward an orderly state. Therefore, the government should first further strengthen support for scientific and technological innovation and infrastructure construction, leverage the cumulative effect of resource factors, provide more favorable conditions for the next stage of new quality productivity and new urbanization development, and enhance positive feedback mechanisms within subsystems. Second, through policy guidance and synergy platform construction, it should promote resource sharing between systems, facilitate the flow of technology, capital, and talent, form cross-system synergy effects, strengthen positive feedback mechanisms between systems, and achieve orderly development of the dual-new system.

(3) Inject emerging development elements to enhance system evolution momentum. After 2020, dual-new synergy has shifted from rapid advancement to stable evolution stage, indicating that the marginal effect of original elements is diminishing, endogenous momentum is weakening, system operation is tending toward stable equilibrium, and there is an urgent need to introduce emerging elements to break through existing synergy mechanisms. In response to this situation, the government should adapt to phased changes, inject emerging elements such as green technology, digital infrastructure, and institutional innovation into the dual-new system to provide new momentum for dual-new synergy development. Simultaneously, it should build cross-regional and cross-departmental collaborative governance mechanisms, unblock bottlenecks in the coordinated development of new quality productivity and new urbanization, and further optimize the dual-new synergy mechanism.

(4) Explore regionally differentiated development models and promote dual-new system evolution according to local conditions. Dual-new synergy levels still show regional differentiation characteristics of "strong in the east and weak in the west." To achieve high-quality regional coordinated development, it is necessary to break away from a "one-size-fits-all" promotion mindset. Localities should build differentiated and hierarchical dual-new synergy development paths according to local economic foundations, geographical factors, and resource endowments. Eastern regions should leverage their scientific and technological and industrial advantages to promote the orderly transfer of innovation resources to the central and western regions while achieving their own development, strengthening their radiating and driving role for central and western regions. Central regions, as key nodes connecting east and west, should enhance comprehensive carrying capacity, strengthen infrastructure construction and improve technological innovation capabilities based on manufacturing foundations and transportation location advantages to undertake industries transferred from the east. Western regions should utilize local natural resource advantages and the "East Data West Computing" digital economy development policy to develop green and low-carbon industries and digital rural economies, creating a dual-new synergy evolution path driven by resource advantages and digital economy.

References

[1] Chen Yao, Chen Xiangman. Impact of house price and house price income ratio on urbanization of China: Empirical analysis based on spatial econometric model[J]. Economic Geography, 2021, 41(4): 57-65.

[2] Chen Shuxing, Ding Renzhong. Research on some theoretical and practical issues of China's urbanization development in the new era[J]. Fujian Tribune (The Humanities & Social Sciences), 2021(12): 77-89.

[3] Guo Junping, Qu Song, Wu Shuo. Spatial and temporal differentiation, macro influencing factors and mechanism of farmers' living affluence in China[J]. Reform, 2024(4): 63-76.

[4] Wang Yajun, Zheng Xiaodong, Fang Xiangming, et al. The impact of left-behind experience on multidimensional poverty of the new generation migrant workers: Evidence from the China migrants dynamic survey[J]. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2023(3): 53-70.

[5] Guo Rongna, Bai Jingkun. Construction of tech-venture capital mechanism: The path to enhance the institutional effect of patient capital through bilateral risk-taking spirit coupling[J]. China Soft Science, 2025(1): 34-46.

[6] Shi Jianxun, Xu Ling. Major strategic significance and implementation path of accelerating the formation of new quality productivity[J]. Research on Financial and Economic Issues, 2024(1): 3-12.

[7] Fang Chuanglin, Sun Biao. The connotation of new quality productive forces and research priorities for driving urban-rural integrated development from the geographical perspective[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2024, 79(6): 1357-1370.

[8] Liu Miaomiao, Wu Weidong. Empirical study of the coupling of new urbanization and rural revitalization in Shaanxi Province[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2024, 47(8): 1420-1430.

[9] Chen Sijin. Fiscal decentralization, digital new quality productivity and economic growth quality[J]. Journal of Southwest Minzu University (Humanities and Social Science), 2024, 45(8): 117-129.

[10] Yu Wenguang, Sun Rong, Huang Yujuan. Fiscal digital transformation and new urbanization: Impact and mechanism[J]. Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, 2025, 27(1): 77-92.

[11] Chang Jiran. Research on the development of new urbanization driven by county-level leading industries[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2024, 42(6): 1179-1187.

[12] Zou Yafeng, Zhang Qian, Rao Yufei, et al. Evolution of new urbanization of provincial capitals in western China[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(4): 636-648.

[13] Li Junrong, Feng Huimin, Lin Rongri, et al. Evolution and influencing factors of coupling coordination between new-type urbanization and common prosperity in China[J]. Economic Geography, 2024, 44(5): 86-95.

[14] Zhao Xinyu, Wan Mengze. Digital economy, new urbanization and spatial spillover effects[J]. Shandong Social Sciences, 2023(11): 145-153.

[15] Li Junming, Xia Youfu. New urbanization, market-oriented reform, and digital economy development[J]. Statistics & Information Forum, 2024, 39(6): 32-44.

[16] Zhou Chuang, Zheng Xugang, Yang Tongfei. Coevolution of new urbanization and rural revitalization and its citizenization effect[J]. Geographical Research, 2024, 43(12): 3265-3288.

[17] Wang Yang. Impact of digital new quality productivity on agricultural and rural modernization: Index system construction and effect test[J]. Statistics & Decision, 2024, 40(14): 23-28.

[18] Jing Qinlei, Lin Chen, Zhang Wenguang. Has new-type urbanization construction promoted urban-rural industrial integration development? A quasi-natural experiment based on the comprehensive pilot policy of new-type urbanization[J]. Reform, 2025(2): 132-146.

[19] Wen Feng'an, Huang Shangke. The role of new quality productivity in digital rural construction based on new urbanization[J]. Journal of Southwest University (Social Science Edition), 2024, 50(3): 15-26.

[20] Shang Lu, Li Donghong, Han Siqi, et al. How does industry-university-research cooperation drive the development of new quality productive forces in digital native enterprises: An exploratory single case study from a knowledge orchestration perspective[J]. China Industrial Economy, 2025(1): 174-192.

[21] Liu Wei. The reform dividend and mechanism improvement of new urbanization in the process of Chinese-style modernization: Study and implementation of the spirit of the third plenary session of the 20th CPC Central Committee[J]. Journal of Chongqing University (Social Science Edition), 2024, 30(6): 12-25.

[22] Jiang Hong. Scientific understanding of the three basic problems of New Quality Productivity[J]. Studies on Marxist Theory, 2024, 10(8): 75-83.

[23] Haken H. Synergetics: An Introduction[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1983.

[24] Wang Songmao, Niu Jinlan. Co-evolution of tourism economy and urban ecological resilience in Shandong Province[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2023, 78(10): 2591-2608.

[25] Xu Jianwei, Li Ziwen, Han Xiao. Accelerating the development of new quality productive forces: Promoting ideas and policy suggestions[J]. Reform, 2025(1): 40-52.

[26] Chen Zixi, Qing Mei. Research on the measurement of the high-quality development level of China's urban agglomerations and its temporal and spatial convergence[J]. Journal of Quantitative & Technological Economics, 2022, 39(6): 42-60.

[27] Yang Peiqing, Bai Yuanyuan. Study on the coupling coordination and driving mechanism of digital economy and new-type urbanization in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition), 2024, 24(4): 114-126.

[28] Li Guangqin, Li Mengjiao. Provincial-level new quality productive forces in China: Evaluation, spatial pattern and evolution characteristics[J]. Economic Geography, 2024, 44(8): 116-125.

[29] Wang Jinwei, Wang Qixiang, Lu Dadao. Spatio-temporal coupling pattern and its influencing factors of digital economy, tourism economy and new urbanization: A case study of Yangtze River Delta region[J]. Geographical Research, 2024, 43(12): 3301-3326.

[30] Huang Xuliang, Xu Haidong. Science and technology finance policy and new quality productive forces development[J]. Collected Essays on Finance and Economics, 2025(1): 47-58.

[31] Li Yujie, He Zhengchu, Pan Weihua. The impact of industrial collaborative agglomeration on the toughness of the industrial chain: Multidimensional factors from new quality productivity such as artificial intelligence[J]. Scientific Decision Making, 2025(3): 22-40.