农业大数据学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 8 ›› Issue (3): 347-353.doi: 10.19788/j.issn.2096-6369.000165

• 数据管理 • 上一篇    下一篇

智慧农业时代的“数据贫困”:逻辑机制、表征及权益治理路径

吴沛谦*(), 钟裕欣   

  1. 安徽师范大学教育科学学院, 安徽芜湖 241000
  • 收稿日期:2026-05-15 接受日期:2026-07-15 出版日期:2026-09-26 发布日期:2026-10-08
  • 通讯作者: 吴沛谦,E-mail:yzjwpq@163.com。
  • 基金资助:
    高等学校心理学类专业教学指导委员会招标项目基金(20253001);安徽师范大学高峰学科建设项目- 02优秀引进人才培育项目(2025GFXK040)

“Data Poverty” in the Era of Smart Agriculture: Logical Mechanisms, Representations, and Governance Pathways for Data Rights

WU PeiQian*(), ZHONG YuXin   

  1. School of Education Sciences, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu 241000, Anhui, China
  • Received:2026-05-15 Accepted:2026-07-15 Published:2026-09-26 Online:2026-10-08

摘要:

智慧农业演进中存在显著的“大农场偏见”盲区,全球 5 亿小农户在算法迭代中面临系统性边缘化风险。揭示其结构性不平等并构建包容性赋能机制,已成为数字乡村建设中亟待解决的核心命题。本文结合人机交互心理学与科学技术研究视角,系统综述 33 篇国内外核心文献,运用定性分析与逻辑建模构建“农业 AI 排除循环”框架,解构中国“大国小农”国情下数据红利集聚与排斥的深层机理。研究发现:(1)数字化转型已质变为“数据贫困”,本应作为数据生产者的小农户,在实践中被系统性地降格为数据客体;(2)中国语境下数据贫困呈现采集非标化、收益倒挂与主体性危机三大表征;(3)解构“双螺旋”错位机制,即大农场获“算法溢价”进入正向螺旋,而小农户因被视为“数据噪声”陷入负向排斥螺旋;(4)现行治理面临“算法威权”下的精英俘获与“数字悬浮”风险。由此,提出智慧农业应从“效率崇拜”转向“包容性赋能”。政策上应引入公平维度评估,探索组建村集体主导的“农民数据合作社”;技术上应基于“可信数据空间”研发适配碎片化环境的边缘侧模型。本研究为制定包容性数字乡村政策提供理论支撑,对保障小农户知识主权具有重要价值。

关键词: 智慧农业, 数据要素, 数据贫困, 算法偏见, 社会-技术系统, 数字包容, 小农户赋能

Abstract:

The evolution of smart agriculture has revealed a significant "large-farm bias," leaving 500 million smallholders worldwide at risk of systematic marginalization within algorithmic iterations. Exposing these structural inequalities and constructing inclusive empowerment mechanisms have become core imperatives for the development of digital villages. Integrating perspectives from human-computer interaction (HCI) psychology and Science and Technology Studies (STS), this research systematically reviews 33 core publications. By employing qualitative analysis and logical modeling, it constructs an "Agricultural AI Exclusion Cycle" framework to deconstruct the deep-seated mechanisms of data dividend aggregation and exclusion within the context of China’s "large country with small-scale farmers". The results indicate that: (1) Digital transformation has undergone a qualitative mutation into "data poverty," fundamentally reducing farmers’ status from "data producers" to "data objects"; (2) In the Chinese context, data poverty is characterized by non-standardized collection, benefit inversion, and a crisis of subjectivity; (3) The study deconstructs a "double helix" misalignment mechanism, where large-scale farms secure an "algorithmic premium" through a positive spiral, while smallholders fall into a negative exclusion spiral due to being treated as "data noise"; (4) Current governance is challenged by elite capture under "algorithmic authority" and the risk of "digital suspension". This study proposes that smart agriculture must pivot from "efficiency fetishism" toward "inclusive empowerment". At the policy level, fairness-based evaluations should be integrated, and the establishment of village-led "farmer data cooperatives" should be explored. At the technical level, edge-side "small-but-beautiful" AI models adapted to fragmented environments should be developed based on "trusted data spaces." This research provides theoretical foundations for inclusive digital rural policies and is vital for safeguarding smallholders' epistemic sovereignty.

Key words: smart agriculture, data elements, data poverty, algorithmic bias, socio-technical systems, digital inclusion, smallholder empowerment