Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the challenges and solutions related to the valuation and monetization of ecological products, particularly focusing on regulatory services that are public goods and face difficulties in measurement, collateralization, trading, and realization of value. Group 1: Measurement Challenges - The core issue of "difficulty in measurement" arises from the intangible nature, public attributes, and hidden value of regulatory services, making them hard to quantify and recognize in traditional market systems. Solutions include enhancing localized parameter databases and dynamic monitoring capabilities, integrating "3S" technologies (Remote Sensing, GIS, GPS) with IoT sensor networks for real-time ecological monitoring [2] Group 2: Collateralization Challenges - The "difficulty in collateralization" stems from ambiguous property rights, high value uncertainty, and lack of effective risk mitigation mechanisms, preventing regulatory services from being qualified as financial collateral. Solutions involve establishing a legal basis for the capitalization of ecological assets, clarifying operational and income rights, and innovating diverse green financial tools such as "ecological asset mortgage loans" and "green bonds" [3] Group 3: Trading Challenges - The "difficulty in trading" is characterized by the absence of trading platforms for regulatory services, poor supply-demand matching, and high transaction costs. Solutions include developing multi-tiered market models, optimizing government ecological compensation methods, and innovating horizontal trading models for pollution rights and carbon emissions [4] Group 4: Realization Challenges - The "difficulty in realization" focuses on promoting industrial operations and precise market demand alignment. Solutions involve fostering "ecological+" industry integration, implementing origin-based ecological labeling systems, and guiding the development of new business models that rely on high-quality regulatory services [5]

Core Insights - The article discusses the rapid development of policy-based agricultural insurance in China since the implementation of premium subsidy policies in 2007, highlighting the significant role of these subsidies in reducing the burden on agricultural producers and enhancing risk protection [1][2] - However, the high subsidy rates have led to fraudulent activities, including inflated insurance claims and false reporting, which undermine the integrity of the agricultural insurance system [1][3] - The introduction of "3S" technology (Remote Sensing, GIS, and GPS) is proposed as a solution to address these issues by improving regulatory oversight and ensuring accurate insurance practices [2][4] Policy-Based Agricultural Insurance - In 2023, policy-based agricultural insurance achieved a premium income of 126.39 billion yuan, accounting for 87% of the total agricultural insurance premium, with government subsidies amounting to 95.18 billion yuan and an average subsidy rate of 75% [1] - The core feature of policy-based agricultural insurance is its reliance on government subsidies to support agricultural producers, which is intended to enhance fairness in resource distribution and improve overall social welfare [3] Issues and Regulatory Challenges - The "two false issues" (false underwriting and false claims) have severely distorted the redistribution process of subsidies, with fraudulent activities accounting for 83.96% of agricultural insurance crimes from 2012 to 2020 [3] - These issues not only divert resources from genuine insurance services but also erode trust among agricultural producers, potentially leading to a decline in demand for policy-based agricultural insurance [3] Application of "3S" Technology - The article proposes a regulatory framework utilizing "3S" technology to enhance the oversight of policy-based agricultural insurance, aiming to provide a cost-effective and intuitive way to identify fraudulent activities [4][6] - The framework emphasizes the need for publicly available data to facilitate consensus among regulatory bodies and improve collaborative oversight [3] Policy Recommendations - Establish a supporting policy system for the application of "3S" technology in agricultural insurance underwriting and claims, ensuring the scientific validity and effectiveness of remote sensing data [10] - Strengthen the infrastructure and talent development for "3S" technology in regulatory agencies, promoting real-time data comparison between agricultural information and insurance claims [10] - Encourage insurance companies to adopt "3S" technology in their operations, lowering the technical barriers and integrating this capability into the qualification standards for policy-based agricultural insurance [10] - Promote the iterative upgrade and integration of "3S" technology with other technological tools to enhance the precision of regulatory practices in agricultural insurance [10]