As the demands for land resources continue to rise with economic and social development, China’s land-related industries—including land surveys, land planning, land evaluation, land remediation, real estate appraisal, property registration, land registration agency services, and land reserves—are experiencing rapid growth. The number of professionals working in these land-related fields has already exceeded one million, with a particularly significant surge in the ranks of private enterprises’ land professionals, who are gradually becoming the backbone of the industry. Therefore, standardizing and enhancing the professional competence and quality of land-sector practitioners, as well as establishing clear career-development pathways for them, have become crucial tasks in current land-resource talent management. In particular, the inclusion of “Land Remediation Engineering Technicians” as a sub-category in the “National Occupational Classification Directory” in 2015 marked a pivotal breakthrough in the career development of land-sector professionals. At present, China’s land sector suffers from a weak professional foundation. Based on an analysis of the current state of career development among Chinese land professionals and an examination of domestic and international occupational trends, the author proposes a preliminary framework and roadmap for the professional development of China’s land sector, aiming to provide valuable references for the advancement of land-sector careers.

Most professionals in China’s land sector are specialized technical personnel, and their career development paths primarily include the professional title progression path and the professional qualification progression path.

◆In China’s land sector, two primary professional qualifications have been established: land appraiser and land registration agent. The title evaluation for land professionals is mainly incorporated into the series for engineering and technical personnel; additionally, some professionals engaged in scientific research are included in the evaluation series for natural science researchers and social science researchers.

From the perspective of occupational classification in China, most professionals in the land sector belong to the category of specialized technical personnel. Under China’s socialist market economic system, there are currently two primary career development paths for specialized technical personnel: the professional title development path and the professional qualification development path. Among these, the professional title development path is currently the dominant pathway for the career advancement of specialized technical personnel. A professional title serves as a marker reflecting the academic and technical level, work competence, and work achievements of specialized technical personnel. At present, the professional title system—being the fundamental system for evaluating and managing specialized technical talent in China—fulfills not only an evaluation function but also plays a crucial role in job appointment and determining salary and benefits. Currently, China has established 29 professional title series covering fields such as engineering, health care, agriculture, economics, accounting, teaching, and scientific research. For land-sector professionals, title evaluations primarily fall under the engineering technical personnel series; meanwhile, some specialized technical personnel engaged in scientific research are evaluated within the natural science researchers and social science researchers series.

In accordance with the requirement put forward by the Third Plenary Session of the 14th CPC Central Committee to “implement a dual-certificate system comprising academic degrees and professional qualifications,” China began establishing a professional qualification certification system in 1994. This system comprises two categories: practice qualifications (entry-level) and professional qualifications (level-evaluation type). Practice qualifications refer to the government-imposed entry barriers for certain professions (job categories) that involve significant responsibilities, enjoy broad social applicability, and are closely related to public interests. These qualifications serve as the essential standards for individuals to independently practice or engage in a specific profession (job category) in compliance with the law, and are typically established by the state based on relevant laws, administrative regulations, or decisions issued by the State Council. Professional qualifications, on the other hand, represent the minimum standards for the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to engage in professions (job categories) that are widely applicable across society, highly specialized, and demand advanced technical expertise. These qualifications are set by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security in collaboration with relevant authorities under the State Council, taking into account the needs of economic and social development.

As of the end of 2013, the State Council departments had established a total of 618 professional qualifications, including 219 for professional and technical personnel and 399 for skilled workers. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, in order to advance reforms aimed at streamlining administration and delegating power, combining regulation with service optimization, and actively creating an environment conducive to mass entrepreneurship and innovation, the State Council has reviewed and approved, in seven batches, the cancellation of a total of 434 professional qualification licensing and certification items under the purview of State Council departments—of which 154 were for professional and technical personnel and 280 for skilled workers. In the land sector, China currently mainly establishes two professional qualifications: land appraiser and land registration agent. During this round of cleanup and standardization of professional qualifications, the State Council has reclassified land registration agents from entry-level professional qualifications to competency-based professional qualifications. Currently, the entry-level professional qualification for land appraisers has already been abolished. Whether it will be further adjusted to a competency-based qualification remains unclear, as no official document has yet been issued by the national authorities. However, some provinces and regions have already made such adjustments—for example, in March 2016, Hebei Province issued the "Decision on Cancelling and Adjusting a Batch of Professional Qualification Licensing and Certification Items," reclassifying the land appraiser qualification as a competency-based one.

The qualification and certification system for professional and technical engineers in developed countries has six practices that can serve as valuable references.

◆The mutual recognition systems for engineering and technical education qualifications and professional engineer licensing among some developed countries have created a pathway for specialized and international career development for professionals in technical fields. In China, most professionals in the land sector belong to the engineering profession; thus, foreign engineer qualification systems hold valuable lessons for establishing a robust career framework for land professionals in China.

Since developed Western countries generally adopt market economic systems based on private ownership, the career development of professional and technical personnel largely relies on qualification and certification systems. In the field of engineering technology, in order to keep pace with global economic integration, some developed countries—including the United States—have initiated and begun establishing mutual recognition frameworks for engineering education qualifications, primarily under the Washington Accord, Sydney Accord, and Dublin Accord, as well as mutual recognition systems for engineers’ professional qualifications, mainly under the International Professional Engineers Accord, the Asia-Pacific Engineers Accord, and the Engineering Technicians Accord. These initiatives have created specialized and internationally oriented career pathways for professional and technical talent.

Abroad, the title system primarily applies to professionals in fields such as scientific researchers, university teachers, and physicians. Different research institutions adopt varying criteria, which differ significantly from China's current system for evaluating professional title qualifications. For example, in U.S. research institutions, the title “Professor” not only signifies the academic level possessed by the researcher himself, reflecting his or her competence in teaching and research, but also denotes the position held by the researcher within the organization. Once a researcher leaves his or her original institution or is hired by another research institution, his or her title must be reassessed.

Most professionals in China’s land sector belong to the engineering profession. Therefore, studying foreign engineering qualification systems can provide valuable insights for establishing a professional system for land-sector practitioners. Examining how the engineering qualification systems operate in the countries that have joined the Washington Accord, we can identify six key areas of借鉴 (learning from and drawing on):

Clear career development pathways and career advancement steps that correspond to specific competencies and provide effective distinctions have been established. For example: In the United States, engineers are divided into two levels—Intern Engineer and Professional Engineer; in the United Kingdom, Professional Engineers are categorized as Engineering Technicians, Principal Engineers, and Chartered Engineers; and in Australia, engineers are divided into two levels—Entry-Level Engineer and Chartered Engineer—as well as three categories: Assistant Engineer, Engineer, and Professional Engineer.

Comprehensive qualification and competency standards have been established. For example, the United States has enacted model laws and licensing statutes for engineers, setting entry criteria or thresholds for practitioners primarily based on “professional skills and practical abilities.” The UK Engineering Council has issued the “UK Standards for Professional Engineers’ Competencies,” which cover both competency attributes and personal commitments. The former category includes professional competencies and generic competencies, encompassing theoretical knowledge, engineering practice, leadership skills, communication abilities, and more. In Australia, the Engineers Australia has released “Stage One: Competency Standards” and “Stage Two: Competency Standards”—the former applicable to entry-level engineers, and the latter to chartered engineers.

Establish a social assessment and evaluation system that is professionalized, socialized, standardized, and规范化. In developed countries, the evaluation of engineering and technological talent is primarily based on peer review, with examinations, assessments, and evaluations serving as specific tools. For example, the U.S. engineer certification system uses examinations as the fundamental means of identifying the competency levels of engineering and technological professionals, and examination scores serve as the basic criterion for advancement within the engineering career ladder. In the UK and Australia, a professional competence assessment and certification mechanism has been established, grounded in qualification reviews and specialized interviews; the evaluation method employed is peer review.

Accreditation of engineering education in higher education institutions. Abroad, undergoing accredited engineering education serves as the starting point for the professional development of engineering and technology professionals. In the United States, the engineering licensing system stipulates that applicants for engineering licensure must complete an accredited engineering education program before taking the national engineering examination. In the United Kingdom, applicants seeking chartered engineer status must hold an accredited master’s degree in engineering. In Australia, obtaining accreditation through a recognized engineering education program is not only the first step on an individual’s path toward becoming a professional engineer but also directly determines the engineer’s future career trajectory.

Mandatory continuing education. In developed countries, continuing education is closely linked to engineers’ career development planning. In the United States, in most regions, state governments use continuing education as the basis for license renewal; failure to meet continuing education requirements may result in license revocation. In the United Kingdom, continuing education is collectively referred to as “professional development” activities, which represent a mandatory commitment and obligation for professional engineers. Australia shares a similar approach: continuing education is positioned as an ongoing learning process aimed at enhancing the knowledge base, technical skills, and judgment of engineering professionals across various fields. Of course, overseas continuing education takes many different forms, including attending training courses, engaging in hands-on learning, participating in lectures and seminars, receiving mentoring, guidance, teaching, or giving presentations, publishing papers and other publications, and taking part in volunteer activities.

Professional social organizations play a leading role. Abroad, non-governmental organizations and nonprofit professional institutions play regulatory, guiding, and even leading roles in promoting the professionalization of engineers. For example, in the United States, the Engineering and Surveying Examination Board and the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology are responsible for setting standards for evaluating engineers and engineering education, implementing accreditation and assessment procedures, while government agencies merely assume leadership, organizational, and coordinating roles. In the United Kingdom, the system of professional engineers itself is a bottom-up system that has emerged and developed from civil society; the government does not assume specific responsibilities within this system. Instead, the Engineering Council of the UK primarily oversees and regulates the engineering community, issues standards, designs procedures, and authorizes and registers various qualification certification bodies and programs. Each professional association, authorized by the Engineering Council of the UK, conducts specific accreditation and certification of engineers and engineering education programs. In Australia, the Engineers Australia has received a royal charter and is tasked with formulating and maintaining the operation and direction of the nation’s entire engineering system.

Building a professional and international career development system with Chinese characteristics is a major trend in the development of China’s land professions.

◆ In the context of economic globalization, China’s professional and technical personnel lack sufficient specialization and internationalization, and their overall competence is notably inadequate. At present, establishing and perfecting career development pathways for professional and technical titles in the land sector remains the primary option.

Currently, in China, the career development of professional and technical personnel follows a career path that primarily relies on professional titles, supplemented by professional qualifications. This reflects the long-standing institutional path dependency in China’s career system, which is closely linked both to China’s distinctive socialist market economy and to the ongoing deepening reform of the administrative system, which focuses on reducing and standardizing professional qualifications.

As economic globalization continues to advance, for our country to secure a competitive edge in the intense global marketplace, we must inevitably see a surge of engineering and technological talent with international perspectives and world-class capabilities. This calls for us to adopt a more open-minded approach to promote the international benchmarking of engineering and technological talent competencies and to seek international recognition for our development systems. Currently, China is only a member of the Washington Accord and has yet to join other relevant agreements, which significantly constrains the internationalization of our talent pool.

In 2012, the "Medium- and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Professional and Technical Personnel (2010–2020)," issued by the Organization Department of the CPC Central Committee and the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, explicitly stated the need to “establish and improve an engineer accreditation and certification system that aligns with international standards, thereby enhancing the professionalism and internationalization of engineering and technical personnel.” Currently, in the land sector, land survey and monitoring technologies are evolving toward globalization, real-time capabilities, integration, and practicality; land evaluation techniques are becoming increasingly precise and comprehensive; and land ecological restoration technologies have become a key focus of common concern among countries. International cooperation and exchanges in science and technology as well as talent development across such fields as land planning, national land use planning, efficient and intensive land use, land survey and monitoring, arable land protection, land remediation, and real estate registration are becoming ever more frequent. Building a professional and internationally oriented career development system with Chinese characteristics has become a major trend in the development of China’s land-related professions.

Under China’s current national conditions and institutional framework, establishing and improving career development pathways for professional and technical personnel in the land sector remains the primary option at present. In particular, in 2017, China issued the “Opinions on Deepening the Reform of the Professional Title System,” which specifically proposed that China’s title system should “establish a title system that is scientific, standardized, and socially oriented,” while also emphasizing “promoting effective alignment between the title system and the vocational qualification system. Based on occupational classification, we should comprehensively study and plan the frameworks of both the title system and the vocational qualification system.” These “Opinions” not only highlight the fundamental role of occupational classification, occupational standards, and career development in building a contingent of professional and technical personnel, but also reflect established practices for the specialized and internationalized development of such personnel, thus outlining a new blueprint for the career development of professional and technical talent in the new era. Fully implementing the spirit of these “Opinions” is the top priority for advancing the career development of professionals in China’s land sector.

Meanwhile, in the current context of streamlining and standardizing professional qualifications, we must also adopt a more rational approach to the system of professional qualifications. Drawing on both domestic and international experiences, professional qualifications not only serve as an important pathway for the career development of technically skilled professionals but also play a crucial role in safeguarding public health, safety, and well-being under a market economy. The U.S. system of engineering licensure emerged precisely because of gaps in the management of engineers’ qualifications—many individuals who had never received formal training and lacked actual engineering competence exploited these regulatory loopholes, posing significant safety risks to society. As a result, the public demanded that these risks associated with engineering qualifications be eliminated. According to China’s “Administrative Licensing Law,” matters subject to administrative licensing include: activities directly involving national security, public safety, macroeconomic regulation, ecological and environmental protection, and those directly related to human health, life, and property safety, which require approval according to statutory conditions; the development and utilization of limited natural resources, the allocation of public resources, and market access in specific industries directly affecting the public interest—matters that necessitate the granting of specific rights; and professions and industries providing public services and directly linked to the public interest, where it is necessary to establish qualifications and credentials requiring special credibility, special conditions, or special skills.

Land is the foundation of people’s livelihoods, the cornerstone of development, the mother of wealth, and the basis of ecological sustainability. The development, utilization, and protection of land resources are closely linked to food security, economic security, and ecological security. The development, utilization, and remediation and protection of land resources are highly technology-intensive endeavors that demand strong professional expertise; thus, there is a solid legal basis for establishing professional qualifications for those working in the land sector. At the same time, currently, a high proportion of China’s land professionals operate in a market-oriented manner. Therefore, strengthening the capacity, quality, and ethical standards of land-sector practitioners has become an important responsibility of industry management. Moreover, relevant regulations issued by the State Council clearly stipulate the qualifications and credentials required for land professionals. For example, the “National Land Use Planning Outline (2016–2030)” explicitly calls for “establishing and perfecting systems for certification of planners’ qualifications and institutional accreditation, and promoting the development of both the talent pool and institutional capacity in land use planning.” Based on this, the author believes that continuing to advance the construction of professional qualifications in China’s land sector remains a crucial pathway for the career development of land professionals in China—and the key lies in pushing for the inclusion of land-related professions in the national catalog of professional qualifications.

Prioritize establishing and improving the professional title system for land professionals, and appropriately advance the development of a land professional qualification system.

◆ Conduct occupational surveys and analyses of land professionals, and propose a scientifically sound classification system for land-related occupations. Develop and refine comprehensive competency standards for land professions. Treat the education, training, and capacity-building of land professionals as the core means to enhance their professional specialization, and design a tiered certification system and career development pathways tailored specifically for land professionals.

Based on both domestic and international experience, comprehensively promoting the career development of land professionals requires not only addressing specific implementation issues such as occupational classification, professional standards, specialized education, career assessment, and continuing education, but also taking a holistic approach to tackle institutional design issues—including functional positioning, framework systems, operational mechanisms, and governance models.

Based on the current realities of land-related career development in China and in line with the requirements of the “delegation, regulation, and service” reform, it is advisable at present to adopt the following principles: “Occupational classification serves as the prerequisite, occupational standards form the foundation, the occupational development evaluation system and the vocational education and training service system constitute the core, and the occupational information system provides the necessary support.” On this basis, we should holistically plan the framework for both the land-related professional title system and the vocational qualification system. We should prioritize establishing and improving the professional title system for land professionals, advance the construction of a land-related vocational qualification system at an appropriate time, and vigorously promote the professionalization and internationalization of land professionals. Specific proposed measures include:

Actively promote the development of a land-related occupational classification system. Drawing on foreign occupational and job classification systems, and in accordance with China’s relevant standards and revision requirements for occupational classification, conduct occupational surveys and analyses of current practitioners engaged in land surveying, land planning, land evaluation, land remediation, land appraisal, real estate registration, land registration agency services, and land reserve management. Based on these findings, propose a scientifically sound land-related occupational classification system (or land occupational clusters) and facilitate its inclusion in the "National Occupational Classification Directory." Currently, the Directory has already incorporated "Land Remediation Engineering Technicians" into both sub-categories and detailed categories. From the perspective of accessibility to inclusion in the Directory, two approaches can be considered: On the one hand, revise the occupational content of the already included sub-category "Land Remediation Engineering Technicians," expanding its scope to encompass other land-related occupations as detailed categories. On the other hand, reclassify the sub-category "Land Remediation Engineering Technicians" as "Land Engineering Technicians," listing the existing "Land Remediation Engineering Technicians" as a detailed category, adding newly proposed engineering-related occupations such as land surveying, real estate registration, and land evaluation as additional detailed categories, while assigning other non-engineering land-related occupations to their respective related occupational categories.

Develop land-related occupational competency standards. Specialized knowledge and skills are the hallmark and foundation that distinguish one occupation from others. The development of land-related occupational competency standards should draw upon both domestic and international theories and empirical models of occupational competency standards, be oriented toward land-related occupational activities, and center on occupational competencies themselves. Employing the occupational function analysis approach, we should systematically identify and formulate, at different levels, core competency standards for various land occupations, industry-wide general competency standards, and occupation-specific competency standards. This will create a standards system that is dynamic, open, and flexible, thereby meeting the needs of sustainable development for both the land sector and land professionals.

Establish a scientific and socially-oriented land occupation evaluation system. Whether it comes to overseas professional qualification registration and certification or the current direction of China’s deepening reform of the professional title system, building a scientifically sound talent evaluation system remains the key and core task. For the occupational evaluation of land professionals, multiple aspects—including the evaluation entities, evaluation methods, evaluation criteria, and evaluation content—are involved. Depending on whether the evaluation is guided by professional titles or by professional qualifications, the specific approaches to land occupation evaluation will differ somewhat. However, all approaches should take into account the following key aspects: First, promote the development of socially-oriented land occupation evaluation entities, including establishing and improving relevant land industry associations, learned societies, and third-party land occupation evaluation institutions; second, adopt an evaluation approach that combines peer review with examination and assessment, encompassing specific methods such as qualification reviews, examinations, interviews, and comprehensive evaluations, thereby fully reflecting the competence and quality levels of land professionals; third, establish a systematic standard framework and occupational evaluation criteria that correspond to the career advancement levels of land professionals.

Vigorously promote the reform of the professional title system for land-related technical personnel. Fully implement the spirit of the "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of the Professional Title System" issued by the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council, and vigorously advance the reform. This includes: refining land-related specialties within the existing title series, improving the hierarchical structure of titles for land-related technical personnel, and establishing a senior-level engineer title specifically for land-related specialties; revising and perfecting the evaluation criteria for land-related titles, with greater emphasis on moral character, competence, and performance; innovating the title evaluation mechanism by adopting an industry-based evaluation system anchored in peer expert reviews, and exploring specific implementation methods that integrate examinations, reviews, assessments, performance evaluations, individual work reports, interview defenses, practical operations, and performance demonstrations; establishing channels for non-public economic organizations, social organizations, and freelance land-related technical professionals to apply for professional titles; smoothing career development pathways between highly skilled professionals and engineering-technical personnel in the land sector; and strengthening capacity-building for the evaluation of land-related technical personnel, including the establishment of a pool of review experts.

Actively explore the land professional qualification system. Focus particularly on the engineering field, designing a tiered certification system and career development pathway tailored for land professionals. Drawing on foreign experiences and models in engineering professional qualification certification, proactively and appropriately promote the inclusion of land engineers in the national list of professional qualifications, and establish a certification mechanism for land engineers that integrates government regulation with industry self-regulation. Develop a framework that effectively links accredited engineering education, continuing education, and the career development of land engineers, thereby creating an efficient system for cultivating and developing qualified engineers. Construct an evaluation and certification mechanism for land engineers based on competency standards, grounded in peer review, and facilitated by examinations and interviews. Additionally, establish a credit system for land engineers.

Establish and improve a land-related vocational education service system. Drawing on international experience, the development of professionalization requires the establishment of a systematic framework that effectively links standardized engineering education (professional degree programs), continuing education, and on-the-job practice, thereby ensuring that individual professionals can continuously enhance their specialized knowledge and skills throughout their career development. Therefore, to promote the career development of land professionals, education and training, as well as training and capacity-building, must be regarded as the core means for improving professionalization. Key measures include: establishing a mechanism that aligns land professionals’ career advancement steps—such as professional qualifications or titles—with engineering education and degree programs; creating a coordinated linkage between land professional development and the construction of land disciplines and land-related majors; strengthening macro-level regulation of land-related degree programs; developing a mechanism that connects land professionals’ “step-by-step” career advancement with continuing education, and conducting research on “individual commitment” systems and certification frameworks for continuing education; promoting the establishment of individual learning accounts and credit accumulation systems for land professionals, thus facilitating smooth pathways for continuing education and lifelong learning; incorporating land-related vocational education and training into the national qualifications framework, and advancing mutual recognition and conversion of learning outcomes from non-degree education and vocational skill level credits; collaborating with existing talent-development platforms—including relevant universities and research institutes, national and ministerial key laboratories, and practical training bases—to build a joint training platform for land professionals, focusing particularly on enhancing educational levels, improving competencies and qualities, deepening specialized knowledge, and strengthening practical training; and promoting the compilation of land-specific vocational training materials and the establishment of a pool of qualified land vocational trainers.

Promote the construction of a land occupation database information system. Establishing a comprehensive occupational information system is an important means of advancing professional development. For example, the U.S. occupational information system not only provides workers with comprehensive career information but is also utilized by government agencies for human resource statistics, educational planning and development, corporate talent resource management, university major setting and administration, industry-specific professional qualification certification, and employee career planning. Currently, at the ministerial level, we are promoting the development of a land resources and talent database information system. We can draw on the experience gained from building the U.S. occupational information monitoring system to develop functional modules for land occupation development, including: establishing land occupation classification information, conducting online surveys on land occupations, tracking the career trajectories of land professionals, assessing the competencies and qualities of land professionals, providing online education and training for land professionals, and managing their development. This will enable dynamic monitoring of land occupation classifications and career development trends, ultimately forming a decision-support system for land technical and professional talent development based on occupational information, and actively supporting land technical and professional talent career planning as well as macro-level talent regulation in the land sector.

Promoting the career development of land professionals is a systematic undertaking that requires coordinated efforts and joint endeavors from all sectors of society. To this end, we recommend strengthening organizational support by establishing a dedicated comprehensive coordination team specifically tasked with the overall design, coordinated management, and application of results related to the construction of the land professional system. Additionally, we suggest setting up research teams and expert advisory groups to advance occupational surveys, develop and validate occupational standards in the land sector, and enhance high-level inter-ministerial communication and coordination. At the same time, we should bolster policy support by incorporating the career development of land professionals into the "Medium- and Long-Term Talent Development Plan for Land and Resources" as well as relevant special policies and plans for land and resource management. We also need to strengthen research support by mobilizing experts and scholars from various fields to conduct studies on both the theoretical foundations and practical approaches to land professional development, thereby solidifying the groundwork for this initiative. Furthermore, we should intensify publicity efforts to ensure that all stakeholders involved in land-related work and broader segments of society fully recognize the importance and necessity of land professional development, thus fostering a positive public opinion environment.

(The author is the Director of the Human Resources Research Office at the Human Resources Development Center of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection.)