楚雄师范学院学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (5): 74-81.

• 管理学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

互惠共生视域下传统医药与乡村振兴的融合路径——兼论健康乡村建设的挑战与突破

邵维庆1, 卢海燕2   

  1. 1.云南民族大学 国际合作交流处,云南 昆明 650504;
    2.昆明医科大学 法医学院,云南 昆明 650500
  • 收稿日期:2025-05-31 出版日期:2025-09-20 发布日期:2025-09-18
  • 作者简介:邵维庆(1970–),男,法学博士,云南民族大学国际合作交流处教授,研究方向为民族学、社会医学、医学人类学;卢海燕(1984–),女,法学博士,昆明医科大学法医学院讲师,研究方向为卫生法学、法人类学。
  • 基金资助:
    云南省哲学社会科学规划项目“传统医药交流交融促进民族团结进步实证研究”(YB2022071); 云南省教育厅科学研究基金项目“乡村振兴视域下民族地区健康乡村建设‘硬法’‘软法’的协同之治”(2023Y0738)

Institutional Symbiosis in Integration of Traditional Medicine and Rural Revitalization:—An Overview of Challenges and Innovations for Healthy Village Development

SHAO Weiqing1, LU Haiyan2   

  1. 1. Office of International Relations, Yunnan Minzu University, Kunming, Yunnan Province 650504;
    2. School of Forensic Science, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, Yunnan Province 650500
  • Received:2025-05-31 Online:2025-09-20 Published:2025-09-18

摘要: 乡村要振兴,健康是保障。健康乡村建设为推进乡村全面振兴提供了坚实的健康保障,其中强化中医药服务是推进健康乡村建设的八项重点任务之一,由此,乡村振兴、健康保障和传统医药三者之间形成了紧密的内在联系。在该实践场域中,传统医药的实践者、体验者与乡村振兴的参与者作为多元共生单元主体,通过医疗机构设施设备的基础性保障、传统医药“文化资本”挖掘利用的技术性保障,以及相关项目有机结合的催化力量等共生基质互动,并在共生环境外部条件的约束强化和激励保障作用下,形成互嵌互补、互惠共生的共生关系,进而构建为一体化共生系统,协同赋能健康乡村建设。然而,现实中两者的共生系统对健康乡村建设存在如下不足:共生单元主体互动不强导致建设合力不够,共生基质支撑不够导致建设后劲乏力,共生环境外部掣肘导致建设能力弱化,共生模式关系失衡导致建设困境加剧。应增强共生单元联动以凝聚建设合力,巩固共生基质以激发建设后劲,优化共生环境以提高建设能力,完善互惠共生模式以破解建设困境,从而拓展健康乡村建设新范式。

关键词: 传统医药, 乡村振兴, 互惠共生, 健康乡村建设

Abstract: Health constitutes the foundational guarantee of rural revitalization. The Healthy Village Initiative establishes a robust institutional framework for health advancement that underpins comprehensive rural regeneration. Within the architecture of this policy, enhancing traditional medicine service provision is formally designated as one of eight core strategic priorities. This tripartite nexus–rural revitalization, health security, and traditional medicine–thus manifests an internally coherent institutional logic. Within this ecosystem, traditional medicine practitioners/service recipients and rural revitalization stakeholders function as primary institutional actors within a multi-entity symbiotic system. Their interrelations are mediated through three-dimensional symbiotic substrates: the material infrastructure of medical facilities/equipment, technical capacities for leveraging the “cultural capital” of traditional medicine, and programmatic synergies through integrated interventions. Under externally imposed institutional constraints and incentive structures within the symbiotic environment, these elements coalesce into a mutually embedded, complementary, and reciprocally beneficial symbiosis model. This institutional configuration ultimately evolves into an integrated co-governance system that collectively sustains Healthy Village development. However, in practice, the symbiotic system between the two presents the following limitations in building healthy villages: weak interaction among symbiotic units weakening collective effort, inadequate support from the symbiotic matrix diminishing sustained momentum, external constraints on the symbiotic environment eroding construction capacity, and imbalanced relationships within symbiotic models exacerbating construction dilemmas. To address these limitations, it is necessary to enhance collaboration among symbiotic units to consolidate collective efforts, strengthen the symbiotic matrix to boost long-term momentum, optimize the symbiotic environment to enhance construction capacity, and reinforce mutualistic symbiotic models to alleviate construction dilemmas. Only with these collective efforts can new paradigms for Healthy Village development be forged.

Key words: traditional medicine, rural revitalization, mutualistic symbiosis, Healthy Village development

中图分类号: