Research on Statistical Accounting Difficulties of New‑form Low‑Altitude Economy and the Construction of Industrial Indicator System and Value Evaluation Framework

Research on Statistical Accounting Difficulties of New‑form Low‑Altitude Economy and the Construction of Industrial Indicator System and Value Evaluation Framework

Authors: Buckhouse Intelligent Technology (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Economy Research Institute, Buckhouse Global Low‑Altitude Economy Industry Network, Buckhouse China Low‑Altitude Economy Industry Network, Buckhouse International Low‑Altitude Economy Cooperation Network, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Manufacturing Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Flight Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Support Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Infrastructure Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Industry Supporting Platform, Buckhouse Low‑Altitude Cross‑border Integration Platform

Abstract

As a strategic emerging industry and a key carrier of new‑quality productive forces in China, the low‑altitude economy covers diverse business forms including low‑altitude equipment manufacturing, airspace operation, urban air mobility, low‑altitude logistics and low‑altitude public services. Its industrial boundaries span multiple national economic sectors such as manufacturing, services and digital information. Characterized by rapid iteration of new‑form business models and prominent industrial integration, it poses brand‑new challenges to traditional national economic statistical accounting. At present, China’s low‑altitude economy is in the initial stage of large‑scale commercialization. Numerous new‑form businesses are under demonstration pilots, with extensive cross‑sectoral economic activities. Prominent problems include ambiguous statistical boundaries, co‑existence of double‑counting and statistical omission, difficulties in quantifying non‑monetized values and lack of indicators for new‑form businesses, which hinder objective judgment of the industry’s real scale, structural quality and comprehensive benefits. Based on the real‑world development of new‑form low‑altitude economy, this report systematically sorts out core bottlenecks in current statistical accounting practices, distinguishes core industries from related driving industries, constructs a China‑adapted statistical indicator system for the low‑altitude economy, establishes a multi‑dimensional comprehensive value evaluation framework covering economic, social, safety, innovation and ecological values, and puts forward optimization paths for statistical accounting. It provides theoretical tools and practical references for local industrial monitoring, policy formulation, project assessment and industrial planning.

Keywords: Low‑Altitude Economy; New‑form Business; Statistical Accounting; Industrial Indicator; Value Evaluation; New‑Quality Productive Forces

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Background

With the large‑scale application of UAVs, the advancement of airworthiness certification for electric vertical take‑off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft, and the deepening reform of low‑altitude airspace, the low‑altitude economy has expanded from traditional general aviation into a complex emerging economic form integrating R&D and manufacturing of equipment, low‑altitude flight operation, low‑altitude infrastructure, digital air traffic management, low‑altitude logistics distribution, urban air commuting, emergency rescue, agriculture‑forestry operations and cultural‑tourism consumption. It has become a vital track for driving industrial upgrading and fostering new growth points. At the national level, Statistical Classification of the Low‑Altitude Economy and Its Core Industries (Trial) has been issued, defining four major categories with 65 sub‑categories for the low‑altitude economy: low‑altitude manufacturing industry, low‑altitude operation industry, low‑altitude infrastructure and information service industry, and low‑altitude supporting industry. It lays a foundation for statistical work, yet this classification is mainly mapped from traditional industrial classifications and still faces implementation obstacles when dealing with massive cross‑border new‑form businesses.

From the perspective of industrial practice, many provincial and municipal governments in China have rolled out special plans for the low‑altitude economy and carried out pilots for urban air mobility, UAV logistics demonstrations and low‑altitude cultural‑tourism projects, with rapidly expanding market entities. Nevertheless, industrial scale estimates released by different institutions vary drastically, which mainly stems from inconsistent statistical calibers and divergent understandings of boundaries for new‑form businesses. Some estimates only calculate the output value of equipment manufacturing while ignoring operational services and infrastructure investment; others excessively incorporate indirect driving effects and result in distorted data that cannot support sound decision‑making. Conventional statistical systems are designed for mature industries and fail to fully capture outputs, inputs and benefits of deeply‑integrated low‑altitude new‑form businesses featuring “manufacturing + operation + digital services”. Non‑market outputs and public‑service‑oriented low‑altitude activities are hard to measure in monetary terms, and shortcomings in statistical foundations have gradually become prominent. Against this backdrop, clarifying statistical accounting difficulties for new‑form low‑altitude economy and building a scientifically feasible industrial indicator system and comprehensive value evaluation framework carry strong theoretical and practical significance.

1.2 Domestic and International Research Status

Overseas research on the low‑altitude economy mainly focuses on airspace management, airworthiness certification and business models of urban air mobility. In terms of statistics, surveys conducted by FAA and EASA mostly focus on aircraft quantity, flight hours and enterprise revenue, without forming a complete national economic accounting framework. In Europe and the United States, industrial associations dominate market‑size estimation, which generally suffers from broad boundaries and double‑counting, in the absence of official standardized statistical classification systems.

Domestic academic research on the low‑altitude economy has grown year by year. A large number of papers focus on industrial development paths, airspace reform and business models. In the field of statistical accounting, Statistical Classification of the Low‑Altitude Economy and Its Core Industries (Trial) provides a basic classification basis. Some research institutions have built low‑altitude economy development indices for evaluation from dimensions of innovation, industry, scenarios and guarantees. However, existing indices tend to evaluate development level rather than from the perspective of national economic accounting. Research on accounting methods for new‑form businesses and value quantification mechanisms remains insufficient. Most market reports adopt estimation logics for traditional industries, with inconsistent handling of cross‑integrated businesses, public‑oriented low‑altitude services and indirect driving effects, and no unified paradigm for value evaluation has been established. Existing studies generally point out that long industrial chains, strong coupling and rapid business iteration create statistical difficulties. Nevertheless, systematic research targeting new‑form businesses including decomposition of accounting difficulties, indicator screening and hierarchical value evaluation still needs further deepening.

1.3 Research Content and Research Thinking

This report first defines the connotation and scope of new‑form low‑altitude economy and identifies major pain points in current statistical accounting practices. Second, it constructs a hierarchical statistical indicator system for industries by distinguishing core businesses, related businesses and indirect driving effects, covering six sectors: scale, structure, innovation, operation, infrastructure and market entities. Third, breaking away from GDP‑oriented thinking, it establishes a multi‑dimensional value evaluation framework including economic value, social value, safety value, innovation value and ecological value, and differentiates monetizable accountable value from non‑monetized comprehensive value. Finally, it puts forward optimization implementation paths for statistical accounting and offers suggestions on statistical survey modes, data collection, accounting rules and dynamic iteration mechanisms. The research follows the logic of “concept definition — difficulty analysis — indicator construction — framework establishment — implementation countermeasures”.

1.4 Research Significance

Theoretical significance: It supplements research on statistical accounting for emerging integrated industries, clarifies statistical boundaries for new‑form low‑altitude economy, distinguishes direct outputs from indirect driving effects, takes both monetary and non‑monetary values into account, and enriches theories on value evaluation for strategic emerging industries.
Practical significance: It provides practical references for government statistical departments to implement statistical classifications for the low‑altitude economy, assists local governments in industrial monitoring and project research‑judgment, and reduces data deviations caused by caliber differences. Meanwhile, it offers standardized tools for market institutions, industrial parks and business entities to conduct industrial analysis and project assessment, and promotes high‑quality development of the low‑altitude economy.

Chapter 2 Concept Definition and Industrial Business Classification of New‑form Low‑Altitude Economy

2.1 Connotation of Low‑Altitude Economy and Its New‑form Businesses

According to the statistical classification defined by the National Development and Reform Commission and the National Bureau of Statistics, the low‑altitude economy is a comprehensive economic form formed by industrial innovation and scenario application driven by low‑altitude aviation activities, covering full‑chain economic activities from equipment R&D and manufacturing to flight operation, infrastructure and supporting guarantees. New‑form businesses of the low‑altitude economy refer to new industries, new models and new services developed based on UAVs, eVTOLs, digital air traffic management platforms and intelligent low‑altitude infrastructure, differing from traditional general aviation. They feature rapid technological iteration, strong cross‑border integration, evolving business models, and partial dual attributes of commercial and public‑welfare nature.

New‑form businesses include hardware‑end products such as new‑generation low‑altitude aircraft, intelligent sensing equipment and low‑altitude station equipment; service‑end offerings such as UAV urban distribution, air commuting, low‑altitude cultural‑tourism, low‑altitude emergency services and digital airspace scheduling services; as well as cross‑field digital‑aviation products including digital infrastructure, air‑traffic‑management software platforms and low‑altitude big‑data services. Many new‑form businesses are still in demonstration‑pilot phases with evolving operation and profit models, which constitutes the realistic background for statistical accounting.

2.2 Industrial Chain and Classification of New‑form Low‑Altitude Economy Businesses

Combined with official statistical classifications, industrial activities of the low‑altitude economy are divided into four major sectors: low‑altitude manufacturing industry, low‑altitude operation industry, low‑altitude infrastructure and information service industry, and low‑altitude supporting industry, where new‑form businesses are concentrated:

First, new‑form low‑altitude manufacturing businesses: R&D and manufacturing of eVTOL complete aircraft, industrial heavy‑lift UAVs, special‑operation UAVs, aviation lightweight new materials, aviation power batteries, airborne intelligent sensing and AI flight‑control systems, low‑altitude station hardware equipment, etc. As hardware‑supply‑end new‑form businesses, they are characterized by high‑tech input and long‑cycle airworthiness certification.

Second, new‑form low‑altitude operation businesses: the sector with the most prominent statistical‑accounting difficulties, including UAV urban logistics distribution, urban air mobility (UAM), low‑altitude cultural‑tourism sightseeing, commercialized UAV mapping and inspection services, socialized low‑altitude emergency rescue services, air medical transportation, etc. A large number of outputs in this sector are service‑oriented; some businesses accept both government‑procured public‑service orders and market‑oriented commercial orders.

Third, new‑form low‑altitude infrastructure and information service businesses: vertiports, low‑altitude flight service stations, low‑altitude communication networks integrated with sensing‑communication functions, digital airspace management platforms, low‑altitude big‑data operation, low‑altitude simulation test platforms, etc. These are new‑type digital infrastructures with dual attributes of public infrastructure and market‑oriented operation.

Fourth, new‑form low‑altitude supporting businesses: low‑altitude simulation test services, low‑altitude digital certification, digital training for low‑altitude talents, innovative low‑altitude insurance, low‑altitude compliance consulting, airworthiness technical services and other producer‑service businesses.

From the perspective of industrial impact hierarchy, they can be further divided into three layers. The first layer is core industries that directly produce low‑altitude‑related products and provide services. The second layer is related industries that offer direct support for low‑altitude activities. The third layer is indirectly‑driven industries: consumption, employment and upstream‑downstream derivative demands indirectly stimulated by low‑altitude‑economy development. This third layer shall not be directly included in the scale of low‑altitude‑economy industries and shall only be analyzed as driving effects. This division serves as a key premise to resolve double‑counting.

2.3 Industrial Characteristics of New‑form Businesses

First, in‑depth cross‑industry integration. A single market entity may engage in hardware R&D, platform operation and flight services simultaneously, spanning manufacturing, software and information‑technology services, transportation services. Statistics categorized by traditional industries cannot fully identify all low‑altitude‑economic outputs of enterprises.

Second, high uncertainty of business models. Many new‑form businesses are in pilot phases with unstable revenue structures. Some projects target demonstration and verification instead of commercial profits, and are sustained by policy subsidies and pilot‑project funds. Enterprise revenue alone cannot measure the real industrial value.

Third, interweaving public‑welfare and commercial attributes. Businesses such as low‑altitude inspection, emergency rescue, disaster prevention and forest‑fire monitoring include government‑procured services and public‑welfare emergency tasks. Mass non‑market‑oriented outputs have no direct monetary transactions and cannot be covered by GDP accounting.

Fourth, rapid technological iteration and continuous emergence of new businesses. New models such as AI‑large‑model‑empowered flight control and low‑altitude digital twins keep emerging, while updates to statistical classifications suffer time‑lag and may cause statistical omissions.

Fifth, significant regional disparities. Pilots are advanced at different paces across cities, and new‑form businesses are unevenly deployed. Some regions only host demonstration projects without large‑scale industries, increasing difficulties in comparative regional accounting.

Chapter 3 Major Difficulties in Statistical Accounting for New‑form Low‑Altitude‑Economy Businesses

3.1 Challenges in Defining Industrial Boundaries: Scope Ambiguity Caused by Business Overlaps

The low‑altitude economy is not a closed‑loop independent industry. A great number of economic activities are embedded within existing major national‑economic industry categories. Many enterprises are not specialized low‑altitude enterprises; only partial businesses belong to the low‑altitude economy while others fall under traditional sectors such as electronic manufacturing, software services and logistics. How to split outputs of new‑form low‑altitude businesses within enterprises constitutes the primary accounting difficulty. Many cross‑border new‑form businesses have multiple attributes. For instance, a low‑altitude big‑data platform belongs to both the software‑service industry and low‑altitude flight‑control services; UAV logistics falls into both the logistics industry and low‑altitude operation. Simply incorporating all enterprise revenue into the low‑altitude economy leads to overestimation; only counting complete‑aircraft manufacturing severely underestimates contributions from service‑end new‑form businesses.

Market institutions adopt vastly different boundary‑handling calibers: some estimates only calculate output value of aircraft hardware; some incorporate all operational services; others further include ground‑logistics cargo value and tourism consumption into the low‑altitude economy. Industrial‑scale figures derived from different calibers may differ several‑fold, resulting in chaotic industrial data and hindering horizontal comparison. Meanwhile, new‑form businesses keep iterating and new scenarios keep emerging, static statistical classifications lag behind, and some newly‑emerged businesses are not mapped to existing sub‑categories.

3.2 Co‑existence of Double‑Counting and Statistical Omission

Double‑counting mainly originates from multi‑layer value superposition across industrial chains. For an eVTOL aircraft, outputs from component enterprises, complete‑aircraft manufacturers and service revenues from operators, if summed up without distinction, will trigger double‑counting of intermediate products. Many current industrial reports simply add market sizes of all industrial‑chain links, confusing intermediate inputs and final outputs and violating the value‑added accounting principle of national economic accounting.

Statistical omissions concentrate in operational‑service and public‑oriented new‑form businesses. First, numerous small‑and‑medium‑sized UAV service providers and socialized low‑altitude‑service entities are scattered and lack independent industrial classifications. Conventional statistics for above‑scale industries and service industries fail to cover micro‑and‑small enterprises, and outputs of new‑form‑business services generated by below‑scale entities are largely omitted. Second, public‑welfare and government‑procured low‑altitude public services such as emergency rescue and forest‑fire inspection involve tasks without market‑oriented charging and transaction prices, lacking corresponding revenue data and prone to omission. Third, statistics for C‑end consumption‑oriented new‑form businesses are absent. Low‑altitude cultural‑tourism and personal low‑altitude experience consumption are scattered in cultural‑tourism statistics without independent items, and output value of commercial C‑end low‑altitude services is chronically underestimated. Surveys show that current commercial C‑end low‑altitude operational businesses account for a low proportion of the whole‑industry scale, yet almost no separate sub‑items exist in statistical systems, forming statistical blind spots.

3.3 Difficulties in Measuring Non‑Monetized Output Values and Limitations of GDP‑Oriented Accounting

Traditional national economic accounting mainly measures monetized outputs under market transactions. Nevertheless, a considerable share of value generated by new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses cannot be reflected via market transactions. UAV‑conducted disaster monitoring, forest‑fire prevention and rescue operations generate huge public‑safety value; low‑altitude digital platforms improve airspace‑operation efficiency, alleviate urban traffic congestion and save social time costs; R&D of low‑altitude technologies produces technological spill‑over benefits that drive progress in other industries. Such social benefits, safety benefits and technological spill‑over benefits have no direct market prices and cannot be directly counted as value‑added. Reliance merely on GDP and operating‑revenue indicators will severely underestimate comprehensive value of the low‑altitude economy.

For many demonstration‑pilot projects, their core value lies in technical verification and model exploration. They deliver limited operating revenue in the short term yet carry long‑term industrial‑cultivation value. Pure financial indicators cannot objectively assess project effectiveness, which constitutes a practical dilemma for current local‑project evaluation.

3.4 Insufficient Basic Statistical Data for New‑form Businesses

First, lack of split data at the enterprise level. Existing corporate financial and statistical statements do not separately disclose revenue, costs and value‑added of low‑altitude‑related business segments, which are mixed with traditional businesses such as electronic information, software and logistics. Statistical institutions lack grounds for splitting, and enterprises have no separate internal accounting ledgers.

Second, immature special‑survey mechanisms for new‑form businesses. Industrial‑specific indicators such as flight hours, effective sorties, station utilization rates, airspace‑usage conditions and low‑altitude big‑data business volume are not included in conventional statistical statements, lacking normalized collection channels. Existing civil‑aviation statistics mainly target traditional general aviation and fail to cover massive small‑and‑medium‑sized UAVs and socialized low‑altitude‑operation entities. A large number of socialized UAV‑operation entities are not listed in traditional civil‑aviation general‑aviation enterprise directories, creating gaps in flight‑activity data collection.

Third, cross‑departmental data silos. Low‑altitude‑economy data are scattered across multiple authorities including development‑and‑reform commissions, civil‑aviation administrations, industry‑and‑information‑technology departments, emergency‑management departments, cultural‑tourism departments, transportation authorities and market‑regulation departments. Airspace‑approval data, enterprise‑industrial‑and‑commercial data, airworthiness‑certification data and flight‑report data belong to separate systems. Unified data‑sharing and aggregation mechanisms are absent, making it hard to form a complete industrial portrait.

3.5 Challenges in Comparable Regional Accounting and Strong Industrial Heterogeneity in Pilot Phases

Provincial‑municipal low‑altitude‑economy development varies greatly across China. Some cities focus on manufacturing layout, some prioritize operational scenarios, and others only carry out a small number of pilot projects. Industrial structures differ drastically among regions. Simply comparing total industrial scales carries limited significance, yet standardized sub‑business indicators are lacking, hindering objective horizontal regional comparison. Meanwhile, many new‑form businesses are in demonstration phases with limited project quantities and sample sizes. Directly applying accounting methods for mature industries will result in statistical outcomes vulnerable to disturbances from individual pilot projects and poor stability.

3.6 No Unified Paradigm for Accounting Intermediate Inputs and Value‑Added

Value‑added accounting serves as the core of national‑economic accounting, calculated as total output minus intermediate consumption. For low‑altitude new‑form businesses, no unified operational specifications have been formulated to define intermediate inputs for digital platforms, big‑data services and R&D services, or handle software inputs for digital air‑traffic‑management systems. For example, massive inputs for low‑altitude digital platforms go to R&D and algorithm iteration. Distinguishing between capital formation and intermediate consumption is handled differently by different institutions, directly causing deviations in value‑added estimation results.

Chapter 4 Construction of Industrial Statistical Indicator System for New‑form Low‑Altitude‑Economy Businesses

4.1 Principles for Constructing the Indicator System

1. Compliance with official classification principles: Based on Statistical Classification of the Low‑Altitude Economy and Its Core Industries (Trial), indicators correspond to four major industrial categories to ensure compatibility with national statistical systems and facilitate future docking with official statistical systems.

2. Distinguishing core and driving‑effect principles: Strictly differentiate core industries of the low‑altitude economy, related supporting industries and indirect driving effects. Value‑added accounting shall be performed for core industries; indirect driving effects shall only serve as auxiliary analysis and shall not be included in direct industrial scale to avoid double‑counting.

3. Balancing monetary indicators and non‑monetary physical‑quantity indicators: Besides value‑quantity indicators such as revenue and value‑added, abundant physical‑quantity and operational indicators shall be set to make up for shortcomings that non‑market‑oriented outputs of new‑form businesses cannot be measured monetarily.

4. Practical and collectible principles: Balance theoretical completeness and practical availability. Prioritize indicators collectible via enterprise statements, government departmental data and special surveys, and avoid abstract indicators impossible to collect.

5. Dynamic iteration principle: Reserve interfaces for indicator expansion to adapt to continuously‑emerging new‑form businesses and establish a dynamic indicator‑update mechanism.

6. Hierarchical‑application principle: Indicators are divided into national‑level, local‑regional‑level and project‑entity‑level tiers to satisfy multi‑scenario demands including macro‑industrial monitoring, local research‑judgment and project assessment.

4.2 Overall Framework of the Indicator System

This industrial statistical indicator system consists of six primary dimensions: industrial‑scale indicators, industrial‑structure indicators, market‑entity indicators, innovation‑input‑and‑output indicators, physical‑quantity indicators for operational activities, and infrastructure‑and‑guarantee indicators. Each primary dimension contains secondary and tertiary subdivided indicators, distinguishing value‑quantity indicators and physical‑quantity indicators. It also marks data‑collection sources and clarifies which indicators are used for industrial value‑added accounting and which for industrial‑status monitoring.

Primary Dimension 1: Industrial‑Scale Indicators (Core Accounting Dimension for Estimating Total Output and Value‑Added)

This dimension focuses on monetizable industrial economic outputs, strictly differentiating core industries and related supporting industries, as well as total output, intermediate input and value‑added to avoid double‑counting.
Secondary Indicator 1: Value Scale of Core Industries
‑ Total output of core industries: total output of new‑form low‑altitude‑manufacturing businesses, total output of new‑form low‑altitude‑operation businesses, total output of new‑form low‑altitude‑infrastructure‑and‑information‑service businesses, total output of new‑form low‑altitude‑supporting businesses
‑ Intermediate inputs of core industries: raw materials, outsourced components and services, outsourced software, operation‑and‑maintenance services and other intermediate consumption for each sector
‑ Value‑added of core industries: total output minus intermediate consumption, calculated separately for four major sectors. It is the core indicator measuring direct economic contributions of the low‑altitude economy.
‑ Operating revenue of core industries: operating revenue of above‑scale and sampled below‑scale enterprises engaged in new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses, distinguished as market‑oriented business revenue, government‑procured‑service revenue and pilot‑project‑fund revenue.

Secondary Indicator 2: Scale of Related Supporting Industries (For monitoring only, not included in direct value‑added of low‑altitude economy)
‑ Output scale of upstream direct supporting industries (aviation‑battery raw materials, general electronic components, etc.)

Secondary Indicator 3: Investment Scale
‑ Fixed‑asset investment in new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses: manufacturing‑capacity investment, investment in low‑altitude‑infrastructure stations, investment in digital‑platform construction
‑ Total R&D‑fund input: internal R&D expenditure of enterprises engaged in new‑form businesses.

Primary Dimension 2: Industrial‑Structure Indicators (Characterizing internal structures of new‑form businesses and identifying development weaknesses)

Secondary Indicator 1: Proportion of internal structures
‑ Proportion of value‑added of each subdivided new‑form business in total value‑added of core industries, distinguishing proportions of manufacturing‑end, operational‑service, digital‑infrastructure and supporting‑service sectors
‑ Proportion of market‑oriented‑business revenue and proportion of government‑procured‑service revenue, reflecting commercial‑maturity levels of businesses.

Secondary Indicator 2: Product and service structure
‑ Output‑value structure of eVTOLs and different types of UAV products; revenue structure of various operational services (logistics, commuting, cultural‑tourism, inspection, emergency services).

Secondary Indicator 3: Trade structure
‑ Export‑delivery value of products from new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses, import value of key components.

Primary Dimension 3: Market‑Entity Indicators (Reflecting ecological development of industrial entities)

Secondary Indicator 1: Quantity of enterprise entities
‑ Quantity of enterprises engaged in new‑form businesses by sector: manufacturing, operational‑service, digital‑platform and supporting‑service enterprises; quantity of above‑scale and below‑scale micro‑and‑small enterprises
‑ Quantity of newly‑registered and deregistered enterprises; quantity of high‑tech enterprises and “specialized‑refined‑differentiated‑innovative” enterprises.

Secondary Indicator 2: Employment indicators
‑ Total number of direct employees for new‑form businesses, categorized by posts: R&D personnel, manufacturing personnel, flight‑operation personnel, operation‑and‑maintenance personnel; proportion of R&D personnel among total employees.

Secondary Indicator 3: Capital‑activity indicators
‑ Total equity‑financing amount for new‑form‑business sectors, number of financing events, financing distribution by track.

Primary Dimension 4: Innovation‑Input‑and‑Output Indicators (Adapted to high‑tech new‑form‑business characteristics)

Secondary Indicator 1: Innovation input
‑ Proportion of R&D funds in operating revenue; number of R&D personnel; quantity of industry‑university‑research cooperation projects.

Secondary Indicator 2: Innovation output
‑ Number of authorized invention patents for new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses, categorized as aircraft, flight‑control algorithms and infrastructure; utility‑model patents and design patents
‑ Quantity of obtained airworthiness certifications: type certificates and production licenses for complete aircraft and components; operating revenue generated by new products
‑ Quantity of participated industry‑standard formulation: national standards, industrial standards and association standards.

Primary Dimension 5: Physical‑Quantity Indicators for Operational Activities (Making up for deficiencies of financial indicators, focusing on operational new‑form businesses)

This set of indicators are characteristic physical indicators for the low‑altitude economy, unaffected by profit‑making status of business models, and objectively reflect actual business‑operation scales.
Secondary Indicator 1: Flight‑activity indicators
‑ Total commercial flight hours; flight hours by scenario (inspection, logistics distribution, cultural‑tourism sightseeing, emergency operations, air transportation)
‑ Effective commercial sorties; quantity of pilot routes and normalized‑operation routes
‑ Reported‑operation frequency of socialized UAV‑operation entities.

Secondary Indicator 2: Service‑coverage indicators
‑ Number of points covered by low‑altitude‑logistics services; number of visitors received by air‑cultural‑tourism services; number of emergency‑service response‑and‑disposal cases.

Primary Dimension 6: Infrastructure‑and‑Guarantee Indicators

Secondary Indicator 1: Physical infrastructure
‑ Number of completed vertiports and flight‑service stations; station utilization rate; quantity of under‑construction and planned stations.

Secondary Indicator 2: Digital infrastructure
‑ Coverage of low‑altitude sensing‑communication‑integrated networks; number of entities accessing digital airspace‑management platforms; total flight‑mission volume processed by platforms.

Secondary Indicator 3: Supporting guarantees
‑ Number of low‑altitude‑training institutions; quantity of licensed UAV operators and operation‑and‑maintenance technicians; scale of low‑altitude‑insurance underwriting.

4.3 Indicator Collection and Accounting Implementation Rules

1. Enterprise split‑accounting rule: For cross‑industry‑operating enterprises, do not incorporate all enterprise revenue into the low‑altitude economy. Adopt the business‑splitting method via special enterprise survey forms for enterprises to separately fill in total output, intermediate input, revenue and R&D investment belonging to new‑form low‑altitude‑economy business segments. Extract corresponding parts for statistics and exclude remaining traditional businesses to resolve statistical distortion for cross‑industry enterprises.

2. Combined above‑scale‑enterprise and sampling‑survey mode: Implement regular reporting systems for above‑scale enterprises. Adopt stratified sampling surveys for numerous scattered below‑scale micro‑and‑small enterprises and socialized‑operation entities to estimate overall outputs and resolve statistical omissions.

3. Supplementation via multi‑department government‑data coordination: Connect civil‑aviation flight‑report data, airworthiness‑certification data, enterprise‑industrial‑and‑commercial registration data, development‑and‑reform‑commission project databases and government‑procurement lists to supplement physical‑quantity indicators beyond enterprise statements.

4. Handling of government‑procured‑service businesses: Government‑procured low‑altitude inspection and emergency services shall be counted into total output and operating revenue according to actual contract amounts. Pure public‑welfare emergency tasks without contractual consideration shall not be counted in value‑quantity statistics, yet shall be included in physical‑quantity indicators such as flight hours and enter the social‑value segment of the value‑evaluation framework.

5. Establish dynamic update lists for indicators: Add tertiary indicators corresponding to new scenarios and phase out obsolete indicators annually according to iteration of new‑form businesses.

Chapter 5 Construction of Comprehensive Value Evaluation Framework for New‑form Low‑Altitude‑Economy Businesses

5.1 Logic for Framework Construction

GDP and value‑added alone can only measure market‑oriented monetized value of the low‑altitude economy and cannot fully reflect its comprehensive contributions. This framework adopts five‑dimensional comprehensive evaluation: economic value + social value + safety value + innovation value + ecological value. It falls into two modules. The first module is monetizable accountable value, corresponding to the industrial statistical indicator system in Chapter 4 and measurable in monetary terms. The second module is non‑monetized comprehensive value, combining index scoring and benefit quantitative measurement to assess public benefits and spill‑over benefits, adapted to evaluation demands for numerous pilot‑phase and public‑welfare‑oriented new‑form businesses. The evaluation framework can be applied to comprehensive‑development evaluation for regional low‑altitude economies and comprehensive assessment for individual new‑form‑business projects.

Evaluation principles: Take economic contributions as the foundation while considering social benefits; distinguish quantifiable measurement and qualitative description; differentiate direct value and indirect spill‑over value. Indirect value serves only for reference and shall not be mixed with direct value‑added.

5.2 Five‑Dimensional Comprehensive Value Evaluation Framework

Dimension 1: Economic Value (Monetizable, connected to statistical indicator system)

Reflect direct and indirect economic‑output benefits of the low‑altitude economy, mainly adopting indicators including value‑added, revenue, investment and employment driving effects.

1. Direct economic value: value‑added of core industries, fixed‑asset investment, direct employment, corporate tax contributions.

2. Indirect‑driven economic value (for auxiliary reference only, not directly counted in industrial value‑added): upstream‑downstream industrial‑chain‑driven outputs, consumption‑driving effects and derivative‑service‑industry stimulation. Adopt input‑output coefficients to measure industrial‑correlation driving effects and explicitly mark them as indirect effects to avoid confusion with direct outputs.

Dimension 2: Social Value (Partially semi‑quantifiable, largely non‑monetized value)

Focus on comprehensive improvements brought by new‑form businesses to social operation, people’s livelihood services and urban operation.
‑ Improvement of people’s‑livelihood services: improved timeliness of low‑altitude‑logistics distribution, service capacity of air‑medical‑transport rescue, enrichment of low‑altitude‑cultural‑tourism supplies.
‑ Improvement of urban‑operation efficiency: UAV inspection reduces labor costs and improves inspection efficiency for urban pipe networks, power facilities and transportation; degree of ground‑traffic‑pressure alleviation brought by air‑commuting pilots.
‑ Coverage of public inclusive services: empowerment for rural development delivered by UAV plant protection and material delivery for rural areas.
‑ Social‑cost savings: labor‑hour and time‑cost savings achieved by replacing traditional operation modes with low‑altitude operations; cost‑benefit measurement can be conducted.

Dimension 3: Safety Value (Predominantly non‑monetized benefits, unique core value of the low‑altitude economy)

The low‑altitude economy delivers prominent value in disaster prevention‑and‑mitigation, emergency response and land‑resource monitoring; this dimension is set independently.
‑ Disaster‑emergency‑response capacity: number of task responses and disposal‑support effects for UAV‑conducted fire monitoring, flood‑geological‑disaster investigation and emergency‑material delivery.
‑ Urban‑safety governance: number of hidden dangers detected via security patrol and infrastructure‑risk inspection.
‑ Airspace‑operation safety: risk‑warning‑and‑disposal capacity for flight risks delivered by low‑altitude‑management platforms, safety‑accident incidence rate.
‑ Industrial‑chain‑supply‑chain security: localization level of key components for low‑altitude equipment, degree of supply‑chain independent controllability.

Dimension 4: Innovation Value (Technological spill‑over value)

The low‑altitude economy belongs to high‑tech tracks, and technological spill‑over constitutes an important value. Many pilot‑phase projects deliver limited short‑term economic benefits yet carry significant innovation value.
‑ Technological breakthroughs: localization‑breakthrough status of key technologies, commercialization of core‑product airworthiness certifications and new‑product R&D outcomes.
‑ Technological spill‑over effects: spill‑over‑driven progress in other industries brought by flight‑control technologies, lightweight‑material technologies and aviation‑battery technologies.
‑ Industrial‑ecology cultivation: development of local industrial chains, construction of innovation platforms, talent cultivation.
‑ Standard‑setting discourse power: outcomes of participating in national and international low‑altitude‑sector standard formulation.

Dimension 5: Ecological Value

Evaluate green‑and‑low‑carbon benefits of new‑form businesses.
‑ Energy‑saving and emission‑reduction: carbon‑emission reduction achieved by replacing traditional fuel‑powered general‑aviation equipment with electric low‑altitude aircraft; carbon‑emission reduction realized by substituting numerous ground‑motor‑vehicle trips with low‑altitude inspection.
‑ Ecological‑protection applications: development status of UAV‑conducted ecological monitoring, wildlife protection and desertification‑monitoring businesses.
‑ Negative industrial constraints: noise‑pollution risks, recycling status of discarded aircraft, included as deduction items in evaluation.

5.3 Dual‑Track Evaluation Modes

Mode A: Macro regional evaluation, for comprehensive research‑judgment on low‑altitude‑economy development in provinces, municipalities and industrial parks.
Transform the five‑dimensional framework into a comprehensive evaluation index. Assign weights to each primary dimension, and map secondary and tertiary indicators to corresponding scores. Assign priority weight to the economic‑value dimension. Objective scores are derived from physical‑quantity indicators and statistical‑accounting data. Expert‑evaluation modules are set for a small number of hard‑to‑quantify indicators. Strictly distinguish: value‑added obtained via statistical accounting represents objective statistical results; the comprehensive‑value index is a multi‑dimensional evaluation result. The two cannot substitute for each other, and the comprehensive index shall not be converted into GDP scale.

Mode B: Pilot‑project evaluation for new‑form businesses.
Many pilot‑phase projects feature immature business models and low revenue yet possess social, safety and innovation value. This framework avoids denying pilot‑project value merely based on financial indicators, distinguishes direct‑economic benefits from social‑safety‑innovation benefits of projects, and enables scientific assessment for demonstration projects.

5.4 Important Constraints for Framework Application

First, non‑monetary‑value dimensions shall not be converted and added into industrial value‑added, and comprehensive‑value evaluation shall not equal GDP expansion.
Second, indirect spill‑over effects shall be listed separately; spill‑over benefits are prohibited from being directly counted into total industrial scale of the low‑altitude economy.
Third, for new‑form businesses still in early pilot phases, lower weights shall be assigned to economic benefits while higher weights shall be assigned to innovation and social values. For commercially‑mature businesses, raise weights for economic benefits.

Chapter 6 Optimization Paths for Existing Statistical‑Accounting Problems of New‑form Low‑Altitude‑Economy Businesses

6.1 Refine implementation rules for statistical classifications and clarify boundaries for new‑form businesses

Based on national Statistical Classification of the Low‑Altitude Economy and Its Core Industries (Trial), issue implementation‑operation guidelines targeting new‑form businesses, specify which parts of each new‑form business shall be included in statistics and which belong to supporting‑related industries, and clarify practical methods for enterprise‑business splitting. Establish dynamic identification lists for new‑form businesses, conduct timely research‑judgment on continuously‑emerging new models and define statistical categorization to resolve boundary ambiguity. Explicitly distinguish core industries, related supporting industries and indirect driving effects. Mandate caliber marking in industrial reports and local estimations to reduce confusion of data from different institutions.

6.2 Improve statistical‑survey systems to resolve statistical omissions and double‑counting

Implement a combined statistical mode: “regular reporting for above‑scale enterprises + sampling surveys for below‑scale entities + integration of multi‑department government‑data”. Design special survey forms for cross‑industry enterprises to require split reporting of outputs and intermediate inputs for low‑altitude‑related businesses, so as to realize accurate value‑added accounting. Improve sampling frames for numerous scattered socialized low‑altitude‑operation entities and include small‑and‑medium‑sized UAV‑service providers excluded from traditional general‑aviation directories. Strictly enforce value‑added‑accounting logic taking total output minus intermediate input as the core, and eliminate double‑counting caused by simple summation of revenue across industrial‑chain links. Incorporate flight hours and sorties into regular surveys to realize mutual verification between value‑quantity and physical‑quantity datasets.

6.3 Establish dual‑track processing mechanisms for monetary and non‑monetary values

Clarify that national‑economic statistical accounting mainly handles market‑oriented monetized outputs. For public‑welfare‑oriented businesses without consideration, focus on collecting physical‑quantity data such as flight hours and task volumes for inclusion in the comprehensive‑value‑evaluation system, instead of forcibly converting them into GDP. Promote the five‑dimensional value‑evaluation framework proposed in this report. In local‑planning evaluation and pilot‑project acceptance, change the single evaluation orientation focusing merely on revenue and profit, take social, safety and innovation values into account, and objectively view early‑stage demonstration projects.

6.4 Build a cross‑departmental data‑collaboration foundation

Construct a statistical‑data‑collaboration mechanism for the low‑altitude economy. Aggregate enterprise‑industrial‑and‑commercial information, civil‑aviation flight‑report data, airworthiness‑certification data, government‑procurement projects, industry‑and‑information‑technology‑department project databases and emergency‑management‑department task records to break down data silos. Leverage digital means to connect low‑altitude‑flight‑service platforms, automatically collect flight‑operation data, reduce reporting burdens for surveys, realize cross‑verification of multi‑source data and improve statistical‑data quality.

6.5 Improve comparable regional‑accounting methods and build industrial‑quality‑monitoring dashboards

In view of industrial‑structure disparities across regions, avoid simple comparison of total industrial scales. Publish value‑added structures by business segment and physical‑operation indicators simultaneously to facilitate objective regional comparison. Build a monitoring dashboard for new‑form low‑altitude‑economy businesses covering scale indicators, structural indicators, innovation indicators and physical‑operation indicators. Focus not only on industrial scale but also on commercial‑maturity levels, innovation quality and infrastructure‑construction levels, and avoid “scale‑only theory”. For regions still in pilot phases, prioritize monitoring leading indicators such as projects, routes and flight hours.

6.6 Strengthen basic industrial research and unify estimation methodologies for new‑form businesses

Academic and industrial institutions shall reinforce research on input‑output and value‑added accounting for the low‑altitude economy, and improve operational rules for intermediate‑input and capital‑formation handling for new‑form businesses. Guide industrial‑research reports to mandatorily disclose estimation calibers and boundary assumptions, distinguish direct industrial scale from indirect driving effects, enhance transparency of industrial data, and mitigate misguidance to decision‑making caused by false and inflated estimation results.

Chapter 7 Conclusions and Outlook

As a key direction for new‑quality productive forces, the low‑altitude