摘要： 在全球化时代，如何建构自主知识体系，是近年来中国学术界的研究焦点之一。其中，立足中国本土的实践与问题，提炼出既能深刻反映自身情境、又能与国际社会进行有效对话的“标识性概念”，便成为打破知识依附、实现理论创新的关键突破口。这一努力绝非走向封闭的本土主义，而是在“全球”与“本土”的辩证张力中，寻求一种既根植于中国大地、又面向人类共同知识宝库的理论创造。它旨在将中国的经验转化为具有普遍意义的理论资源，从而不仅为理解中国提供钥匙，也为丰富全人类的社会科学知识作出贡献。为此，本刊特邀六位学者，从多个视角出发，共同探讨标识性概念的生成逻辑、建构路径及其在知识体系中的定位，旨在推动中国学术从“概念输入”走向“概念创造”，实现从知识移植到知识自主的转型。 郭忠华教授追溯了标识性概念的起源与内涵，指出其作为建构自主知识体系起点的关键作用。没有标识性概念，也就没有自主知识体系，标识性概念是建构自主知识体系的出发点。王宁教授认为从本土概念入手建构自主知识体系中的标识性概念可以避免“独特性湮没”现象，但需要防止陷入“独特性孤岛”问题，他强调标识性概念必须放在存量概念地图中来定位。孙江教授提出“全球本土化”作为概念史研究方法，主张在跨文化视野中实现概念的在地转化与理论超越，并指出全球本土化的概念史研究不能执着于过去，问题意识应该朝向未来。唐亮教授分析了全球化背景下概念创新的路径，呼吁强化基于共性研究的理论建构与国际对话，并尊重和保护学者个人的学术兴趣和学术自主性。周平教授以“边疆治理”概念为例，阐释了本土性概念在回应现实问题与推动知识原创中的重要意义，即提供认识工具、促进知识生产、服务国家决策和传承中华文明。叶娟丽教授基于经验的维度，总结出概念建构的四项理想标准：具有突破性的理论解释力；具有可操作的研究适用性；具有持续的影响力；具有广泛的跨界接受度。

Abstract: In the era of globalization, constructing an autonomous knowledge system has been one of the focal research areas in China’s academic circles in recent years. Among these efforts, extracting “iconic concepts” grounded in China’s local practices and issues—concepts that not only profoundly reflect their own contexts but also facilitate effective dialogue with the international community—has emerged as a critical breakthrough point for breaking free from knowledge dependency and achieving theoretical innovation. Thus, we invited six scholars from different disciplinary perspectives to jointly explore the generative logic, construction pathways, and positioning of iconic concepts within the knowledge system. The aim is to propel Chinese academia from “concept importation” to “concept creation”, achieving a transformation from knowledge transplantation to knowledge autonomy. Professor Guo Zhonghua traced the origin and connotation of iconic concepts, highlighting their pivotal role as the starting point for constructing an autonomous knowledge system. Professor Wang Ning argued that starting with local concepts to construct iconic concepts within an autonomous knowledge system can avoid the phenomenon of “uniqueness being submerged”, but cautioned against falling into the issue of an “island of uniqueness”. Professor Sun Jiang proposed “glocalization” as a methodological approach for conceptual history research, advocating for the localization and theoretical transcendence of concepts within a cross-cultural perspective. He also emphasized that glocalized conceptual history research should not be fixated on the past but should direct its problem consciousness toward the future. Professor Tang Liang analyzed the path of conceptual innovation in the context of globalization, and called for strengthening theoretical construction and international dialogue based on commonality research. Professor Zhou Ping took the concept of “borderland governance” as an example to elucidate the significant importance of locally rooted concepts in addressing real-world issues and promoting original knowledge creation. Professor Ye Juanli, drawing from an empirical perspective, summarized four criteria for successful conceptual construction.