China’s traditional model of growth for plastic pelletizing machines has become unsustainable, making transformation the only viable path to shifting toward a new growth paradigm through scientific and technological advancement. Therefore, only by adopting a science-and‑technology development philosophy rooted in independent innovation, fostering a strong sense of urgency and proactive commitment, vigorously addressing the constraints and challenges hindering progress in this field, and accelerating the establishment of institutional frameworks and mechanisms that support such development, can we usher in a new phase of high‑level advancement. Transformation is the fundamental principle underpinning the enhancement of indigenous innovation capacity. This paper examines the bottlenecks constraining the technological development of plastic pelletizing machines from the perspectives of innovation, product development, human resources, and R&D systems, and argues that transformation constitutes the cornerstone of an innovation‑driven approach to advancing this sector.

1. Transformation is the strategic guiding principle for the independent innovation and technological development of plastic pelletizing machines.

China’s plastic pelletizing machinery began to develop in the early 1980s. After nearly three decades of effort, China has become a major manufacturer of such equipment, with injection molding machines now ranking first in global production. Overall, although China’s plastic pelletizing machinery has advanced rapidly and offers a wide range of product varieties, it can generally meet domestic demand for standard technical equipment used in plastic raw-material processing and plastic‑product manufacturing and molding. Some specific products have even entered the world’s top ranks. Nevertheless, compared with industrially advanced countries such as Germany, Japan, and Italy, China’s plastic pelletizing machinery still lags behind, primarily in terms of limited product variety, high energy consumption, low levels of automation and control, and unstable performance. The industry remains in a developmental stage, largely confined to the mid- to low‑end market. Its output is dominated by mid‑ and low‑grade, general‑purpose machines, and the overall technological level of its key products is roughly equivalent to that of advanced nations in the early 1980s.

As the petroleum and chemical industries continue to grow during the Eleventh Five-Year Plan period, China’s plastics machinery sector is poised to enter a new phase of development. To meet the evolving demands of these industries, China’s plastic pelletizing machine industry has embarked on a new round of strategic transformation. This transformation represents a strategic vision for independent innovation and the scientific advancement of the plastic pelletizing machine sector.

2. Innovative conceptual transformation.

The fundamental driver of the scientific development of plastic pelletizing machines is innovation. Only by shifting the mindset from imitative innovation to independent, original innovation can we achieve truly transformative progress. In China, the plastic pelletizing machine industry emerged in the early 1980s, initially following a path of technology importation, reverse engineering, and replication. While assimilating advanced international technologies, the emphasis was on imitation and increasing domestic content, with little effort devoted to placing independent innovation on the agenda. As a result, the gap between China’s capabilities and the international cutting edge has continued to widen. Take all‑electronic injection molding machines as an example: when replicating foreign designs, the focus has largely been on low‑cost models. By the time such replicas are completed, the underlying technology has already evolved, prompting yet another round of imitation. Meanwhile, leading manufacturers continuously advance their equipment through independent innovation—delivering higher performance and greater added value—to meet the ever‑growing demands of plastic part production. By contrast, our efforts have often amounted to imitative innovation, yielding modest improvements in performance and functionality but failing to bring about substantive breakthroughs or break free from existing constraints in molding and processing.