Aa

RESOURCE CENTER

Press Release

Seminar and Press Conference of 2007 China Urban Competitiveness Study (Hong Kong)

2007.03.28

Organizer:

The Better Hong Kong Foundation

 

Co-organizers:

Institute of Finance and Trade Economics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

The Seminar and Press Conference of 2007 China Urban Competitiveness Study (Hong Kong) is held in Hong Kong on March 28, 2007. It is organized by The Better Hong Kong Foundation and co-organized by Institute of Finance and Trade Economics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

1. Main findings of 2007 China Urban Competitiveness Study

“The 2007 Blue Book on China Urban Competitiveness” was led by Dr Ni Pengfei of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences with contributions from about 100 scholars from Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau. The report identified the core advantages of 200 Chinese cities. Their urban competitiveness is ranked according to various indicators.

A. Ranking of Urban Competitiveness

The top 10 cities in overall urban competitiveness are: Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou, Taipei, Wuxi, Suzhou, Foshan and Macau.

Hong Kong’s rank in different competitiveness in 2006 and 2007:

Scale competitiveness:                 1st in 2007, 1st in 2006;

Efficiency competitiveness:         1st in 2007, 1st in 2006;

Efficacy Competitiveness:           1st in 2007; 10th in 2006

Structural competitiveness: 3rd in 2007; 2nd in 2006

Quality Competitiveness:             1st in 2007; 2nd in 2006

Hong Kong ranked the 3rd in structural competitiveness after Shanghai and Shenzhen. Comparing with rapidly growing cities in the mainland, Hong Kong was almost at the bottom of 200 cities in growth competitiveness, ranked 198th.

B. Analysis of Pattern of Ranking of Urban Competitiveness

 
The report shows that the ranking of urban competitiveness changed dramatically. The competitiveness of cities in the Bohai Ring rose significantly. The competitiveness of cities in Zhejiang declined and the competitiveness of some cities in Taiwan declined significantly. Overall, the urban competitiveness of the following regions changes from high to low in the following order: Pearl River Delta, Yangtze River Delta, Taiwan region, Bohai Ring, Northeast China, Central China, Southwest China and Northwest China. There are also significant differences in urban competitiveness within each region. High-income cities and large cities have high urban competitiveness while low-income and small cities have low urban competitiveness generally.

C. Brand Building

The theme of this year’s report is “Brand: The Most Beautiful Scene of Cities”. There are case studies on how cities build up their brands. It is found that Hong Kong, Shaoxing, Nanjing, Nanchang and Xiamen have good practices in the development of business brand, Hangzhou, Ningbo, Shenzhen and Shanghai in tourism brand, Weihai, Chengdu, Nantong and Zhuhai in residential brand, Beijing, Qingdao, Quanzhou and Chongqing in brands of local products.

2. Urban Competitiveness Seminar: Hong Kong’s Competitiveness, an Inspiration from Major Urban Competitiveness Indices

Prof. Yeung Yue-man and Prof. Shen Jianfa from Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies/Dept of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong spoke at the Urban Competitiveness Seminar. They examined the urban competitiveness strength of Hong Kong and the key measures to enhance Hong Kong’s urban competitiveness. Based on the major international urban competitiveness indices, the relative position and strengths of Hong Kong are revealed.

ŸWorld Economic Forum – Growth Competitiveness Index: Hong Kong’s ranking dropped from 2nd (1997) to 28th (2005); the index was revised as Global Competitiveness Index: Hong Kong improved from 14th (2005) to 11th (2006) (3rd in Asia);

Institute for Management Development – World Competitiveness Index: Hong Kong dropped sharply from 3rd (1997) to 14th (2000) but bounced back to 2nd (2006); Hong Kong is catching up with the US;

The Heritage Foundation – Index of Economic Freedom study: Hong Kong has been the world’s freest economy for 13 consecutive years;

Chinese Academy of Social Sciences: 2007 Chinese Urban Competitiveness Study: Hong Kong is the top Chinese city;

Japan Centre for Economic Research – Potential Competitiveness: Hong Kong recognized as the most competitive economy in 2005 and 2006.

The first four indices, which measure immediate past years’ economic, social and governmental performance, and the last index, which analyzes potential competitiveness, reveal highly comparable results for Hong Kong. The city has scored highly on its infrastructure development, financial market, business environment, efficiency and flexibility, legal system, as well as government administration.

Maintaining, indeed strengthening Hong Kong’s advantages and competitiveness in all aspects is definitely the key for our future. We need to strengthen our infrastructure connections, both internally and externally, in transportation, communication, and industrial and commercial sectors. The scope of financial services should be expanded and operation cost should be lowered in order to consolidate Hong Kong’s role as the financial centre of Asia. The independent and impartial role of our judicial system should be persevered. The government must also provide assistance to our economy, without any necessary intervention.

Indeed, critical issues such as environmental degradation, deteriorating living quality, education, and innovation and technology are hindering Hong Kong’s performance in the competitiveness ranking, threatening our future. Worsening air pollution is reflected in the dwindling number of days with blue sky. Employees in foreign enterprises are scared away, with some regional offices broaching relocation. Moreover, Hong Kong’s rankings in the living environment, living area, recreational and sports facilities fare poorly. Is a simple “Action Blue Sky” campaign able to solve the air pollution problem? Can the government provide concrete policies to raise the quality of life? The new government for the 2007-2012 term should take all these issues on board. With regard to talents and education, and innovation and technology, increasing admission to local universities, admitting quality migrants, developing science and technology parks, as well as enhancing regional cooperation are strategies that can improve Hong Kong’s competitiveness. We await better results to turn the situation around.

Ms. Karen Tang, Executive Director of the Better Hong Kong Foundation concluded that: ”To maintain Hong Kong’s competitiveness, it is crucial to emphasize its strengths and rectify its weaknesses. Hong Kong needs to consolidate its pillar industries in finance, business and trade services and the ability to attract foreign capital. The headquarters economy should be an avenue along which Hong Kong’s status and its reach of services and functions can be expanded. Hong Kong must also expand its hinterland and promote regional cooperation as ways to highlight our uniqueness and competitiveness. Above all, the government and different industries are well advised to catch every opportunity in this ever-changing world to forge ahead in global urban competition.”         

(End)

For enquiries, please contact Miss Alice Mak, Communications Manager of The Better Hong Kong Foundation, Tel: 2865 3529 / 60306025