Is Hong Kong’s economic strategy fit for a changing world?

What is Hong Kong’s answer to Singapore’s Economic Development Board or the mainland’s National Development and Reform Commission? We don’t really have an exact equivalent, perhaps in keeping with our historical stance on the economy, in which the private sector takes the lead and the government role is to facilitate and support. However, in an integrated global economy thrown into turmoil by US President Donald Trump’s tariff war, a lack of proper government oversight seems less tenable. Luckily, Hong Kong is not completely devoid of tools to influence the development of its economy. After all, the city does have a secretary for commerce and economic development who oversees InvestHK, the Trade and Industry Department and Hong Kong’s overseas Economic and Trade Offices. The mainland offices report to a different bureau. Meanwhile, the city’s financial secretary supervises the Office of Attracting Strategic Enterprises (OASES), the Hong Kong Investment Corporation, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, and the office of the government economist. The Talent Services Unit, which specialises in manpower, reports to the chief secretary. We cannot forget another important player – the secretary for innovation, technology and industry who oversees the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation, Cyberport and the Hong Kong Productivity Council. It is also important to highlight two other major areas of economic activity. The first is tourism. Hong Kong’s commissioner for tourism reports to the secretary for culture, sports and tourism. There is also the Hong Kong Tourism Board, which works closely with other relevant government institutions. In terms of leisure tourism, I would argue our marquee attraction is Hong Kong Disneyland, along with Ocean Park, the Peak Tram, the Tian Tan “Big Buddha” statue and Ngong Ping 360 as important supporting acts. Hong Kong’s robust roster of trade exhibitions and conventions also drives visitor numbers. The second major area is education. Hong Kong has eight publicly funded world-class universities, most of which are rated highly in international ranking tables. There are four more universities for entirely self-funded students, and potentially even more under development. Moreover, the city has major professional vocational institutions, such as the International Aviation Academy and the MTR Academy. Collectively, these institutions have a major economic impact, not least because of their potential to attract more international students. Given the references to Hong Kong’s future in the 14th national five-year plan, we should also note the development of the Northern Metropolis which focuses on innovation and technology. Historically, our strength in these areas has been commercialisation rather than blue-sky research, but proximity to the Shenzhen powerhouse should make for a complementary relationship. Innovation and technology are not ends in themselves, but rather a means to create or improve goods and services that people want to buy. Currently, there are several troubling scenarios. First, there are clearly areas of duplication and overlap. For example, the difference between InvestHK and OASES is not always apparent, and their interactions with the Investment Corporation are not clear. In some units, reporting lines are blurred or contradictory. There is also the problem of the so-called “silo mentality”, the tendency of different departments and agencies to focus only on their own small corner of the world without regard to the wider implications for society. Of course, this is not a problem unique to Hong Kong. All bureaucracies are prone to it to some extent. Regardless, anyone who has worked in or dealt with Hong Kong’s government can give examples of how the machine is not “all joined up”. Finally, despite the establishment of the Economic Development Commission in 2013 by then chief executive Leung Chun-ying, it is questionable whether anyone is taking a holistic view of the economy and setting priorities that prevail over turf wars. The commission doesn’t seem to publish reports any more. Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu’s council of advisers seem to have absorbed at least part of the commission’s tasks. We cannot be the hub for everything under the sun or we risk being a jack of all trades and a master of none. Instead, the public discourse is periodically swept by trendy catchphrases that quickly fade out of relevance. How has the “panda economy” that was going to save us all worked out? In six months time, who will care about the “low-altitude economy” with similar claimed magical powers? We do not need slogans with ephemeral lifespans but, instead, carefully thought-out long-term strategies which take into account the global economy’s latest developments. This does not require large numbers of extra civil servants. On the contrary, there may be scope for reductions if duplication is eliminated. Regardless, there will have to be some reshuffling and straightening out of reporting lines. The city might benefit from a top-down review of the overall management structure. We don’t necessarily have to mimic Singapore but it’s time that Hong Kong re-energised the Economic Development Commission established under the Leung administration. We need to revamp the council of advisers so there is a government body that’s laser-focused on the economy. Before its work gets truly under way, the commission will probably need to conduct studies that take into account recent economic developments. The world is changing. We need to be nimble and bring our survival strategies up to date. We will either learn how to ride the wave or be swept away by it.

Is Hong Kong’s economic strategy fit for a changing world?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}The city doesn’t need slogans with ephemeral lifespans but, instead, carefully thought-out long-term strategies

The city doesn’t need slogans with ephemeral lifespans but, instead, carefully thought-out long-term strategies