At present, local investment promotion efforts are in full swing.

Many regions describe their investment promotion efforts as “struggling to survive in a tight spot,” a situation best summed up by a single word: “fight.”

But are the difficulties in attracting investment truly due to weak local industrial foundations, insufficient policy incentives, and a lack of appeal to businesses?

Not exactly. A closer look reveals that even with identical policies and nearly identical inherent conditions, why do some regions see exponential growth in investment attraction—scoring as high as 90 points—while others, despite their best efforts, remain stuck hovering around the passing mark of 60 points?

If we are to turn a 60 into a 90, we must first understand exactly where the gap lies between a 60 and a 90 in industrial park investment attraction.

A Deeper Understanding

“Targeted investment promotion” has been a buzzword in recent years, with nearly every region emphasizing the need for precision in their efforts.

But what exactly is “targeted investment promotion”? Investment promotion staff in different regions have varying interpretations.

Take an automotive manufacturing industrial park as an example. If you ask what the park’s leading industry is, some might answer, “Our park’s leading industry is the automotive sector.” If you press further, they might say, “We focus on the automotive parts industry.”

However, the automotive industry is vast and diverse. It is estimated that a single passenger car is assembled from over 10,000 non-disassemblable individual components.

Should the park’s priority targets be upstream, midstream, or downstream enterprises? Where exactly should it position itself within the industrial chain? Strictly speaking, this level of targeting is still insufficient.

Some will surely argue, “It’s already difficult enough to attract automotive manufacturers—if we have to be even more precise, investment promotion will only become even more challenging!”

But if the park’s investment promotion efforts are scattered and haphazard, how can they be precise?

Today, the human resources, energy, and time available for industrial park investment promotion are limited. “Aiming 10 arrows at one target” certainly has a higher success rate than “aiming 10 arrows at 10 targets.”

Conducting industry analysis and assessment in advance to eliminate industries and production segments that do not meet local government requirements, have low added value, or lack significant potential not only reduces the likelihood of investment promotion staff “stepping into pitfalls,” but also enhances the efficiency of investment promotion.

By focusing on a specific key segment and building up a certain scale, then expanding from that point to the broader landscape to attract investment across the entire industrial chain, efficiency is significantly improved.

This demonstrates that the prerequisite for targeted investment promotion is in-depth industrial research. When the direction of a park’s development is correct, it yields twice the result with half the effort; otherwise, it is like heading in the opposite direction.

Take Singapore as an example. Before introducing investment promotion policies, Singapore employs specialized professionals to conduct industry research based on the country’s economic development status, industrial structure, global economic trends, and national industrial layout.

Through macro-level research and micro-level analysis, they delve deep into industrial chains to identify key nodes with high added value and strong core competitiveness. From these, they select industries that align with national development plans, facilitate the upgrading of the country’s industrial structure, and help build core competitiveness for investment promotion.

Once the industries are identified, targeted policies are formulated. Because the industry positioning is precise and specific, the support policies are often more attractive.

From this perspective, the policies that both enterprises and local governments focus on are merely a “magnifying glass” for region-specific investment promotion.

Investment promotion is a chain of interconnected steps; if the initial industry research is not done well, all subsequent efforts may go to waste.

More Diverse Approaches

Intense pressure and fierce competition in investment promotion are the norm. This year’s shifting domestic and international landscape has altered the direction of corporate investment. Some large enterprises are accelerating their overseas expansion, while many small and medium-sized enterprises face survival pressures.

When change and pressure strike, regional investment promotion staff shift their focus to local enterprises. The top priority is to prevent companies within the industrial park from relocating or going out of business; whether they can attract external enterprises is largely a matter of chance.

However, when a top-tier investment promotion region faces this economic challenge, its approach is entirely different.

The current landscape of large, medium, and small cities within China is largely set, making it unlikely to see another example like Shenzhen—a small fishing village that rapidly grew into a major metropolis.

Everyone understands that, given the established industrial structure, urban layout, and market size, the only way forward is to strengthen their own capabilities and move upward step by step.

Since attracting new investment has become difficult, some regions have turned their attention to local enterprises. By leveraging the strengths of local businesses, they are focusing on increasing capital and expanding production for existing projects, and are actively implementing “secondary investment promotion.”

Using targeted services as a lever, they are encouraging and guiding local enterprises to increase capital, expand production, and reinvest profits.

At this point, we must address the quality of the local business environment. Although these four words have been mentioned countless times, we cannot deny that the business environment has indeed become a key factor in corporate site selection.

A favorable business environment can help local enterprises grow rapidly and attract out-of-town enterprises, bringing with them capital, experience, vision, and new perspectives.

This, in turn, better drives local economic development and creates a virtuous cycle of growth.

In addition, many regions are beginning to experiment with new investment promotion methods: technology-focused investment promotion is booming in eastern coastal cities; third- and fourth-tier cities are exploring “enclave” investment promotion to attract industrial transfers from economically vibrant regions; and co-creation and incubation models have become closed-loop integration approaches within industrial parks…

Economic growth and market diversity have given rise to an endless stream of innovative investment attraction methods. If local governments are truly committed to fostering local economic development, they will always find a way.

A Longer-Term Perspective

With the rapid development of industry-investment-driven investment promotion, this model is no longer confined to local governments; industrial parks are also joining the ranks of industry-investment initiatives.

This approach not only firmly secures the stability of invested enterprises’ presence but also generates long-term, high-yield investment returns as the enterprises grow.

Today, the operational model of industrial investment is becoming increasingly mature and flexible, with more implementation pathways available. We have also summarized "60-point" case studies and "90-point" templates for industrial investment-based investment promotion in industrial parks.

The starting point for industrial investment and investment promotion in industrial parks is the “space-for-equity” model, with full occupancy as the goal.

There was once a park in Shenzhen with a total floor area of 1.6 million square meters—a true “giant” by Shenzhen standards.

To solve the challenge of filling the park, it introduced a “property rights for equity” model. With the help of industrial investment, the park signed contracts with nearly 200 companies in just one and a half years, including six Fortune 500 companies.

Subsequently, the park innovatively expanded to develop various maker support funds and industrial investment funds.

At the time, this model seemed like a perfect solution, with clear advantages: it helped the park rapidly achieve its target occupancy rate during construction and held great appeal for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and startups.

However, compared to today’s industrial investment models, the “space-for-equity model” has clear shortcomings. It holds little appeal for mature enterprises of a certain scale and struggles to attract high-quality corporate resources.

From the perspective of the park’s long-term development, the “space-for-equity model” scores only 60 points.

With the innovative evolution of these models, the 90-point fund investment model and investment banking model have emerged as new frontiers for strong industrial parks.

The "investment-driven attraction" model is highly beneficial for mature, large enterprises. Typically, the companies attracted not only fill gaps in the park but also rapidly fill gaps in the industrial chain, and can even serve as industry leaders to attract more companies along the industrial chain to set up operations.

However, fund-based investment promotion places extremely high demands on a park’s capital reserves and fundraising capabilities, making it suitable primarily for parks operated by local governments or enterprises with state-owned capital backing.

Hefei, renowned for its venture capital sector, has adeptly utilized the “investment-driven attraction” model to attract a large number of high-tech enterprises.

In contrast, the investment banking model places even higher demands on a park’s financial strength, fundraising capabilities, investment capacity, and team expertise; insufficient experience or capability in any of these areas could result in massive losses.

For industrial parks lacking mature experience and talent, trying to achieve overnight success is indeed difficult. When launching industrial investment-driven investment promotion, it is advisable to start with “space-for-equity” arrangements and then gradually transition toward fund-based investment promotion and the investment banking model.

In Closing

When it comes to the challenges of investment promotion, everyone faces them. Today, it is unrealistic to expect to get rich overnight through investment promotion.

In the face of these challenges, the key to improving from a 60 to a 90 lies in local authorities deepening their understanding of investment promotion, exploring more diverse approaches, and adopting a long-term perspective—only then can they achieve steady and sustainable progress.