I have to say, attracting investors is getting harder and harder these days.

Why is that?

On the one hand, the difficulty stems from the ever-increasing number of industrial parks in China and the intensifying competition among regions.

On the other hand, as parks strive to gain the upper hand in industry-focused investment promotion, they are becoming increasingly specialized.

Formerly comprehensive industrial parks are now establishing “parks-within-parks” to enhance industrial clustering and core competitiveness.

Attracting investment to these “parks-within-parks” seems to be the solution to the problem of industrial parks being too diverse and chaotic, or too large but not strong enough.

However, new approaches often come with hidden pitfalls. Only by first streamlining operations—subtracting the unnecessary—before adding value and leveraging synergies can “park-within-a-park” investment promotion achieve its intended results.

This seemingly simple formula is actually very difficult to implement.

Distinctive

Specialization, Specialization, and More Specialization

As the name implies, a "park-within-a-park" is a smaller industrial zone within a larger one.

A single development zone often spans thousands, or even tens of thousands, of acres. It is quite a challenge for local governments to single-handedly support the industrial ecosystem across such a vast area.

Consequently, various regions have begun dividing these vast development zones into several smaller industrial parks.

To achieve coordinated regional industrial development, their core industries often focus on different sub-sectors within the same broad industrial category, or they may involve complementary relationships along the industrial chain. In some cases, they adopt a dual-park model featuring a headquarters park for industry leaders alongside a park for small and micro enterprises.

These independent parks, large and small, connect to form lines, and lines to form a network, creating an organic industrial network that constitutes the region’s industrial ecosystem.

As such, a distinct feature of "parks-within-parks" is that their dominant industries tend to be relatively concentrated and specialized. The key to success lies in precise industrial positioning.

Unlike other industrial parks, "parks-within-parks" must first practice "subtraction."

This "subtraction" encompasses multiple aspects: the dominant industry, the scale of the park, and even asset operations.

Spreading oneself too thin across too many fronts is counterproductive; it is better to focus on one area than to try to cover everything.

The unique strength of a “park-within-a-park” lies in its “focus.”

To achieve industrial clustering in its development zones, Dongying City, Shandong Province, has established multiple specialized industrial parks. Among them, the Dongying Software Park, located within the Yuelai Lake Science and Education Industrial Park, is a typical example of a “park-within-a-park.”

Targeting the software and information technology sector, it has attracted over 90% of the city’s software enterprises, with more than 200 companies signed up and settled in, already demonstrating a specialized and scaled development model.

Whether in biomedicine, new energy, new materials, or cultural and creative e-commerce, streamlining and specialization are the essence of the "park-within-a-park" model.

Deciding which industries to target, which segments of the industrial chain to focus on, and what kind of ecosystem to build is by no means a matter of whim or personal preference.

Rather, these decisions are based on precise planning and positioning, aligning with urban and industrial development trends as well as local resource endowments.

Because the dominant industries in "parks-within-parks" tend to be relatively narrow, attracting investment is far more challenging than in comprehensive parks that offer quick returns. Considering factors such as investment attraction difficulty, industry characteristics, clustering levels, and commercial considerations, the scale of a "park-within-a-park" does not necessarily need to be large.

Governments also demonstrate greater flexibility in land allocation. Whether it involves a single plot of land or several buildings designated for R&D, such projects can all be considered “promising” park-within-a-park initiatives.

For "parks-within-parks" with relatively narrow industrial focus and smaller scale, an investment attraction model that uses "light" industries to drive "heavy" ones has become a key strategy.

Following the establishment of the Hangzhou Yuhang District Biomedical High-Tech Industrial Park, Donghu High-Tech partnered with relevant departments to develop the Donghu High-Tech Hangzhou Biomedical Accelerator in the area, a classic example of a “park-within-a-park.”

Over time, many companies have grown from light-asset incubators and subsequently moved into heavy-asset accelerators to acquire industrial space.

In “park-within-a-park” investment promotion, “light” can sometimes be “heavy.”

Infusing a Sense of Purpose

Professional, Professional, and Even More Professional

After streamlining, it’s time to build.

This doesn’t mean a haphazard approach. Instead, it involves strategically tailoring elements such as operations, services, policies, and supporting infrastructure to the park’s specific industries.

Policies serve as the “conductor’s baton” for investment promotion staff, so let’s start with policies. “Park-within-a-park” zones are part of larger development zones, high-tech zones, and similar large-scale parks, and their policies are largely dependent on those issued by regional governments and management committees.

However, policies in these larger zones may lack industry-specific focus, and support for distinctive industries may be limited. Therefore, “parks-within-parks” should develop their own unique policies that build upon the existing regional framework.

Offering “stacked” policy benefits can significantly enhance the park’s appeal to enterprises.

Adding supplementary policies complements regional policies and further facilitates the clustering of enterprises.

Enterprises seeking to establish operations in a “park-within-a-park” have a clear objective: the vast majority are drawn by the specific industries present.

Whether in terms of industrial concentration, industrial services, or supporting infrastructure, the true value of "parks-within-parks" lies in their specialization compared to other industrial parks.

For example, many parks have established smart shared factories for smart manufacturing enterprises; built centralized laboratories, dual-circuit power systems, and steam and wastewater treatment facilities for biopharmaceutical companies; and constructed centralized hazardous chemical warehouses for integrated circuit firms...

Sharing public infrastructure resources can significantly reduce corporate costs, and if supplemented with public facilities involving “scarce permits” as mentioned above, it can substantially enhance the park’s premium value.

A high degree of thematic focus, strong clustering, and robust resource integration capabilities not only attract maximum attention from enterprises but also strengthen the bond between existing companies within the park and the park itself.

“Spoil them rotten and get them hooked.”

Professionalized services make it easy for enterprises to enter the park, yet difficult for them to leave.

Difficult but right

Persevere, persevere, and persevere again

“Treating rent collection as the core metric” and “filling every available space as the ultimate survival rule” prevent the park from developing its own industrial ecosystem, ultimately leading to the failure of its development and operations.

After aggregation and specialization comes perseverance—only then can a park endure over the long term.

Specialized tenant recruitment for “parks within parks” is no simple task—yet it is a difficult yet necessary endeavor.

With a limited pool of potential tenants, investment promoters must maneuver within a confined space. Faced with these challenges, they have their own strategies.

The most effective channel is the government.

The leading industries within a “park-within-a-park” will inevitably align with the region’s dominant industries; in this context, the government becomes the largest “supplier” of high-quality enterprise resources. Park developers and operators can leverage government resources to facilitate industrial integration and attraction.

They can also leverage the “mentor-mentee” model among existing enterprises within the larger park. By maintaining strong relationships and actively seeking opportunities, they can identify new investment needs and, by following the trail, obtain information on upstream and downstream enterprises and potential partners.

Capital-driven investment promotion and “enclave” investment promotion can both serve as key breakthroughs.

In addition to industrial positioning, the park must also stay attuned to policy trends.

A sudden policy shift can directly impact the park’s resource support and operational infrastructure… Enterprises painstakingly recruited and the park itself could be brought to its knees.

Only by sustaining the “park-within-a-park” model over the long term can enterprise growth, industrial clustering, and park development achieve exponential growth.

In Conclusion

The "park-within-a-park" model is not a hit-or-miss approach to investment promotion; rather, it is a method characterized by clear objectives, precise strategies, and significant results.

This demands higher standards, greater professionalism, and stronger perseverance from investment promotion professionals. If one can persevere throughout the process, the rewards will be exceptionally rich.