Contact Us

Please contact us for queries or comments:

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)


The Art of Dealing with Competition and Cooperation between US and China in the New Era


                                                Lin  Yang

We live in a critical time. Few world leaders could have imagined that the humanity in 2020, armed with advanced technology and unparalleled civilization, would be on pause plagued by a pandemic. The unprecedented difficulties our society is facing pose tremendous challenges for world leaders and each of us to ponder questions: from how individuals stay connected with each other to how countries co-exist with each other; from isolation to reduce human contact to maintaining the global virtual connectedness; from preparing for the pandemic with minimized disruption in economic activities to reopening the economy without risking public health; from competing for global medical supply chain security to collaborating on finding a cure or vaccine for the virus; from building up domestic solidarity (or patriotism/nationalism) to avoid the expense of dismantling international cooperation. How to balance these complexities in the uncertainties will have a massive impact on the world political, economic and societal order post-pandemic.

Headlines these days, however, are filled with war of words seeking blames for the virus. The disinformation and anti-sentiments on both sides of US and China towards each other are increasingly dangerous. Even if the Coronavirus did not awaken leaders to cooperate, it should at least demonstrate that competing efforts could not resolve the virus totally, and antagonism will not guarantee any win. Winning is leading, but not beating competitor with self loss. US and China leaders in the past decades chose the avenue of engagement, exploring complementary interests for win-win outcomes. This unprecedented new era needs visionary leaders to stand up with the new reality wisely and balance the competition and cooperation to re-calibrate for co-existence and new success despite the differences.   

Many scream out predictions for post coronavirus era: “De-globalization”, “regionalization” or “localization”. The global supply chain disruption has awakened many businesses to rethink their offshore manufacturing and business partnerships. Discussions are underway on how to rebuild or diversify the supply chains. National borders and airlines have been temporarily closed which may have unintended effect on building up real walls between nations;

Co-incidentally, the current wave of technology revolution seem to enable these economic and geopolitical changes. While the internet revolution decades ago democratized information flow and made globalization trending, the new AI+5G+IoT revolution will automate or augment repetitive human labor, potentially democratizing labor and logistics costs, and leveling the playing field for global businesses. If the Coronavirus crisis will indeed accelerate the return of localization of supply chains, we may see many new smart and intelligent manufacturing facilities emerging locally, with the transmit of labor and talent from long distance globally.

These new technologies will reshape the global landscape by further revolutionizing industries more than just people’s lives, thus re-defining each country’s national competitiveness. Therefore, each country is racing for technological supremacy in this new eco-system by protecting own knowledge and self interests.      

Following the 2008 financial crisis, China rejuvenated the economy by injecting 4 trillion yuan (586 Billion USD) stimulus package which went primarily to infrastructure development nationwide. This time, China has plans which are estimated around $1.4 trillion USD to build up “new digital infrastructure”, including 5G, AI, data centers, cloud computing, industrial internet, as well as new “digital transformation partnership action plan” for small and medium enterprises, in order to boost its economic recovery as well as tech self-reliance post COVID era.

These lead to new dynamics. Will China be leapfrogging again post COVID? Or will China lose its competitive advantage if multinational companies pull out their manufacturing facilities? Will the tech decoupling protect US more than it harms China? 

Over the years, China built up its “Made in China” manufacturing capabilities with full value chain, but also its gigantic market. China’s industrial might provide tremendous use cases for AI, 5G and IoT adoption, for example smart manufacturing, smart cities, smart grid, etc, which then produce abundant data and further enhances these smart solutions.

The US continues to hold its leading position in advanced research in many emerging technologies, including in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries that can help treat coronavirus. These research needs to find use cases and markets to maximize their value. However, some worry that deploying US technology in China may enhance China’s industrial competitiveness further. Think about China’s gigantic urbanization process over the past decades, which has provided a vast experimental field for international architects, leading to an explosion in flamboyantly beautiful airports, stadiums and skyscrapers across China.

Additionally, the US and China have vast differences in historical heritage, culture, and values, which may impact how those technologies are utilized and governed. Further, many emerging technologies could be used in both commercial and strategic areas, leading to concerns of security ramifications.

These risks pose new dilemmas for policy makers. One, competing for supremacy. But does supremacy mean self gaining more or the other side losing more? Two, prioritizing economics and security. Clearly, there is a delicate balance between protecting security and optimizing the economic growth, and it needs to be thought out and executed with wisdom and foresight. Even though the newly released “United States Strategic Approach to China” on May 20, 2020 lays out a competitive roadmap, it did not rule out cooperation completely, but with “results-oriented” and “when interests aligned”, etc.

COVID-19 is accelerating this new round of digital transformation and industrial revolutions worldwide. Designing new frameworks to co-exist and exploring new shared interests must be key to maintain the world’s open innovation ecosystem. Competition and cooperation are not contradictory; cooperation is embedded in the very idea of competition. Robust competition leads to speedy advancement and heightened prosperity. Disengagement or building barriers could risk disintegrating of the global innovation ecosystem—or being left out of the system, harming both self interest and the eco-system as a whole.

Fortunately, technology advancement in general is a virtuous cycle, with both local and global benefit. Each country’s science and technology input could contribute value to the overall science discovery and technology advancement of the human society, as well as the global effort to address environmental, public health, natural disaster, cybersecurity challenges, etc. Defining multilateral standards around adoption, ethics and accountability for emerging technologies also need collaborative efforts to ensure global compatibility, efficiency and interoperability.

 We should feel fortunate that we could witness another revolution in human history and reap its benefits in our professional and personal lives. This will only happen if our leaders can master the art of competing for prosperity while finding new common interests to collaborate. This is the art of new leadership.

 (The Article is published on World Economic Forum Global Agenda as “US and China must learn to balance competition and cooperation in the coming era”)


TEDx Estee Lauder:  Lin Yang interviewed by Jane Lauder


(MoMA NYC) In April 2016, Lin Yang​ sat in an one-on-one interview by Jane Lauder, talking about China market growth, the new generation of China consumers, etc.

Interview by Lauder
Interview by Lauder

Exploring the future of Life Economy with BGI Co-Founder Wang Jian


Founded in 1999, BGI is now one of the world’s premier genome sequencing centers, empowering large-scale human, plant, and animal genomics research from its modern-day headquarters in Shenzhen. BGI’s co-founder, Wang Jian, started the company while acting as the main initiator on many international research projects including the International 1000 Genomes Project, the Rice Genome Project, and the Silkworm Genome Project. On his recent visit to Boston, Lin Yang, President of Innovation Ideas Institute, had the pleasure in conversing and discovering the minds behind China’s life sciences giant. 

Wang Jian with Lin Yang
Wang Jian with Lin Yang

Lin Yang: Welcome! Before our meeting, I did some online research about BGI, I first noticed that your web domain is “”, not “.com” as I presumed.  Would you please explain the nature of the organization, your vision when creating it, and your future plans for theinstitution?

Wang Jian: BGI was founded as a non-profit organization. We initially set it up in order to participate in the Human Genome Project, which was a completely scientific research project. Thedomain continued since then. With our own strength and capabilities to participate in the human genome project, we considered ourselves as “global resident”. We were great! So why shall we make it .com?  .com means “make money”, I think money is a “byproduct”.  We are different from others, and BGI is always called “an organization”. We have both non-profit and for-profit sectors. Our core objective is to find a new way of life. We did not feel for the way a company functions. However, we also do not want to adopt a government model supported by other people, neither want to be a charity organization. We live in this world, contributing to ourselves,  contributing to the society, and it is our biggest goal.  That is why is .org.

Lin Yang:  That is why people all call you professor Wang, rather than a boss or President?

Wang Jian: No, no.  We have BGI College that has masters and PhD programs. I also have a dozen of master and PhD students, and never stop teaching, which is why they call me Professor Wang.

Lin Yang:  So, in addition to research and development, there is a big education sector at BGI.

Wang Jian: We have BGI Research, with more than 1,000 people doing basic research, which has nothing to do with making money; we have BGI College, there are hundreds of Master and PhD students who are studying there; We have the China National Genebank, the first national genebank which we are responsible for its establishment and management; we also have Giga Science, a new open-access online journal. These four are completely non-profit.

Lin Yang: Nature index has put BGI in high ranking together with several other research institutes anduniversities of China, based on quality and quantity of the papers published.

Do you think that BGI is truly an innovative organization?   

Wang Jian: Before we came to Shenzhen, Shenzhen seldom published Nature,

or Science papers. In the past 8 years since we moved to Shenzhen, BGI has already produced over 200 Nature and Science series publications in Shenzhen. In basic research, our contribution to China and all the society is reputable. Don’t you think it is innovation?

Lin Yang: How do you conduct your basic research and indigenous R&D?

Wang Jian: We are committed to solve the major issues and problems of development in our society which we regard as our major life goals. Whatever kind of tools we need, whatever kind of basic research we need, we are going to work on that. Our goal is clear. We are not innovating purely for innovation, not to be entrepreneurial purely for entrepreneurship.

When we are looking for a new model of life, we have to ask: what is the social significance and goal for this new model of life? If we put all these together, we are entering into a whole new realm.

Just now two MIT professors spoke about innovation and entrepreneurship, when I get on the stage, I said I disagree. Why do we pursue innovation and entrepreneurship? What do we live in the world for? For the society, what can we do when alive and what we can leave behind when we leave? This is the essence of innovationand entrepreneurship, and it has to be related to the meaning of life.

I am opposed to innovation and entrepreneurship solely for the sake of innovation and entrepreneurship. I say I was “opponent” or “rebellion” in China, also in US. We have totally different attitudes, values, and philosophy of life. BGI is unconventional.

Lin Yang: It is only been 17 years since BGI’s establishment in 1999, BGI has already grown into China’s leading institution, even well known internationally.  Do you attribute BGI’s big success more toChina’s rapid economic growth over the past few decades, or to a more favorablepolicy environment, or to China’s huge market potential, or to your ownidealistic and strong leadership?

Wang Jian: BGI has two birthdays. The first one is for the establishment for HGP which was in 1999. Later on we were recruited in the government system. In 2007, we set path again into private business. So it was born first in 1999, and the second resurrection in 2007. We have always been focusing on basic scientific research and innovation, and combined with China context. So for the questions you just asked, it is a combination.

In the history of China’s social development, it is rare to have such an institution that can push the science and technology to the international forefront, but also closely related to China context. Relating to China context means to be in line with the country’s development direction, in line with China’s huge society needs, in line with China’s low middle-level income, and in line with the enormous mobilizing capacity in China society. Combining the cutting-edge technology with China’s context, we develop a unique development model at BGI. Not any individual has the strength or ability to bring BGI to today. Without the China context, there is no BGI. Without the support of the cutting edge technology, we could not enter the world.

Lin Yang: Could you objectively assess the overall level of the current China’s life sciences sector?

Wang Jian: In recent years, China has spent a lot of money and efforts in bringing talents from overseas, together with the improvement of the domestic talent, the gap is not big in some advanced sectors between China and the world.  However, in terms of transferring these science and technology into industries, transferring them into something which can benefit the human society, there are still challenges in policy and regulations, the use of capital, and in the organization of production and services. We are fortunate that BGI has done a little earlier and better in terms of this.

Lin Yang: BGI’s leading position in China maybe unquestionable. Compared with international peers, whatposition do you think you are in, especially in indigenous innovation?

Wang Jian: If comparing only one specialized sector, any organizations may have their own advantages or disadvantages in some ways.

Objectively speaking, in terms of indigenous innovation and transfer, we are almost in a synchronization position with the world. The articles we published on the world’s top scientific journals can explain that. Not just by what I say myself.  Our goal is clear, which is whether what I do can contribute to society development. We hope to leave something remarkable in human society.


Lin Yang: So how do you cultivate the innovation gene in your organization, and build up your own innovation eco-system within BGI?

Wang Jian: We are different from others. Whatever we do, we are required to answer do we like doing it ourselves? Is it useful to ourselves? For example, if we do genetic testing, we first asked ourselves whether we ourselves have taken it. This kind of exploration and innovation comes from our inner self, and is

closely related to ourselves. This is the driving force of our development.

Lin Yang: This is your core competitiveness?

Wang Jian: We do not like to compete with others. We just want to live better and longer. We only compete with ourselves.

Lin Yang: For all your peers internationally, institutions or commercial companies, you said they havestrength and weaknesses. In your perspective, what are the similarities and thedifferences in innovation between them and Chinese organizations? What are theadvantages and disadvantages of each? Any opportunities for cooperation?

Wang Jian: Let’s put it like this: they have many wonderful individual experts, like the Masters in martial arts. However, in terms of team work and scale, if we combine all forces together, we are the strongest.

If you go to Harvard, MIT, University of Washington, each professor’s team has their own expertise which we may not have. So BGI has been fully taken advantage of the China context.

The main challenge now is in policies and regulations. In US, a fully market economy and strict regulations have placed challenges in advanced research and technology. In addition, existing social structure and commercial interests hindered the development.

We both have strength and weaknesses. We are fully confident that we will continue to be leading in this area. Serve the human society is our priority, not competition.

Lin Yang: Could you be more specific when you mentioned the challenges of policies and regulations inthe US, and less so in China?

Wang Jian: Now the clinical application of genetic testing needs to go through a long approval process in the U.S. China used to have policy barriers too, but recently have opened up a lot for pilot experiments, which opens up opportunities. Therefore, each has advantages and disadvantages.

Lin Yang: Do you mean that some international research institutions are more specialized in certainareas, an China is good overall, esp at market application and scale itup?  Is this what you mean?

Wang Jian: Yes and No. We are not saying that we are stronger than anyone else. Our value is to make remarkable contribution for human development in human historyusing advanced science and technology. For instance, can we try to eliminate all the schools for people handicapped in speech or hearing? This is possibleby early genetic testing and prevention. Can we popularize women’s “two cancer” (cervical cancer, breast cancer) testing across China and the whole world? These will benefit the wholehuman kind. We want these to be a global public welfare. It is not a charity, but it is a public welfare, with some small or minimal financial returns to support its fastcoverage around the world. Bringing these advanced tech to human society is a new mode of thinking, a new development model. We are willing to do so.


Lin Yang: What is BGI’s plan globally in the next 5 - 10 years?

Wang Jian: What I have mentioned just now, I hope that they can all rapidly cover globally. Can we popularize the “two cancer” testing around the world with low price? If we can cover all 2 to 3 billion women at the right age globally, how remarkable contribution we will make to human society? If all the world’schildren are able to receive genetic testing and prediction for deaf, eyes and relateddiseases, all these genetic diseases will never exist any more. How big an impact this will be to human kind! This is our naturalprocess of internationalization. This is a public welfare, a cause to impact the

human progress. It is also our branding, and a cause for global coverage. We do not say internationalization, we say global coverage.

Lin Yang: You mentioned several times your value of public welfare or non profit, will this value gainconsensus when doing your business development, and raising capitals?

Wang Jian: We control our own destiny. We contribute to mankind, with appropriate economic returns. We are not working for nothing. Nor are we doing charity by receiving donations from others. We not only have economic balance, but also have small profit.

I want to emphasize that we are not doing charity, we do public welfare. When applying advanced technology in society, if we do notreduce the current cost exponentially, it is not high-tech. We drop the costs, and we still keep small profits to maintain sustainable development, why not?


Wang Jian with Lin Yang
Wang Jian with Lin Yang

Lin Yang: BGI has strong R & D and Education sectors. How are you doing in commercializing these technology, such as in medical, agricultural field, or for average consumers?

Wang Jian: The first is in the early screening, prediction and diagnosis of genetic birth defects, and human genetic diseases. Our hope is not only serving Chinese people, but also serving people worldwide.

The second area which is closely related to gene is tumor. We have made similar contribution in predicting, detecting, and diagnosis of tumor in the early stages.  On the one hand, there is huge social demand. It is a significant contribution to protecting people’s lives. On the other hand, it also has commercial return. We do not deny this.

We think that BGI’s growth and profit can maintain 20-30% sustainable growth. It is rare that our business development also goes well while doing basic research and serving the people. Just now some professors were saying that innovation and entrepreneurship are different concepts. Innovation should be shared, while entrepreneurship are confidential and exclusive. Innovation and entrepreneurship should be combined. BGI is not only doing innovation and entrepreneurship, but also benefiting the humanity.


Lin Yang: How do you see China’s current trend of innovation and entrepreneurship, as well as theinnovation-driven development model for the next stage of growth?

Wang Jian: China has been catching up with the world in the past 30 years. Now to get out of the middle-income trap, science and technology shall serve as the foundation, and commercializing the scientific and technological achievements is important. This is an important concept on innovation.

The professor just talked about how to connect innovation and entrepreneurship. These are two entirely different concepts. How can they be effectively combined? I think this is a challenge for China’s national policy, universities, and entrepreneurs. I think BGI has already stepped ahead. With a good understanding of all these,

China may get out of the middle-income trap faster, making people happier, and the country more prosperous. Thereare still big challenges for the national polices to support these fundamentally.

Policies and regulations are very important for a country’s development besides the innovation

and entrepreneurship by scientists and entrepreneurs. Many challenges are in policies and regulations. Innovation is something brand new, yet policies and

regulations are made based on the past productivity and technological breakthroughs. This creates conflict. BGI’s biggest challenge is its need for more policies and regulations that can provide favorable space for exploration and development, unlike the current environment where we are confined in the same place to do innovation.  I think the challenges and difficulties we face today are the China’s future challenges and difficulties. If well solved, China’s future will be promising.


Lin Yang: We all know that in the past 10—20 years, innovation was led by the internet, informationtechnology advancement. China’s rapid economic development also largely benefited

from the internet development. Some say that the next round of technologicalbreakthrough will be in AI, life sciences and biotechnology sectors. What arethe innovation trends in the field of life sciences in the next 5- 10 years?

Wang Jian: I am a “rebellion”. Industrial revolution was the most glorious time in history, but surely the shortest. It is not people-oriented, but more associated with wealth. Wealth is not what you are born with, and not what you can take when die. I do not know why people want to spend so much time on that.

We are born with our gene given by our parents. When we die we leave it to future generations. Why not doing things about our lives? I can predict that the people-oriented new life sciences and life economy is coming. It will become the newest and forever-lasting model of social development, in unstoppable development scale, speed and model, after the industrial revolution. No one will be over-satisfied with their health, life expectancy and beauty. I believe in these “two quality” theory, a good health quality, no one will object; good beauty quality, no one can resist. What did all the past sovereigns and emperors do eventually after their glorious life? They all were pursuing longevity.  Can we also pursue that? Therefore, the ultimate pursuit of human development is the pursuit of health, longevity, and beauty.

I am not optimistic about the industrial revolution, I believe in the life economy.  Life sciences and life technology is the highest and ultimate pursuit of human kind, which will lead all other aspects of development.


Lin Yang: Do you mean that many years later, we may not have to worry about how long we live or howbeautiful we are? We can live however long we want, and however beautiful wewant? What can we imagine the meaning of our life at that time?

Wang Jian: I dare not say that we can live however long we want, however beautiful we want. We expect though. Whether it can come true or not, it will rely on the scientific development, rely on the law of nature, how much can we decode it.

What is the meaning of life? We live in this world, live a happy, healthy life. This is the meaning of life. Do we live to read books or to create wealth? No! We live to have a wonderful life journey. The most wonderful thing in life is: when you are alive, have you ever helped others? Have you left something remarkable to nextgenerations?


Lin Yang: Nowadays a lot of innovation is not only disruptive but also cross-discipline. In the future, technology advancement in life sciences may penetrate into other areas. For example, DNAsynthesis may replace the current silicon and become data storage medium, etc. Would you please share with us how the future breakthroughs in life sciencesand biotechnology will indirectly or directly impact our lives and society?

Wang Jian: Only things that are around our lives make sense. I have repeatedly stressed this. I am not optimistic about materials, which is useless. You see those who buy a pile of diamonds made of carbon?  It does not make sense. So what, for what? The value of life is the most valuable.

How to maintain those that are life-related, art and people-related to replace the production in many industrial processes is something you can see and you can feel.

Gene synthesis and gene storage technologies are all important research tasks at BGI. A small tube of DNA, even the invisible amount, can replace the amount of 1T data on a hard disk. So without question, this new medium will replace silicon someday. But the cost is still high. In addition, many people have not accepted this concept. Without scale up, it seems very expensive. I believe that in the next decade or two, it will become a new development model.

Nothing will make people more excited and more look forward to than life sciences and bio technology.  So I am definitely not a fan of industrialization. I must be the industrialization’s largest “rebellion”.


(Conclusion) Wang Jian:  Finally, I would like to say, the era of life economy is coming. It is characterized by people-orienteddevelopment and enabling better life, rather than human competition, or fighting for resources. It is completely contrary to the industrialization and the capitalism. Hope that your innovation institute can realize that the development of human society is facing a huge turning point.

Thank you!

Copyright 2016 

Innovation Ideas Institute

World Experts on China‘s New Leadership


Hong Kong Commercial Daily, March 18, 2013

World Experts on China’s New Leadership

                                     Lin  Yang



新的中国最高领导人习近平和李克强都出生于新中国诞生之后,曾在青年时代被下放到农村劳动,同时拥有较高的学历和与国际社会交流的经验,他们将如何定义自己的治国纲领?他们的个人经历将如何在他们的政策抱负中得以诠释?昨日李克强总理在新闻发布会上多次提到了“法制”和“人民”,把“经济转型”,”改善民生”,和“社会公正”作为工作重点,并提出了建设“创新政府”,“廉洁政府”,“法制政府”,用亲民,平和的语气展示了中国新领导的新形象。哈佛大学著名经济学家理查德.佛瑞曼认为,李克强总理提出了一些好的关于“民生”的想法和政策,比如关注低收入人口,城镇化应考虑农民利益,应使更多的农村学生接收大学教育等。他希望这些想法都能被付诸行动。 英国牛津大学的中国专家热纳.米特表示,李克强看起来较从容和自信。 






如果未来中国的经济增速会放缓,各级财政上的挑战也会接踵而来,这就亟须进行财政改革,特别是调整中央与地方之间的财政关系。哈佛大学经济学家理查德.库柏认为,可把以前地方政府靠出让土地的财政收入转化为征收房地产税,资本利得税等来调整财政杠杆 中国的金融体系也需要进一步深化改革。比如,中国银行业可否实行市场化汇率?可否把贷款委员会和党委会分开?中国是否可以开放债券市场,并建立良好的金融法制环境等等?但是改革财政和金融系统是巨大的工程,需要一个有强有力的改革派才可以顺利推进。

很多数据表明,中国的消费(包括政府和家庭消费)占GDP比例(2000年46.5%至2009年的34%)持续下降,同时中国的消费占GDP比率(虽然世界银行认为在2009年后出现小幅上升)与世界上任何主要经济体相比,仍然是最低的。因此说明中国存在严重的经济不平衡,需要采取纠正措施更大程度地依赖国内消费的增长。但华盛顿约翰.霍普金斯大学中国专家彼得.波特里尔却认为,中国国内消费不足的说法是有问题的:(1)按国际标准来算,中国的消费增长率是非常高的- 自2000年以来在世界主要经济体中是最高的。中国的消费占GDP比例下降的原因是投资和国内生产总值的增长速度更快,而不是因为消费的增长率低。(2)在1998-2003年期间住房市场私有化以来,中国家庭收入中住房支出所占的比例稳步增加。这些支出通常不包括在家庭消费统计中。而正如乔纳森·安德森所说,如果住房支出被列入消费统计数据,那么2000年后中国的家庭消费占GDP的比例基本维持了稳定。因此,彼得.波特里尔认为,中国的消费问题并不像表面上看上去那样。中国已经明显地成为了世界上增长最迅速的消费市场。有关家庭消费增长应该超越目前的增长水平这一说法令人存疑。考虑到未来几年的GDP增长将放缓,将消费增长保持在目前的水平上都会是一个大的挑战。而且如果消费增长进一步依靠增加信用卡的使用,中国很可能面临几年前韩国面临的家庭负债过高的问题。所以他认为中国经济的再平调整其实需要主动去接受减少投资,并接受GDP增长降低的现实。



二,中国的城镇化进程继续推进  需多层面系统性改革


中国城镇化进程中的主要问题有哪些呢?美国哈佛大学经济学家杜怀特.泊金斯认为,城镇化进程中第一要注意如何管理日益增多的城市人口,尤其是保证持续涌入城市的移民人口的社会福利。比如,可彻底取消不公平的户籍管理制度,开始为进入城市的新人口及家庭建设充足的公立住房。这基本上就是一个解除移民社会福利障碍的问题,同时涉及农村土地政策。第二,中国应当更有效地治理空气和水污染以解决城市人口的公共卫生问题。第三,需要探讨科学的城市化模式。 曾有许多不同的声音提出应限制大城市的发展,鼓励发展中小城市。中国是否会试图探索这种城市化模式?如果尝试这种模式,是会利用行政手段加以限制还是会制造间接的激励机制来鼓励而不是强制实施这种模式?这里面也存在许多因素和问题,包括城市基础设施的发展模式尤其是中小城市的交通设施是否具备?土地价格是根据市场机制测算,还是利用透明的办法进行拍卖,或者利用行政手段进行分配?城市住房建设应当如何选址以及如何定位等。此外,中国城市太大,人口过于密集,无法采取美国的汽车拥有和使用模式,新加坡模式或许更加适用。



三,中国发展带来系列社会问题 改革亟需解决各种社会矛盾




四,中国政治改革何去何从 寻找中国特色之路






总体来讲,在全球化的趋势下,中国和美国及世界的经贸关系会持续走互惠互利的道路。哈佛大学著名劳动经济学家理查德.佛瑞曼认为中美之间的双边经贸关系总体来讲会更加紧密,更加健康。由于两国关系在各方面相互依存,不可分割,已形成一种“共同经济”, 因此关系不会有大的恶化。 中国与世界的经贸关系越紧密,相互投资越频繁,世界会更繁荣和更和平。 











Chinese Banks in Global Market


Innovation Ideas Institute, in collaboration with New Economy group at Tsinghua university, conducted a research on innovation economy and urbanization through cases studies of the innovation ecosystem in Massachusetts and the urbanization of Orlando. This research project shed light on how to build up innovation eco-system in China’s massive urbanization process.

Establishing a Healthy Property Tax system is key to China’s Sustainable Development and Security


Establishing a Healthy Property Tax system is key to China’s Sustainable Development and Security

     Sen Hu

Case study on Urbanization in Zhenggezhuang village in Beijing


    Case study on Urbanization in Zhenggezhuang village in Beijing

A Garden Chat with Huawei Founder















































































































image of 3i's world