The Greater Bay Area’s need for institutional innovation is crucial
The Greater Bay Area’s need for institutional innovation is crucial
The Government Work Report delivered by Premier Li Qiang during the two sessions sets a clear direction for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area — to become an international innovation and technology (I&T) hub, and to develop a world-class source of technological innovation. For many in Hong Kong, the idea of an I&T hub is already familiar. But what does the “source of innovation” really mean, and how should Hong Kong strategically position its role?
The source of innovation is, quite literally, a place where innovation is initiated. In the technology context, it refers to a complete innovation chain, spanning basic research and technology development, through the translation of results into applications, and on to the formation of industries. Hong Kong has long excelled in basic research, with a high level of internationalization and strong academic output. Yet for years, translating research results into products and scaling them into industries has remained a major bottleneck. To become a world-class source of innovation, Hong Kong must better connect with resources in other Greater Bay Area cities and strengthen the middle and downstream stages of innovation, so it can integrate into and support the broader national development agenda.
In today’s international environment, innovation in the Greater Bay Area also requires an independent, controllable, end-to-end supply chain. This is no longer only a question of cost and efficiency as it increasingly touches on national security. The COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical shocks that emerged over recent years have demonstrated repeatedly that stable supplies of critical medicines, raw materials, and core components for other products are a baseline for steady development and growth. Competition in science and technology is therefore not only about breakthroughs but also about whether products can be delivered reliably, compliantly, and at scale.
Looking back at Hong Kong’s I&T track record, while many high-quality R&D projects successfully produced a prototype in the laboratory, they hit bottlenecks at the commercialization stage. A typical example is the nasal spray vaccine developed by local university teams during the COVID-19 pandemic: Despite world-leading early research, Hong Kong’s severe shortage of manufacturing facilities meeting good manufacturing practice standards meant the clinical trial batches had to be outsourced to Chinese mainland manufacturers. Administrative hurdles, including cross-boundary patent procedures, further delayed the trials. By the time conditions for mass production were in place, the pandemic had receded and the window for industrialization and commercialization was lost. This encapsulates Hong Kong’s recurring problem — many academic papers, few products commercialized, and a hollowed-out industrial base.
The direction of the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-30) emphasizes strengthening strategic science and technology capabilities, improving the efficiency of allocating innovation resources, and building a more complete and effective national innovation system. For Hong Kong, the most immediate implication is to fill the gap in pilot production capacity, which is the critical bridge between research and mass manufacturing. Pilot production validates processes under near-real production conditions, optimizes parameters, and scales progressively from trial runs to small batches. Without local pilot production platforms, world-class research progress would be hindered and reliant on external facilities, raising costs, slowing timelines, and reducing control.
This is why the Northern Metropolis should serve as a core platform for Hong Kong, and the Greater Bay Area, to become a genuine source of innovation. The 2026-27 Budget proposed allocating HK$10 billion ($1.28 billion) each for the Hong Kong Park of the Hetao Shenzhen-Hong Kong Science and Technology Innovation Cooperation Zone (Hong Kong Park), San Tin Technopole, and Hung Shui Kiu development. The priority now is to fast-track shared pilot production capacity at San Tin Technopole, supported by testing and certification, quality management, intellectual property, legal services, and financing. Done well, this can shorten the path from research to high value-added products and build the engineering and quality talent base needed for sustained growth.
Infrastructure investment is only half the equation; institutional innovation is just as critical. Hong Kong should connect its top-tier research capacity with the vast market and manufacturing resources in other Greater Bay Area cities. Through the Hong Kong Park, it should open dedicated cross-boundary fast-track channels for the flow of people, logistics (especially biological samples), capital, and data, backed by a traceable, high-compliance mechanism. This should include fit-for-purpose arrangements for cold-chain logistics, sample storage, and strict documentation requirements, so administrative boundaries and institutional differences no longer impede the efficient movement of innovative inputs.
Only by advancing software and hardware in tandem, and by deepening integration across industry, academia, research, and investment, can Hong Kong play its distinctive role in helping build the Greater Bay Area into an international innovation and technology hub. Working with mainland cities, it can help develop a globally competitive, world-class source of innovation and contribute Hong Kong’s strengths to the nation’s drive for high-level scientific and technological self-reliance and self-strengthening.
The Government Work Report delivered by Premier Li Qiang during the two sessions sets a clear direction for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area — to become an international innovation and technology (I&T) hub, and to develop a world-class source of technological innovation. For many in Hong Kong, the idea of an I&T hub is already familiar. But what does the “source of innovation” really mean, and how should Hong Kong strategically position its role?
The source of innovation is, quite literally, a place where innovation is initiated. In the technology context, it refers to a complete innovation chain, spanning basic research and technology development, through the translation of results into applications, and on to the formation of industries. Hong Kong has long excelled in basic research, with a high level of internationalization and strong academic output. Yet for years, translating research results into products and scaling them into industries has remained a major bottleneck. To become a world-class source of innovation, Hong Kong must better connect with resources in other Greater Bay Area cities and strengthen the middle and downstream stages of innovation, so it can integrate into and support the broader national development agenda.
In today’s international environment, innovation in the Greater Bay Area also requires an independent, controllable, end-to-end supply chain. This is no longer only a question of cost and efficiency as it increasingly touches on national security. The COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical shocks that emerged over recent years have demonstrated repeatedly that stable supplies of critical medicines, raw materials, and core components for other products are a baseline for steady development and growth. Competition in science and technology is therefore not only about breakthroughs but also about whether products can be delivered reliably, compliantly, and at scale.
Looking back at Hong Kong’s I&T track record, while many high-quality R&D projects successfully produced a prototype in the laboratory, they hit bottlenecks at the commercialization stage. A typical example is the nasal spray vaccine developed by local university teams during the COVID-19 pandemic: Despite world-leading early research, Hong Kong’s severe shortage of manufacturing facilities meeting good manufacturing practice standards meant the clinical trial batches had to be outsourced to Chinese mainland manufacturers. Administrative hurdles, including cross-boundary patent procedures, further delayed the trials. By the time conditions for mass production were in place, the pandemic had receded and the window for industrialization and commercialization was lost. This encapsulates Hong Kong’s recurring problem — many academic papers, few products commercialized, and a hollowed-out industrial base.
The direction of the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-30) emphasizes strengthening strategic science and technology capabilities, improving the efficiency of allocating innovation resources, and building a more complete and effective national innovation system. For Hong Kong, the most immediate implication is to fill the gap in pilot production capacity, which is the critical bridge between research and mass manufacturing. Pilot production validates processes under near-real production conditions, optimizes parameters, and scales progressively from trial runs to small batches. Without local pilot production platforms, world-class research progress would be hindered and reliant on external facilities, raising costs, slowing timelines, and reducing control.
This is why the Northern Metropolis should serve as a core platform for Hong Kong, and the Greater Bay Area, to become a genuine source of innovation. The 2026-27 Budget proposed allocating HK$10 billion ($1.28 billion) each for the Hong Kong Park of the Hetao Shenzhen-Hong Kong Science and Technology Innovation Cooperation Zone (Hong Kong Park), San Tin Technopole, and Hung Shui Kiu development. The priority now is to fast-track shared pilot production capacity at San Tin Technopole, supported by testing and certification, quality management, intellectual property, legal services, and financing. Done well, this can shorten the path from research to high value-added products and build the engineering and quality talent base needed for sustained growth.
Infrastructure investment is only half the equation; institutional innovation is just as critical. Hong Kong should connect its top-tier research capacity with the vast market and manufacturing resources in other Greater Bay Area cities. Through the Hong Kong Park, it should open dedicated cross-boundary fast-track channels for the flow of people, logistics (especially biological samples), capital, and data, backed by a traceable, high-compliance mechanism. This should include fit-for-purpose arrangements for cold-chain logistics, sample storage, and strict documentation requirements, so administrative boundaries and institutional differences no longer impede the efficient movement of innovative inputs.
Only by advancing software and hardware in tandem, and by deepening integration across industry, academia, research, and investment, can Hong Kong play its distinctive role in helping build the Greater Bay Area into an international innovation and technology hub. Working with mainland cities, it can help develop a globally competitive, world-class source of innovation and contribute Hong Kong’s strengths to the nation’s drive for high-level scientific and technological self-reliance and self-strengthening.
