160 years ago, after several successive defeats, the faltering Qing Empire finally took steps toward modern industrialization. The foreign affairs movement of strengthening the people at home and resisting humiliation from abroad ushered in the first peak of China's national industrial development, laying the foundation for the subsequent development of China's industrial development and the process of modernization; Nanyang and Beiyang have also become the earliest concept of "special zones" in China.
Regrettably, however, this campaign of "mastering oneself with one's own strength" was defeated by the smoke of the foreign enemy's ships and guns, and China's reform was forced to be interrupted for a hundred years.
Exploring the root cause of failure lies not in the outside, but in this so-called economic and military innovation, which has not broken the cage shackles of the old system internally, and has been constrained by the constraints of the traditional standard system, and it is impossible to achieve breakthroughs and innovations at the institutional level, and it is naturally impossible to bring prosperity and take-off to China. Since then, for a hundred years, it has never been able to break free from this magic obstacle.
However, the model of "official supervision and private administration" continued in the following hundred years - in a large country like China, which is vast, resource-dispersed, and geographically distinct, the government's driving force has always been dominant in order to rapidly achieve industrial development and industrialization. Since then, whenever the development of the country and the nation encounters problems, the park has always become an important carrier for seeking a way out.
More than a hundred years after the flames of the foreign affairs movement dissipated, China once again perked up from a hundred wastes to be revived. 43 years ago, a loud sound of spring thunder, the coast of the South China Sea, the tiger cliff mountain, the mountain gun smoke rose, moved the mountains and reclaimed the sea, and the rickshaw cart launched the first piece of land for reform and opening up. The rise of the Shekou Industrial Zone is the first time that New China has officially begun to attract foreign investment and investment, and has launched the first cannon of China's reform, opening up and modernization construction, which also marks the beginning of China's industrial real estate.
This "marginal revolution", which began in the border areas of the South China Sea, for the first time completely broke through the old model, no longer burdened by the shackles of inherent ideas and mechanisms, and opened an exciting new change: in this government-led innovation test field, the policy dividend drove the market dividend.
The original Chinese park was a policy-driven institutional innovation, from Shenzhen to Shanghai, from Wuhan to Beijing, the dividends brought by institutional innovation have spawned one development miracle after another.
In these industrial parks and subsequent new city areas and high-tech parks, the leading force of the government is extremely critical - in the choice of industries, the formulation of policies, the services of enterprises, etc., there is no need for administrative forces to intervene appropriately. Under the current unfavorable economic situation and dangerous internal and external environment, the public service product attributes of the industrial real estate industry are becoming more and more prominent, and government forces (as well as state-owned enterprises and platform companies) need to play a more active role in it.
However, the power of marketization is also indispensable. In the more than 30 years since the establishment of the market economy in China, many economic development problems lie in the fact that the market is still unable to play a decisive role, and real estate is the best example - the duality of urban and rural land, the deformity of the supply and demand system, and the serious administrative intervention... Letting the market make decisions and considering problems from a market-oriented perspective is undoubtedly the foundation for establishing a long-term development mechanism for this industry.
So far, we believe that China's industrial real estate is taking its own unique path, and no template from other developed countries can be copied directly. Perhaps one of the important reasons is the complex game relationship between the government and enterprises.
In many of the cases we have observed, state-owned enterprises have innate policy advantages and have strong industrial guidance and resource mobilization capabilities, but in terms of the degree of marketization, they are far less sensitive than the sense of smell of private enterprises. Private enterprises must first solve the problem of survival and profit, and many so-called "industrial support" is thunderous, rainy, or at least more than enough and insufficient. It can be said that it is very difficult to find an industrial real estate developer who is perfect in all aspects.
Such a leap in thinking extends, which seems to be logically scattered, but it helps us to think about the path of industrial real estate. There has never been a form of real estate, such as industrial real estate, which maintains many factors such as national economy and people's livelihood, industrial development, regional construction and enterprise operation. China is facing an era of great changes in the world economy, when the new round of industrial revolution is coming, how should China's industrial road be chosen? And how to weigh the choice between the administrative power of the government and the power of the market?
Continuing the logic of history, in the field of industrial development of the entire country, the leading and driving force of the government must be unquestionable, and the power of marketization is the decisive force for the success or failure of industrial parks and long-term development.
Pure privatized industrial parks must have their drawbacks, or too short-sighted for profit, or too far from the overall planning of the government, which is not a blessing for the development of a regional industry; Of course, too bureaucratic administrative control is greatly detrimental to the long-term peace and stability of industrial parks, which has been fully demonstrated in China's popular "land investment".
The government takes the lead, appropriately guides and supervises, and encourages social capital to enter the standardized operation in an orderly manner; The market decides to promote cluster development and operate market-oriented parks according to local conditions with a multi-win-win model, which is the best combination for the success of industrial real estate. Fortunately, we are already seeing more and more of this trend. In this way, the industrial real estate is very fortunate, and the development of China's urbanization and national industries is very fortunate!
Due to the limitations of various factors, in the current industrial real estate field, there is actually no development operator that is very well-known even in the global scope. We have always believed that whether it is a company that has transferred from the traditional residential field, or a company that started from the industry, or a company from the financial field, although the path is different, as long as it grasps the core essence of industrial real estate and forms a unique model, in theory, it has the opportunity to become bigger and stronger - but in fact, the vast majority of them fail.
In the current field of industrial real estate, due to the driving effect of policies and the immaturity of rules, many opportunities for huge profits have been created, so that many capitals have flocked to industrial real estate, showing the current chaos. How to judge the future of industrial real estate with a grand vision of scheming and plotting in the midst of chaos? We need a group of real and down-to-earth industry main forces that make their own model and competitiveness stronger, more practical and more thorough.
Industrial real estate developers are not actually developers, to be precise, they should be a service provider and operator, and their core value is derived from the service to the industry. And unlike the traditional real estate developers who serve the public, industrial real estate developers are the role between enterprises and the government, and it is a good link and bridge between the government and enterprises.
Due to the immaturity of the entire field, there are still many problems in land legal risks, model replication and expansion, financial capital docking, product line collocation and industrial level, even if the enterprise has these resources and service capabilities, whether this resource and ability can be copied in the past when the enterprise expands to other cities, it is also a big question.
Therefore, the real threat does not come from the outside world, but mainly from our own enterprises - whether we can survive loneliness and lead the final development of industrial real estate with industrial thinking - this is the king of the future industrial real estate layout. This also means that the road of industrial parks must continue to move forward, and the "internal force cultivation" of industrial real estate developers must be quite in place.
All in all, the Chinese industrial real estate market we are currently facing is still a complicated and inexplicable chaotic state, all kinds of industrial real estate developers, business models are very different, the development stage is extremely uneven, and even many are still on the fringes of policies and laws, and it is difficult to generalize various situations.
Especially the traditional real estate developers who are currently entering the industrial real estate in a big way, they have unique capital, scale and brand advantages, but whether they really revolve around the industrial layout is questionable. We do not encourage the practice of "doing real estate in the name of industry", so we are judging the criteria for ranking lists, running activities, doing research, conducting training and writing this book, all focusing on the degree of integration with the industry, to what extent we can truly and effectively support, guide and incubate the industry and serve the real economy. However, subject to the current living conditions of the domestic real estate industry, relying on real estate thinking for combing and traction, although it is doubtful, but also has to admit that the situation is inevitable.
Our views and discourse may be a little harsh, but it is true that we want the industry to look at these developing issues with a constructive and positive eye. They may still be in the exploratory stage, many are boldly trying and making mistakes, while some are already in the bud of an excellent model, and we hope that the industry can give them more support and hope.