哪些中国城市未来发展潜力最大？

    于九月上旬，米尔肯研究所在北京的新闻发布会上首次发表了中国最佳表现城市指标，展示中国经济发展表现最杰出的城市。我们进行这项中国城市排名研究是为了解答两个问题：中国哪些城市的经济表现最有活力？为什么？

    对于出席新闻发布会的部分中国记者而言，这两个问题的答案似乎呼之欲出；中国经济表现最具活力的城市当然是北京、上海、广州及深圳这几个最大的城市。

    同类排名普遍将这几个中国大型城市置于榜首，但根据我们的研究准则，名列前茅的城市却另有他选。在进一步介绍调研的细节之前，我希望先回答几位记者曾提出的另一个问题：为什么要进行这项研究？

    我们的指标有三个目的：第一，它可帮助商业机构、投资者、商会、政府官员、发展机构、学术与公共政策组监察及评估他们工作和经商城市的经济表现。第二，它提供了改善城市表现的大方向。第三，它提供了一个发掘相对未开发的市场及商机的参考。米尔肯研究所自1999年发布年度美国最佳表现城市排名以来，一直都为以上三方面带来贡献。指标以崭新的角度，客观地衡量各区域的经济表现。

    自2014年在新加坡成立米尔肯研究所亚洲中心后，研究所开始发布亚洲最佳表现城市报告。而今年，研究所进一步扩展最佳表现城市系列，并首次发表以中国为核心的研究报告。研究所于九月在新加坡举行了为期两天的亚洲峰会，向四百多名参与者公佈有关报告，并就中国未来发展进行了激烈的讨论。

    中国最佳表现城市指标由九个部分组成，衡量城市短期（一年）和中期（五年）的表现。 为了更准确地判断未来的经济增长趋势，指标研究了每个城市的就业及收入增长、地区生产总值（GRP）、外商直接投资（FDI）和高增值产业的实力。这个方法能够有利进行多方面的评估，指出城市经济增长背后的主要因素。

    此次报告一共研究了266个中国地级市及以上级别城市的经济数据。研究城市被分为两个组别：大型城市，包括34个一线及二线城市；中小型城市，包括232个三线城市。这两个组别的城市经济表现排名均基于实际的经济表现，而非预测的经济成就。

    令人惊讶的是，成都超越了上海、北京和深圳，凭着其卓越、优秀的表现在全国一线及二线城市中位居第一。在九个经济表现指标中，成都有七项名列前十名。多项优势包括人力资本、中央政府支持、成熟的高端航空和飞机设计业和最新崛起的电子制造业均拉动着成都的快速经济增长。

    除了重庆以外，经济表现排前十名的大部分一线、二线城市均位于长江三角洲、珠江三角洲及京津唐地区的城市群。我们从此得出的结论为，中国的未来将非常依靠城市群和中小规模城市的发展来获得增长动力。因此，中国内陆拥有巨大的增长潜力。

    我们的数据分析亦指出中国最具经济活力的城市均具有一些重要的共通点，包括产业多元化、重视高科技产业、良好的交通网络、持续地发展基础建设及培养人才，及具有吸引外资的能力。

    在我们的三线城市经济表现排名中，苏州市居于榜首。三线城市位列前十名的，有七个来自江苏省，全部隶属于长江三角洲经济区；这些城市都受惠于邻近上海的地缘优势，并能享受汇集人才与先进技术的好处。

    报告的排名反映我们深信可持续的社会及经济发展取决于三个最基本的因素：人力资本、就业机会和融资机会。中国近期的经济放缓也预示着，目前是关键的时机去了解哪些城市或地区在进行改革和放眼未来上表现更杰出。

    本文作者黄华跃先生是米尔肯研究所董事总经理、研究员及中国报告联合撰写人。

    In early September the Milken Institute launched its pioneering Best-Performing Cities China Index at a press briefing in Beijing. The index identifies the Chinese urban areas with the most exceptional economic performance. With this new ranking of Chinese cities we attempted to answer two questions: which cities in China have the most dynamic economies, and why?

    To some of the Chinese reporters attending the press briefing, the question seemed so obvious as to be not worth asking. Of course, they replied, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen have the most dynamic economies in the country. Those are, after all, among the biggest cities in China.

    Putting China’s big cities at the top of such rankings is the norm. But those urban areas are not the most dynamic cities in China according to our index criteria. Before I get into some of the details, I want to address another question some of the reporters asked: why undertake such a study at all?

    The goal of the index is threefold. First, it can help businesses, investors, industry associations, government officials, development agencies, academic and public policy groups monitor and evaluate the economic performance of cities where they work and do business. Second, it suggests approaches to improving cities’ performance. Third, the index provides a vehicle to explore relatively untapped markets and business opportunities. That has been the value of the annual Best-Performing Cities ranking in the United States, launched by the Milken Institute in 1999. It objectively measures regional economic performance in a way that had not been done previously.

    In 2014, following the establishment of the Singapore-based Milken Institute Asia Center, the Institute developed its first Best-Performing Cities Asia Index. This year, we expanded the Best-Performing Cities series with this report centered on China. The China report was made available to the 400 attendees of the Institute’s two-day Asia Summit, held this September in Singapore, and engendered lively discussions about China’s future growth.

    The Best-Performing Cities China index is based on nine components that take into account both short term (one year) and middle term (five year) measurements. To better predict future growth, the index weighs jobs and income growth, gross regional product (GRP), foreign direct investment (FDI), and the strength of high value-added industries in each city. This approach yields a multidimensional assessment, and sheds light on the factors behind the cities’ growth.

    In terms of methodology, we ranked 266 Chinese cities at the prefecture level and above. Index rankings are divided into two categories: the largest-cities group includes 34 first- and second-tier cities; the small and medium-sized group includes 232 third-tier cities. The two groups are separately ranked based on actual economic performance, rather than projected success.

    To the surprise of many, Chengdu surpassed Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen to be the strong No. 1 among first- and second-tier cities with its outstanding and unrivalled performance. The city secured Top 10 positions in seven of the index’s nine components. Advantages such as human capital, central government support, established industries in high-end aerospace and aircraft design, and a more recently developed electronics-manufacturing sector, are driving Chengdu’s success in economic growth.

    Except for Chongqing, most of the top ten first- and second-tier cities in economic performance are part of the urban clusters of the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, and the Jing-Jin-Tang (the Beijing, Tianjin and Tanggu corridor). We conclude that China’s future will largely depend on the development of urban clusters and small and medium-sized cities. As a result, inland China still possesses great potential for growth.

    Our analysis also shows that Chinese cities with the most dynamic economies share some important characteristics. Among them are diversified industries, a focus on high-tech, improved transportation networks, continued efforts to develop infrastructure and the talent pool, and the ability to attract foreign investment.

    Of the third-tier cities we ranked, Suzhou came in at No. 1. Seven of the Top 10 best-performing third-tier cities are in Jiangsu province, and all are part of the Yangtze River Delta economic region. They have all benefited from Shanghai’s proximity, as well as an influx of talent and technology.

    The report’s rankings reflect our belief that sustainable social and economic development relies fundamentally on three pillars: human capital, job creation, and access to capital. The recent slowdown of China’s economy indicates that it is more important than ever to understand which cities or regions are doing a better job of implementing change and looking to the future. By benchmarking the performance of Chinese cities and regions on a continuing annual basis, the Milken Institute aims to provide key insights into China’s growth opportunities for investors, policy makers and observers of China’s development.

    Perry Wong is Managing Director, Research at the Milken Institute, and co-author of the Best-Performing Cities China Report.