Andrew Fung says the document is a statement of intent whose true test lies in whether ordinary residents feel a sense of ownership
The publication of Hong Kong’s first five-year plan marks a watershed moment in the city’s post-handover history. For the first time, Hong Kong has a forward-looking, long-term strategic document that aligns its development with the national 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-30) while addressing local needs with unprecedented clarity. The plan is not merely an administrative exercise; it is a signal to investors, businesses, and residents alike that Hong Kong is moving from reactive governance to proactive, long-term planning.
For the business community, both local and international, the significance of the plan cannot be overstated. For decades, Hong Kong’s economic trajectory was shaped largely by market forces and short-term policy responses. The new five-year plan changes that. With 105 specific indicators across seven thematic areas — from strengthening the four traditional economic pillars to accelerating the Northern Metropolis and deepening Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area integration — the plan offers a level of predictability that investors have long sought . The Northern Metropolis, in particular, represents a generational opportunity. Within it, the three university towns — in San Tin, Hung Shui Kiu, and Ta Kwu Ling — will leverage one of Hong Kong’s most underappreciated assets: its concentration of world-class universities. With five institutions in the global top 100 and two in the top 20, Hong Kong possesses an academic density unmatched in the region. The university towns are designed to channel this strength into commercialization and research, with San Tin focusing on life sciences and artificial intelligence, Hung Shui Kiu positioning itself as a hub for applied technology and international talent, and Ta Kwu Ling supporting advanced manufacturing. The “industry-academia integrationufacturingingb for applied practice where lecturers work within enterprises, will help bridge the perennial gap between research and market application.
The plan’s emphasis on renminbi internationalization also deserves attention. Hong Kong is already the world’s largest offshore RMB hub, but the SAR government’s commitment to actively exploring the use of RMB in settling government expenditure is a meaningful step. This is not merely symbolic. If senior officials — the chief executive, permanent secretaries, department heads, Executive Council members, legislators, and the leadership of statutory bodies such as the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority, the Airport Authority, and the Urban Renewal Authority — were to receive half of their monthly salaries in RMB, it would send a powerful signal. It would demonstrate that Hong Kong’s leadership is personally invested in the currency’s internationalization, and it would accelerate the adoption of RMB in everyday transactions. Such a move would also deepen the city’s financial integration with the Chinese mainland while reinforcing Hong Kong’s unique role as the bridge between the mainland and global markets.
Yet a plan that focuses only on economics and infrastructure would be incomplete. The true test of the five-year plan lies in whether ordinary residents feel a sense of ownership over it. This requires tangible, hard indicators that directly affect daily life. Housing is the most obvious area. The plan includes binding targets not just for the number of units built, but for the quality of living space. The aspiration must be simple: bigger homes that are also better.
Equally important is the treatment of Hong Kong’s elderly. With the elderly dependency ratio reaching 367 per 1,000 people aged 15-64 in 2026, the demographic pressure is undeniable. The current requirement that applicants for the Old Age Allowance — commonly known as “fruit money — must have resided in Hong Kong for at least 90 days in the year before application is both outdated. It has forced elderly people who wish to retire in the mainland side of the Greater Bay Area to return to Hong Kong and rent “cage” homes simply to satisfy bureaucratic conditions. This is a policy that contradicts the spirit of the “one country, two systems” policy. If a person is living within the country’s borders — whether in Guangdong, Macao, or elsewhere — that should count as an appropriate place of residence. Removing the 90-day restriction would not only alleviate the pressure on Hong Kong’s social services but would also allow elderly residents to age with dignity in environments that are often more affordable and comfortable. The government has already taken steps to facilitate cross-border welfare payments, but residency requirements must be modernized to match the reality of an integrated Greater Bay Area.
Hong Kong’s first five-year plan is more than a policy document. It is a statement of intent: Hong Kong is capable of thinking beyond the next quarter; it can align its unique advantages with national strategy, and it can govern with the people in mind. If the plan succeeds in giving the business community confidence, the elderly dignity, and the broader public a tangible stake in their own future, it will have done something no previous policy framework has achieved. The challenge now is implementation. But the direction is unmistakably the right one.
The author is a former information coordinator for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government and a member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
