Shēnzhènshì @shenzhenshi - Tumblr Blog

Visit the post for more.

Factory Stories – On the Conditions and Struggles in Chinese Workplaces by Hao Ren et al. (2015)

Hao Ren et al. are Chinese worker activists who have been documenting and analyzing the situation and struggles of factory workers in the Pearlriverdelta in South China over the past few years.

In 2011, Hao Ren et al. published a book with strike reports based on their interviews with migrant workers who had taken part in strikes since the early 2000s. The book shows the inner dynamic, the forms of organization, and the strike tactics employed. Hao Ren et al. circulated the book among workers and activists in South China in order to instigate a discussion on the experiences of struggle and on the self-empowerment of workers.

#factories workers strikes workplace

How architecture can respond to the challenge of the urban service economy

Shenzhen’s districts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qianhai

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bao%27an_District

https://www.google.it/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=BRNsV4_MApPF8AfpkrOoAg&gws_rd=ssl#q=Nanshan+district

A Smart Response to China’s ‘Indigenous Innovation’ Policies By Dieter Ernst

A SMART RESPONSE TO CHINA’S ‘INDIGENOUS INNOVATION’ POLICIES By Dieter Ernst

[..] In recent phone interviews with major U.S. companies in China, our interview sources have emphasized that, due to the increasing complexity of modular design trends, no company – not even a global technology leader like IBM – can claim full ownership of a particular technology. There are always multiple contributors and patent holders.

Hence, even if a product contains only one clearly identifiable locally generated patent, it is likely to be considered an “indigenous innovation product” under the revised Chinese policies.

Earlier reports have focused on the perceived threat of Chinese “techno-nationalism.” But this analysis provides at best a partial picture of the dynamics of change in China’s innovation system. We need to accept that Chinese policymakers are still searching, by trial-and-error, for the best ways to protect China’s own intellectual-property interests while at the same time minimizing possible negative effects on its integration into the global economy.

Our research highlights the importance of understanding the conflicting interests of major Chinese stakeholders, and of related intra-agency rivalries that arguably are an important root cause for an apparent trend towards a more “heavy-handed” government approach to regulation aimed at encouraging domestic industry.

In the case of indigenous innovation policies, three main Chinese stakeholders are seeking to impose somewhat conflicting objectives:

Those who support compliance with the international standardization system, such as leading technology exporters like Huawei and Lenovo that already possess a critical mass of registered intellectual property. Those who use standards as a tool to reduce technological dependence, such as parts of the domestic hi-tech industry, research-and-development labs, and universities, often strongly supported by the general public. Those whose main objective is to protect China-based information systems against perceived threats through robust information security and certification regulations.

If China's leaders want to innovate, they should look to Shenzhen once again.

ONE CHINESE CITY HAS FIGURED OUT THE FUTURE JUNE 12, 2016 6:00 PM EDT By Christopher Balding

[..] Not every city in China can become Silicon Valley, of course. And Shenzhen had a particularly good base upon which to build, given that the surrounding Pearl River Delta is home to the thousands of nimble manufacturers that assemble most of the world's consumer appliances. But the city itself has gotten some key fundamentals right.

First and foremost, it's a true melting pot. To a far greater extent than other Chinese megacities, Shenzhen has eased the path for migrant workers to become full citizens: Anyone who buys an apartment is entitled to full residency rights. Ambitious risk-takers from around the country flock to the city to make their fortunes, unencumbered by history.

China's Market Meddling

By contrast, Beijing remains the preserve of party elites, while Shanghai is notorious for shunning outsiders. In both cities, bureaucratic infighting and middle-class resistance continue to hamper efforts to liberalize the "hukou" system of household registration. That condemns low-skilled migrants to black-market status in areas like education and restricts the flow of labor to where it can most effectively help businesses grow. If China's cities want to develop ambitious, hard-working and entrepreneurial work forces, they need to do better at welcoming newcomers who embody those traits.

Second, Shenzhen has created the most business-friendly environment in China. It's relatively easy to set up a company and to transfer funds overseas. The World Bank generously estimates it takes more than 31 days and 11 different procedures to start a business in China. Officials in Shenzhen's Qianhai Enterprise Zone boast they can register a foreign-invested firm in eight days. Thriving venture capital and private equity firms now fill the city, which helps foster risk-taking.

Given its lack of natural resources, Shenzhen has focused instead on freeing people to innovate: Together the government and local companies invested more than $3 billion in R&D last year, nearly 6 percent of GDP; the nationwide average is only 2.3 percent. All across the city, posters declare that "innovation [is] encouraged and failure tolerated." City officials actively promote more open financial markets, so that entrepreneurs have an easier time tapping funding.

Most importantly, rather than heeding government diktats about what and how much companies should produce, the city's thriving private-sector competes fiercely to develop products that can survive in a cutthroat market. Elsewhere in China, the government still coddles state-owned incumbents despite their excessive indebtedness, poor record at creating new jobs and overall inefficiency.

Finally, in order to thrive, new businesses need a solid regulatory structure that consistently enforces clear rules. Many local lawyers are licensed in both Shenzhen and Hong Kong, making cross-border agreements easier. A local free-trade zone now offers Hong Kong legal adjudication for companies fearful of more capricious mainland courts and regulators.

Deng's reforms in 1979 were rooted in a single thought: They empowered individuals and promoted entrepreneurialism, rather than reinforcing the state-dominated status quo. If China truly wants to build a 21st-century economy -- a must, given its shrinking population and rising labor costs -- it's going to have to do the same. Shenzhen is proof the formula works.

William Bao Bean, Investment Partner at SOSV joined Bryan Curtis and Doug Krizner for a look at the startup scene in China. First off, the sectors that Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong specialize in.

Investing in Startups in China

AUDIO: William Bao Bean, Investment Partner at SOSV joined Bryan Curtis and Doug Krizner for a look at the startup scene in China. First off, the sectors that Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong specialize in. Running time 05:13 Download: http://assets.bwbx.io/av/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/vMlSn3TS6AKQ/v2.mp3

A Shenzhen-based supplier that assembles mobile phones for major brands like Samsung Electronics has suddenly ceased operations, raising concerns of a worsening slowdown in mainland China’s smartphone market.

Apple Inc.’s loss in a Chinese patent dispute may spell more legal trouble ahead as fast-rising local rivals get bolder in taking on the world’s largest technology company.

[..] The Beijing Intellectual Property Office ruled last week that some Apple devices violate the design patents of little-known Chinese smartphone vendor Shenzhen Baili. While the iPhone maker appealed to keep its best-selling gadgets on the market, it could face a rising tide of lawsuits and a threat to its sales if the ruling creates a precedent, according to Counterpoint Research. The ruling is the latest headache for Apple in China, where it already faces aggressive rivals and a slowing economy in its biggest market outside the U.S. The nation’s patent and intellectual property laws are murky and courts have already ruled against the company over the name of iconic products such as the iPhone.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-17/apple-s-iphones-found-to-have-violated-chinese-rival-s-patent

China: patents, trademarks, copyright, infringement, piracy, innovation policies

https://chinaipr.com/2013/10/29/huaweiinterdigital-appeal-affirms-shenzhen-lower-court-on-standards-essential-patent/#more-1379

One of the hot on-going disputes on IP in China and the world is the relationship between standardization and intellectual property, particularly the role of standards essential patents (SEP’s) when a licensor has undertaken an obligation to license its patents on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) basis. Chinese courts have played an important part in this debate. The most recent skirmish in this area is the case between Huawei and InterDigital Corporation (IDC), which was the subject of a decision of the Shenzhen Intermediate Court and has just now been decided on appeal by the Guangdong High Court.

Faked in China: Nation Branding, Counterfeit Culture, and Globalisation

By Fan Yang

Mapping Media in China: Region, Province, Locality

by Wanning Sun,Jenny Chio

China's economic growth has been accompanied by growing misinformation about its economy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, China is not leading the world out of a recession, is no longer moving toward a market economy, is not America’s banker, and may never surpass the U.S. This paper debunks 10 leading myths about the Chinese economy and replaces them with the accurate picture necessary to guide American policy.

10 CHINA MYTHS FOR THE NEW DECADE By Derek Scissors, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT: China's economic growth has been accompanied by growing misinformation about its economy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, China is not leading the world out of a recession, is no longer moving toward a market economy, is not America's banker, and may never surpass the U.S. Heritage Foundation Asia expert Derek Scissors debunks 10 leading myths about the Chinese economy and replaces them with the accurate picture necessary to guide American policy. The Chinese economy may still be growing rapidly despite the financial crisis. One thing that has been growing even faster is misinformation about the Chinese economy.This is partly a function of unreliable economic numbers put out by China's government, but it is also partly a function of mistaken American and other perceptions. Hidden within the sweeping pronouncements of "China's decade" and "China's century" are important, specific points--some of which turn out to be demonstrably wrong.The foundation of good policy is good information. If the U.S. is to respond wisely to the rise of the People's Republic of China (PRC), the actual speed and nature of that rise must be correctly understood. Exaggerating Chinese prowess and emphasizing the wrong issues leads to general mistakes in U.S. economic and foreign policy, and to an incoherent China strategy.It turns out that China is not leading the world out of recession, is not nipping at America's economic heels, is not America's banker, is not becoming more consumption-driven, and is not controlling its carbon emissions. Instead, Chinese growth for the moment comes at the expense of global growth, the U.S. has stronger long-term economic fundamentals than China, Chinese bond purchases appear unimportant, China is more investment-dependent than ever, and is by far the world's largest greenhouse emitter.The American position is thus considerably stronger relative to China than commonly believed. However, it is also the case that the policy challenges, such as inducing genuine economic reform in the PRC, are more daunting. It will be more difficult for the U.S. to avoid the pitfalls of superficial changes, such as in exchange rates and carbon intensities, to make progress toward a Chinese economy that genuinely does boost world growth.

SOCIALIST MARKET ECONOMY https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

The socialist market economy is the economic model employed by the People's Republic of China. It is based on the dominance of the state-owned sector and an open-market economy, and has its origins in the Chinese economic reforms introduced under Deng Xiaoping. The ideological rationale is that China is in the primary stage of socialism, an early stage within the socialist mode of production, and therefore has to adapt capitalist techniques to thrive. Despite this, the system has widely been cited as a form of state capitalism.

After the Great Leap Forward (1958–1961) and the ousting of the Gang of Four from power, Chairman Deng Xiaoping was willing to consider market-based methods of economic growth so as to revitalise China's economy and find an economic system compatible with China's specific conditions. However, in doing so, he remained committed to the centralized control and the one-party state central to Leninism.

The socialist market economy was a concept introduced by Deng Xiaoping in order to incorporate the market into the planned economy in the People's Republic of China. Deng first used the term during a meeting with vice chairman of the US Encyclopædia Britannica Company Frank Gibney and director of the East Asian Studies Institute of Canada's McGill University Professor Paul Lin Daguang, asking: "why can't there be a market economy in socialism"? We can't say that this is capitalism. Our planned economy is in the primary position; it integrates with the market economy, but this is a socialist market economy.” The concept was later adopted by the Đổi Mới in Vietnam. Following its implementation, this economic system has supplemented the centrally planned economy in the People's Republic of China, with high growth rates in GDP during the past decades having been attributed to it. Within this model, privately owned enterprises have become a major component of the economic system alongside the central state-owned enterprises and collective / township village enterprises.

There are some similarities to Western mixed economies, with some fundamental differences. The fundamental distinction between the Chinese and Western mixed-market economy models lies less in the implementation of the mixed economic model but rather in the degree of state-ownership and underlying authoritarian political philosophy, which eschews Western notions of democracy, individual rights, and the rule of law.

This type of economic system is defended from a Stalinist perspective which states that a fully developed socialist planned economy can only come into existence after first establishing the necessary and comprehensive commodity market economy and letting it fully develop until it exhausts its historical stage and gradually transforms itself into a planned economy (the Stalinist Two-Stage theory of revolution). Proponents of this economic model distinguish it from Market socialism: Market socialists believe that economic planning is unattainable, undesirable or ineffective, and thus view the market as an integral part of socialism, whereas proponents of the socialist market economy view markets as a temporary phase in development of a fully planned economy.

SHENZHEN STOCK EXCHANGE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhen_Stock_Exchange

The Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE; Chinese: 深圳证券交易所) is one of China's three stock exchanges, alongside the Shanghai Stock Exchange and Hong Kong Stock Exchange. It is based in the Futian district of Shenzhen, Guangdong. With a market capitalization of its listed companies around US$2.285 trillion in 2015, it is the 8th largest stock exchange in the world, and 4th largest in East Asia and Asia.

Companies listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhen_Stock_Exchange

AIM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Investment_Market

AIM (formerly the Alternative Investment Market) is a sub-market of the London Stock Exchange, allowing smaller companies to float shares with a more flexible regulatory system than is applicable to the main market.

AIM launched on 19 June 1995 and has raised almost £24 billion and has helped more than 3,000 small-medium-sized companies raise equity to support their growth. Among these are companies from particularly high-growth areas such as technology, clean-tech and biotech. Flexibility is provided by less regulation and no requirements for capitalisation or number of shares issued. Some companies have since moved on to join the Main Market, although in the last few years, significantly more companies transferred from the Main Market to the AIM (the AIM has significant tax advantages for investors, as well as less regulatory burden for the companies themselves). In 2005, 40 companies moved directly from the Main Market to the AIM, while only two companies moved from the AIM to the Main Market.

AIM has also started to become an international exchange, often due to its low regulatory burden, especially in relation to the U.S. Sarbanes–Oxley Act (though only a quarter of AIM-listed companies would qualify to list on a U.S. stock exchange even prior to passage of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act). As of December 2005 over 270 foreign companies had been admitted to the AIM.

The FTSE Group maintains three indices for measuring the AIM, which are the FTSE AIM UK 50 Index, FTSE AIM 100 Index, and FTSE AIM All-Share Index.

AIM is an exchange regulated venue featuring an array of principles-based rules for publicly held companies. AIM's regulatory model is based on a comply-or-explain option that lets companies that are floated on AIM either comply with AIM's relatively few rules, or explain why it has decided not to comply with them.

Nominated Advisers (Nomads) Aside from granting leeway in regard to regulatory compliance, the Exchange also mandates continuous oversight and advice by the issuer's underwriter, referred to as a Nominated Adviser (Nomad). The role of Nomads is central to AIM’s regulatory model, as these entities play the role of gatekeepers, advisers and regulators of AIM companies. In advising each firm as to which rules should be complied with and the manner in which existing requirements should be met, Nomads provide the essential service of allowing firms to abide by tailor-made regulation, reducing regulatory costs in the process. Theoretically, Nomads are liable for damages from tolerating misdemeanors on behalf of their supervised companies, including the loss of reputational capital. However, this heavy reliance on Nomads has been criticised as creating a conflict of interest, since Nomads receive fees from the companies they purportedly supervise while, in practice, managing to avoid liability for market misconduct.

In 2006, the London Stock Exchange launched a review of Nomad activities, resulting in a regulatory "handbook" for Nomads published by the Financial Services Authority in 2007.

Self-regulation Because AIM is an unregulated market segment, it escapes most of the mandatory provisions contained in European Union directives – as implemented in the UK – and other rules applicable to companies listed in the LSE. AIM believes self-regulation is pivotal to AIM’s low regulatory burden: companies seeking an AIM listing are not subject to significant admission requirements; after admission is granted, firms must comply with ongoing obligations which are comparatively lower to the ones that govern the operation of larger exchanges; and certain corporate governance provisions are not mandatory for AIM companies. Therefore, AIM-listed companies are often subject to manipulation by institutional investors. AIM-listed companies usually are only required to adhere to the corporate governance requirements of their home jurisdiction, which, as a practical matter, vary widely.

However, the regulatory requirements are more onerous than for private companies and AIM listed plcs are required to prepare audited annual accounts under IFRS.

Investor base Another important element of AIM’s model is the composition of its investor base. Although AIM-listed companies are not start-ups, most are small and highly risky. This may prove to be hazardous for unsophisticated investors who lack both the knowledge and resources to conduct proper inquiries into a firm’s prospects and activities, or even larger investors which lack strong internal control and risk management requirements. As a consequence, AIM’s investor base is largely composed of institutional investors and wealthy individuals.[5]

How can the emergence of digital platforms create a launch pad for innovation that benefits all?

On the agenda: - New entrepreneurial opportunities. - Impact on employment and work. - Shift from product to service based models."

Speakers: -Nathan Blecharczyk, Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer, Airbnb, USA. -Pierre Nanterme, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Accenture, France. -Chuck Robbins, Chief Executive Officer, Cisco, USA. -Arun Sundararajan, Professor of Business; Rosen Faculty Fellow, New York University, USA. -Susan Wojcicki, Chief Executive Officer, YouTube, USA.

Moderated by Jonathan Zittrain, Professor, Harvard University, USA.

How will rapid technological progress and the prospect of longer, healthier lives revolutionize work? This session was developed in partnership with NHK.

Speakers: · Erik Brynjolfsson, Director, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, MIT - Sloan School of Management, USA. · Yoshiaki Fujimori, President and Chief Executive Officer, LIXIL Group, Japan. · Dileep George, Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer, Vicarious, USA. · Christopher Pissarides, Regius Professor of Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom. · Troels Lund Poulsen, Minister for Business and Growth of Denmark.

Moderated by Hiroko Kuniya, Anchor, NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation), Japan.

http://www.weforum.org/

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Shēnzhènshì