Feng Chujian and Xu Zhuqing: Empowering the Construction of Modern People-Oriented Cities through Innovation
Cities are both the centers of economic development and the primary battlegrounds for industrial advancement and technological innovation. The Central Urban Work Conference convened in July this year proposed six dimensions for the construction of "modernized People's Cities," placing "innovation" at the very top and providing specific deployments for "striving to build vibrant, innovative cities." This not only reflects a strategic shift in urban development logic and paradigms but also clarifies the practical path for empowering high-quality development through innovation. Facing a new situation characterized by the deep restructuring of the global landscape of scientific and technological competition and the accelerated conversion of developmental drivers, we must accurately grasp the relationship between technological innovation and the construction of modernized People's Cities. We must meticulously cultivate an innovation ecosystem characterized by openness, inclusivity, and the efficient allocation of factors, thereby creating an "innovation vitality field" for modernized People's Cities.
First, we must grasp the repositioning of urban functions to make "science and technology for the people" more prominent. Cities are vital spaces for the people's happy lives. From ancient cities that focused on singular functions such as settlement and production, to the subsequent development of the four major functions of residence, employment, recreation, and transportation, and finally to the composite functions of modern cities—encompassing economy, culture, ecology, services, and the circulation and convergence of resources—urban functions have continuously evolved to adapt to and satisfy the multi-level needs of human beings. Throughout this process, technological progress has always been the core force driving the improvement of urbanization levels.
In building modernized People's Cities, the key is to practice the important concept that "a city built by the people is for the people" [1]. We must restructure the symbiotic logic of "people-industry-city," highlight "science and technology for the people," and uphold the fundamentals and break new ground to ensure that the city truly becomes a vital space for satisfying human developmental needs. First, we must persist in placing equal emphasis on development and security, taking technological innovation as the core driving force for building safe, reliable, and "resilient cities." This involves both enhancing industrial innovation capacity to ensure that key core technologies are independent and controllable—thereby strengthening the flexibility and shock-resistance of innovation and supply chains while bolstering the stability and competitiveness of the urban economic system—and extensively applying new-generation information technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and blockchain. We must explore the establishment of platforms for dynamic urban risk assessment, simulation, and deduction to improve our capacity for predicting, preventing, and handling emergencies such as natural disasters and public health events. Second, we must persist in innovation-driven development, focusing on enhancing urban governance capacity to build convenient and efficient "smart cities." Through the construction of smart government affairs, smart healthcare, smart education, and smart communities, we can improve the accessibility, convenience, and equalization of public services. We should strengthen open innovation in the public sector, integrate data resources across departments and levels, achieve "unified management through a single network" [2] for urban operations, and promote the scientific and refined nature of urban governance. Third, we must persist in taking the realization of the people’s aspiration for a better life as our starting point and ultimate goal, using technological innovation to promote the construction of "beautiful cities" and "livable cities." This requires promoting the integrated application of technologies related to green buildings, "sponge cities" [3], and the circular economy to improve resource utilization efficiency and ecological environment quality. Furthermore, we must strengthen technological innovation in the fields of smart elderly care, health technology, and age-appropriate technologies, continuously enhancing the people's sense of gain, happiness, and security during the construction of modernized cities.
Second, we must further accelerate urban synergy to make innovation vitality more robust. To promote high-quality development in cities, we must treat innovation as the "primary driver" and seek momentum from technological innovation. The Central Urban Work Conference proposed that, with a view toward improving the comprehensive carrying capacity of cities for population, economic, and social development, we should develop cluster-based and networked modernized city clusters and metropolitan areas. This emphasizes that urban development must be adept at "looking at the local from beyond the local," identifying paths for innovative urban development through the synergistic linkage of city clusters and metropolitan areas. Numerous theoretical studies and practical explorations indicate that promoting the cluster-based and networked development of adjacent cities—realizing the integration and optimization of regional innovation resources and the localized matching of industrial innovation supply and demand—is conducive to mending gaps in the industrial and innovation chains. It also helps in constructing regional innovation and industrial systems with comparative advantages. Currently, many cities in China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River city clusters have carved out distinctive paths of innovation through synergistic development. Relying on robust regional technological innovation capabilities and solid industrial foundations, they have promoted the integrated development of innovation and industrial chains, creating several industrial clusters and innovation highlands with global influence.
In practice, we must guide cities to build core competitiveness and achieve differentiated development, while placing greater emphasis on strengthening the division of labor and cooperation among different cities in regional industrial innovation synergy. Focusing on key fields and regions, we should strengthen the layout and construction of major technological innovation platforms and bases, promote the efficient aggregation of innovation factors in large, medium, and small cities, and the linked development of industrial clusters, thereby achieving a systemic leap in regional development capacity. We should guide cluster-based development within city clusters, construct cross-regional industrial innovation collaboration chains, promote joint research on key technologies and the co-construction and sharing of innovation scenarios and pilot-scale testing (中试) platforms, build industrial cooperation zones and "innovation enclaves," and explore benefit-sharing mechanisms. We must accelerate the construction of modernized metropolitan areas characterized by the deep integration of innovation and industrial chains. Based on the functional positioning, resource endowments, and industrial foundations of each city within the metropolitan area, we must clarify directions for differentiated development and construct a tiered and highly synergistic industrial organization system.
Third, we must focus on further improving urban quality to optimize the innovation ecosystem. The Central Urban Work Conference made explicit deployments for "meticulously cultivating an innovation ecosystem." This means that the main momentum for future urban economic growth will be the new quality productive forces generated by the urban innovation ecosystem; competition between cities will become an all-around competition of innovation ecosystems. The key lies in achieving value co-creation, and the method emphasizes the connection between innovation subjects. Many successful examples of constructing urban innovation ecosystems have emerged both domestically and abroad; their key lies in valuing the connection of innovation subjects rather than merely the aggregation of resources. Among these, Shanghai’s use of the "Model Speed Space" (模速空间) [4] large-model innovation ecosystem community serves as a prime example. By facilitating cooperation and mutual empowerment among resident enterprises to create an industrial ecosystem cluster where "upstairs and downstairs are upstream and downstream," Shanghai has stimulated the vitality of urban innovation and creativity.
To build a highly connected urban innovation ecosystem, we must grasp three focal points. From the perspective of innovation subjects, we should support the construction of innovation networks through diversified mechanisms. We must support enterprises, universities, research institutes, intermediary service organizations, government departments, and financial institutions in establishing synergistic innovation networks, creating diversified mechanisms to promote multi-node connections. This will effectively facilitate the efficient flow of innovation factors, promote value creation and appreciation, and achieve the co-creation of urban economic and social value. From the perspective of innovation space, we should carry out high-quality urban renewal to provide new spaces for enhancing the connectivity of innovation subjects. We must pay greater attention to the differences in urban resource endowments, industrial foundations, and strategic positioning, focusing on the multi-level innovation needs of urban users. We should promote the reconstruction of urban innovation space carriers in a refined manner and create an inclusive and open institutional environment. Simultaneously, through transformation and upgrading, we can open up more innovation application scenarios, utilizing the density and proximity of innovation spaces to stimulate innovation vitality and integrate innovation spaces into urban life. From the perspective of the innovation environment, we must persist in cultivating an urban innovation culture, creating a favorable environment that encourages exploration and tolerates failure. We should strive to carry forward the "spirit of the scientist" and "spirit of the craftsman," promote "entrepreneur spirit," and shape an urban character that respects labor, knowledge, talent, and creativity. In this way, modernized People's Cities can better become magnetic and vibrant fields for innovation and creation.