“Why don’t we just do what China did?” – a question that’s becoming more common. After all, China built tech parks, created global clusters, and attracted trillions in investments. On the surface, it looks like a model ripe for copying. But reality is more complicated. Many of China’s so-called “scalable” initiatives fail outside of their original context. Why?
This article explains why copying without adaptation doesn’t work – using Chinese case studies and drawing lessons for Kazakhstan.
1. Success is Context, Not Just a Form. China has thousands of industrial parks, but only a handful are truly successful. They didn’t succeed just because buildings were constructed. They worked because:
• The right industries were chosen – ones with demand and export potential;
• Functional value chains were built – from R&D to market;
• Demand was often created through government procurement;
• A local task force – mayor, university, business, and banks – operated like a project office.
Example: A Shenzhen tech park succeeded because part of Huawei’s R&D moved in, office incentives were provided, and universities trained relevant talent.
What doesn’t work: Copying the facade – buildings, names, PR. Without demand, cooperation, and buyers, you get something that looks right on the outside but is empty within.
2. Scalability ≠ Universality. Chinese policy isn’t one grand plan – it’s hundreds of locally tailored solutions. What works in Suzhou won’t necessarily work in Lanzhou.
Problem: Some Chinese regions try to scale models without asking:
• What’s unique about this region (workforce, logistics, research)?
• Is there real demand for this industry?
• Who’s the anchor investor?
• Where are local firms in their development cycle?
In Kazakhstan: Setting up an industrial zone based on a template can fail if you don’t know who’s going to work there, why, and what the outcomes should be in 5 years.
3. The Illusion of Quick Wins. Chinese industrial policy often aims for impact in 5–10 years. They invest in infrastructure, education, and science without expecting immediate returns. Yet some regions rush to show results within a year, prioritizing appearances over substance.
This leads to:
• Empty buildings with no tenants;
• Grants awarded without viable projects;
• Conferences with no follow-up;
• KPIs designed for reports, not outcomes.
For Kazakhstan:
• Focus on 3–5 year impact cycles;
• Don’t mistake “activity” for “progress”;
• Align projects with real market demand and investment cycles.
4. Copying Kills Experimentation. China’s biggest wins come from experimental zones – places where they test new types of support, regulation, and collaboration. These zones don’t replicate existing models – they create their own.
Example: Some zones use contract-based support – assistance is only provided if companies deliver measurable results (exports, jobs, innovation).
Lesson for Kazakhstan: Encourage experimentation. Don’t chase “the Singapore model.” Instead, test solutions that fit local sectors, conditions, and capabilities.
5. China Succeeds Through Ecosystems, Not Single Tools. The biggest mistake in scaling is thinking one tool – a grant, tax break, or tech park – drives success. In reality, it’s the system:
• Logistics + talent + standards + finance + markets;
• Coordination from mayors to ministers, banks to universities.
Example: China’s electric vehicle success involved:
• Subsidies;
• R&D support;
• Engineering training programs;
• Safety standards;
• Public procurement from state firms.
For Kazakhstan: Copying one piece isn’t enough. You need to build an ecosystem – not just a battery plant, but the full chain: lithium → processing → production → demand.
6. Success Comes From Local Teams. China proves that success is about local execution – not just top-down policy.
• A mayor who understands economics, not just protocol;
• A university that adapts curriculum to business needs;
• Banks willing to take smart risks;
• Businesses open to cooperation.
If even one of these pieces is missing, the system fails. That’s why scaling often flops – because local conditions can’t be cloned.
Kazakhstan needs: To invest not just in infrastructure but in people. Develop project leaders, empower them with real authority, and hold them accountable with KPIs.
China’s lesson isn’t to follow a template – it’s to be flexible. Success lies in adjusting tools, aligning stakeholders, and acting as a coordinated team.
For Kazakhstan, this means:
• Don’t copy appearances – build based on substance;
• Drop one-size-fits-all – use tailored, problem-driven solutions;
• Create ecosystems – not isolated assets;
• Fund outcomes – not just intentions.
Industrial policy isn’t a blueprint. It’s a process of ongoing adjustment. And that’s what really matters.
