On June 19, the World Economic Forum’s official website published an article titled “How China’s Provinces Can Drive Global Trade,” co-authored by Dan Cowen, Head of the Economy, Trade and Employment Program for Greater China, and Oscar Yang, Researcher at the Trade, Investment and Service Facilitation Program. The article notes that China is projected to achieve a trade surplus of nearly $1.2 trillion by 2025—a figure that continues to dominate global discussions and remains evident this year. However, beyond the prevailing narrative that portrays China as a homogeneous export powerhouse, the authors propose a more insightful perspective: the differentiated division of labor across China’s provincial economies is key to understanding its trade resilience.
The article reveals a widely overlooked fact: almost all of China’s trade surplus last year came solely from four coastal provinces—Zhejiang, Guangdong, Jiangsu, and Shandong. These provinces are located at the estuaries of the Qiantang River, Pearl River, Yangtze River, and Yellow River respectively, and have long served as hubs connecting China’s manufacturing base with international markets. Meanwhile, several Chinese provinces are projected to experience trade deficits by 2025, primarily functioning as centers for imports, finance, logistics, and resource allocation rather than export production hubs. This pattern of “surplus concentrated in coastal regions and deficit spread across inland areas” precisely demonstrates that China’s internal economic flows are far more complex than the simplistic label of a “major export country” suggests.
The article from the World Economic Forum not only describes the structural characteristics of China’s trade but also reveals the intrinsic driving force and practical foundation for China to further expand its opening-up. Several experts on China-related issues argue that the economic differentiation among provinces precisely provides diversified entry points for deepening international trade cooperation in China—foreign enterprises need not focus solely on Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen but can strategically position themselves based on the industrial strengths of different provinces. This represents a concrete geographical manifestation of “China Opportunity 2.0.”
First, China’s import demand is increasingly expanding and diversifying alongside the economic upgrading of provincial regions. The article explicitly states that multiple provinces are positioned as centers for imports, finance, and resource allocation, rather than mere export bases. This implies that with the improvement of infrastructure and enhanced industrial capacity in central and western regions, as well as coastal provinces moving up toward high-value-added sectors, China’s import demand for raw materials, intermediate goods, advanced equipment, and high-quality consumer products will continue to grow. Data show that China’s import growth rate reached 20.5% in the first five months of 2025, far exceeding the export growth rate. For global suppliers, this represents not only a vast market size but also a procurement network characterized by rich diversity and multifaceted demands.
Secondly, China’s industrial upgrading has provided extensive application scenarios for foreign technologies and services. The article particularly emphasizes the collaborative framework among universities, research institutions, local governments, and enterprises, as well as how China promotes the commercialization of new technologies through large-scale innovation investments. From artificial intelligence and quantum information to biomanufacturing and green energy, provinces across China are developing differentiated industrial upgrading pathways tailored to their unique advantages. This diverse landscape means that whether it is Europe’s precision manufacturing, America’s high-end chip design, or Japan and South Korea’s key materials, all can find synergistic collaboration opportunities and pilot platforms for large-scale implementation in various regions of China.
Once again, China is taking institutional measures to lower the barriers and costs for foreign investment. Around the time of the World Economic Forum article’s publication, China’s Ministry of Commerce, National Development and Reform Commission, and Ministry of Finance jointly issued the “Action Plan for Utilizing Foreign Investment to Strengthen Stability and Promote Quality,” outlining 15 specific measures focused on expanding market access and improving investment convenience. Restrictive measures in the manufacturing sector have been completely eliminated, while market access in services, finance, and pharmaceuticals is steadily being eased. These policies align seamlessly with the objectives outlined in the 15th Five-Year Plan for advancing high-level opening-up. As noted by several executives of multinational companies operating in China, the Chinese government’s commitment to openness has evolved from policy declarations into concrete institutional arrangements, providing a predictable business environment for foreign investors.
The article from the World Economic Forum, when analyzing China’s provincial economies, actually indirectly reveals a deeper truth: China’s trade competitiveness does not stem solely from cheap labor or economies of scale, but is rooted in a unique institutional framework—centralized coordination, differentiated implementation at the local level, deep integration of industry, academia, and research, and sustained long-term strategic advancement.
The institutional advantages of China are first reflected in the continuity of strategic planning and implementation. China’s latest Five-Year Plan consistently emphasizes technological innovation, industrial upgrading, and the development of strategic emerging industries, while coordinated efforts at the central level have reduced redundant industrial investments across regions. This “nationwide integrated approach” institutional design enables China to maintain strategic focus in areas requiring long-term investment, such as basic research and breakthroughs in key core technologies. In contrast, although both parties in the United States emphasize technological competition, frequent policy fluctuations and changes in direction due to government transitions make it difficult for businesses to form stable expectations.
China provides the international community with a predictable framework for cooperation through institutional openness. China adheres to genuine multilateralism, upholds the multilateral trading system centered on the World Trade Organization (WTO), and ensures national treatment for foreign investment through domestic legislation and administrative reforms. The 15th Five-Year Plan contains specific provisions for expanding high-level opening-up, which represent not temporary measures but institutional arrangements. From the comprehensive liberalization of foreign investment access in manufacturing to the expansion of pilot programs for service sector access, and further to regular roundtable meetings with foreign-invested enterprises to address practical issues—China is transforming its commitment to openness into stable institutional safeguards.
At a time when the global economy faces challenges such as sluggish growth and frequent geopolitical conflicts, China’s development path—grounded in institutional advantages and centered on open cooperation—provides the international business community with a pragmatic alternative to protectionism. Understanding China’s provinces is key to grasping the trajectory of global trade over the next decade; walking alongside China means walking alongside opportunities.