Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

The blurry line between public and private in China

Reading Time: 3 mins

In Brief

A few weeks ago, Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao paid a visit to Geely's automotive factory in Hunan Province. Despite the fact that Geely is not a state-owned enterprise, this visit is not all that surprising. State leaders all over the world pay visits to privately owned businesses from time to time.

In the photo below, standing behind Wen's right shoulder is Li Shufu, founder, Chairman and controlling shareholder of Geely.

What makes Wen's visit interesting, however, is the fact that Wen's government itself directly and indirectly owns or controls several competing auto manufacturers. Wen also had some interesting things to say while there:


  • A
  • A
  • A


  • A
  • A
  • A


Today I am speaking about the future direction of Geely’s development. I am also asking Geely to submit a special report to the State Council again after six months. I will once again give instructions to continue to support Geely’s industrial development. (emphasis added)

So apparently, at some point in the past, Geely has submitted a ‘special report’ to the State Council (China’s ’cabinet‘), and from the sound of this story, Wen is offering Geely a chance to re-submit this report for consideration. I hesitate to read too much into this, but it does sound to me as if Geely’s first report may not have been acceptable.

An automobile analyst with whom I have met here in Shanghai tells me that this ‘report’ is a development plan that charts the strategic direction of the company. The fact that China’s government has identified the auto industry as a “pillar” industry over which it intends to continue to exercise heavy influence, plus the fact that Geely is solidly among China’s top ten auto manufacturers are reason enough for the government’s concern. Despite the fact that Geely is nominally “private”, its strategic plans will have to be approved in Beijing.

The surprise for some may be that Beijing is taking a visible lead in the plans of a private firm It is perhaps more common to expect the local government of Zhejiang Province, where Geely’s headquarters are located, to exercise this level of influence, but it is interesting that Beijing is taking such an interest.

In fact, this challenges what many consider conventional wisdom about the level of government influence in this industry. It is often the impression that the central government was only involved at a strategic level with the handful of firms that it directly owns (FAW and Dongfeng), and that all other auto firms were more heavily influenced by local government.

In addition to its apparent role in Geely’s strategic direction, the central government also has perks to offer. In the story referenced above, the final sentence says ‘年初,中央各大新闻媒体也纷纷对吉利的成功经验作了报道。’ (‘At the beginning of the year, all of the major central news media outlets made reports on Geely’s successful experience.’)

This confirms what an executive of one of China’s major auto firms personally told me a few weeks ago. ‘The Central Government offers a kind of support that no local government in China can offer. The Central Government is the only government that controls national level media — local government only control local media — and many favourable news stories about a car company can have a big influence on consumer perceptions.’

Of course, this brings up some interesting questions for which there are no easy answers. For example, how does the central government choose which auto companies it wants to support? Is there a quality about the company (not necessarily related to the quality of its products) that draws government support? Or do auto companies have to proactively seek this kind of government support? And if so, what does it take to win them over?

G.E. Anderson is China specialist, former CFO, and PhD Candidate in Political Science at UCLA. His research focuses on state-owned enterprises, corporate governance and China’s auto industry. This post originally appeared on his ChinaBizGov blog.

2 responses to “The blurry line between public and private in China”

  1. Interesting issue about “central support”, and what the nature and scope of that support is (compared with support from provincial governments). I have my own theory ….. and that is that the private Geely of Hunan (with its base in Zhejiang) was running into institutional problems which amount to (illegal) provincial protectionism and discrimination, related to problems of local authorities ignoring recent central laws promoting competition policy. Geely may have been seeking central (national) intervention to put an end to provincial narrow-mindedness and anti-competitive behaviour in terms of where auto components could be sourced and where finished vehicles could be sold (in the context of Geely’s strategic plan for expansion into other regions).

  2. Dongfu may be correct and makes a very good point. Although China is a unitary country/system, it often suffers internal market divisions by various forces. That is not good for the country, including those protected regions themselves, just like trade protections between countries.

    A truly unified national market will do great good to China, as well as to other trading partners. It will unleash much greater efficiency in resources allocation and enhance the national welfare. So I think centralisation is not enough in some areas in China and China will need to strengthen it.

    Having said that, I think China has probably made considerable progress. It may be an issue of working progress. As China is further integrated into the world market system, any internal market barriers will also be removed.

Support Quality Analysis

The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.