Public consultation for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s first-ever five-year plan and the 2026 Policy Address is currently in full swing. Since the consultation launched in June, the SAR government has received approximately 13,800 submissions regarding the five-year plan and 8,500 concerning the 2026 Policy Address. To craft an effective blueprint this year, policymakers must strike a delicate balance on three core dimensions: harmonizing immediate needs with those for long-term development; aligning sectoral demands with overall interests; and integrating Hong Kong’s development trajectory with the national 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-30).

The first dimension should focus on tackling urgent social challenges and laying the foundation for long-term development. Major concerns such as public housing waiting time, urban renewal, youth development, healthcare, and elderly care demand substantial attention and actionable responses in the upcoming Policy Address.

On the housing front, transitional initiatives like Light Public Housing serve as an immediate relief measure. Concurrently, the development of the Northern Metropolis exemplifies a two-pronged approach: to alleviate the housing shortage and revitalize aging urban districts while strategically expanding the space for the city’s long-term development.

Similarly, tackling youth employment necessitates a blend of immediate and multiple policies. Short-term measures, including diverse career pathways, internship subsidies, and employment support, are vital to boosting confidence and easing immediate pressures. However, the long-term solution lies in proactively building a robust innovation and technology ecosystem, establishing international exchange platforms, and improving upward mobility mechanisms to provide young people with a path for career advancement.

Furthermore, anchoring long-term development means forging Hong Kong’s core competitiveness. In an era defined by geopolitical volatility and rapid technological disruption, urban competitiveness is no longer measured by short-term figures, but by strength in areas such as industrial structure, innovation capacity, talent reserve, and spatial planning. While the first five-year plan will sketch the macro blueprint for innovation and technology (I&T) cultivation, the green transition, talent acquisition, and spatial restructuring, the Policy Address must delineate the concrete, actionable steps for the year ahead.

The second dimension centers on prioritizing overall societal interests over sectoral ones. Historically, public consultations have shown that stakeholders tend to put localized or sectoral gains first.

Hong Kong can leverage the nation’s growth momentum, give full play to the advantages of its global connectivity, fully unleash the institutional advantages of the “one country, two systems” policy, and comprehensively elevate its global competitiveness

In a pluralistic society like Hong Kong, diverse communities and sectors naturally have legitimate specific demands that deserve attention and consideration. However, the Policy Address cannot be a patchwork of competing interests. Allowing siloed thinking to dictate policymaking inevitably leads to fragmented resources, conflicting objectives, and policy gridlock, ultimately undermining the collective wellbeing of the city. The true value of public consultation lies not only in absorbing diverse opinions but in distilling a consensus — transforming fragmented demands into a cohesive, systemic development strategy. Therefore, while stakeholders articulate their specific needs and aspirations, they must also adopt a macro perspective.

This holistic approach requires breaking the silo mentality, moving beyond zero-sum sectoral bargaining, and achieving citywide resource coordination and synergistic development. Sectoral and overall interests are not mutually exclusive; they are symbiotic. Only when the broader Hong Kong economy thrives can individual sectors share in the dividends.

Again, the Northern Metropolis serves as a prime example of such a holistic vision. Viewed through a narrow, localized lens, the mega-project entails short-term disruptions in the process of land rezoning and extensive infrastructure construction. Yet, from a citywide perspective, it carries the strategic imperative of expanding Hong Kong’s developmental capacity, optimizing industrial layouts, integrating with the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area’s I&T resources, and reshaping the city’s spatial layout. Policymakers must look beyond sectoral interests to draft the master plan for the city’s high-quality development.

Industrial policy demands a similar macro-level calibration. Traditional industries require sustained operational space, while emerging sectors need targeted policy and resource support. The government must adopt an overarching strategy for resource allocation and industrial development. It must anchor its traditional economic strengths while simultaneously driving “new quality productive forces”, leaving no sector behind.

The third dimension involves aligning with national strategies. In the past, misinterpretation of the “one country, two systems” framework led some in Hong Kong to believe that the city should work on its own, shunning integration with national development plans. That mindset is now obsolete. As the nation’s comprehensive strength continues to grow, integrating into and serving overall national development is not merely an unmissable opportunity but an inherent responsibility for Hong Kong.

Currently, two major misconceptions persist in Hong Kong society. The first tends to sever Hong Kong’s subordinate relationship with the nation, emphasizing local distinctiveness while downplaying the reality of inevitable integration. The second blurs the differences between the “two systems” principle, favoring a mechanical replication of the Chinese mainland’s development models and overlooking Hong Kong’s unique institutional endowment and advantages.

Both of these are counterproductive. Aligning with national development is to match Hong Kong’s strengths with the country’s needs, thereby achieving mutual empowerment and win-win outcomes.

The Belt and Road Initiative provides a compelling illustration. As the nation promotes opening-up and international cooperation, it requires a highly internationalized, professional, and widely-recognized cross-border service infrastructure. Hong Kong’s common law system, status as an international arbitration hub, diversified financial markets, and cluster of transnational professional services perfectly align with these national requirements.

By leveraging its professional expertise to facilitate BRI project financing, legal arbitration, risk management, and cross-border investment, Hong Kong not only serves the nation’s strategic objectives but also unlocks a trillion-dollar market for its own professional services sector. This is the very definition of strategic synergy.

By meticulously calibrating these three dimensions — long-term development, overall interests, and national alignment — Hong Kong can leverage the nation’s growth momentum, give full play to the advantages of its global connectivity, fully unleash the institutional advantages of the “one country, two systems” policy, and comprehensively elevate its global competitiveness.

The author is vice-chairman of the Committee on Liaison with Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and Overseas Chinese of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, and chairman of the Hong Kong New Era Development Thinktank.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.