By Alfons Futterer,Zhonghua Sheng

Copyright scmp

Hong Kong is emerging as a possible contender to host China’s proposed World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organisation, potentially challenging Beijing’s early preference for Shanghai. We believe the choice of Hong Kong, with its evolving role in the international technological arena, could reflect a nuanced strategy on Beijing’s part to navigate escalating US-China tech tensions.
The initiative was first proposed by Chinese Premier Li Qiang in July. Hosting such a centre carries both symbolic and strategic weight: it will position the host city at the heart of China’s AI diplomacy and offer a tangible avenue to influence the shaping of global AI standards.
Shanghai is the front runner. The city boasts more than 1,100 core AI companies and 100,000 AI professionals, alongside robust government backing. Its 1 billion yuan (US$139 million) AI development fund and innovation hubs such as the Zhangjiang AI Island – which hosts Alibaba Group Holding (owner of the South China Morning Post), among other tech companies – reinforce its credentials.
President Xi Jinping has explicitly called for Shanghai to lead China’s AI development and governance efforts, providing a political capital that few other cities can match.
In comparison, a city like Singapore presents a credible alternative as a potential centre for a global AI governance group. The city state has a comprehensive AI regulatory framework and initiatives such as AI Verify, which is backed by global tech giants including Google, IBM and Microsoft. Singapore’s proven governance expertise makes it a city Western partners can trust.
Hong Kong, however, presents a distinctive proposition. The “one country, two systems” framework allows it to straddle Chinese interests while retaining a degree of international credibility – a combination that could be invaluable in assuaging Western scepticism towards a global AI centre.

Hong Kong’s world-class capital markets and zero-tariff free port status offer clear advantages. The city has seen its AI ecosystem expand rapidly: the Hong Kong Science and Technology Park is home to more than 500 AI start-ups – including home-grown unicorns, each valued at over US$1 billion – that are shaping the future of AI.
The most pragmatic path forward may not require choosing between Hong Kong and Shanghai, but rather leveraging their complementary strengths through a co-hosting arrangement that maximises the proposed organisation’s global impact. This dual strategy offers compelling advantages for all stakeholders.
Shanghai brings proven AI infrastructure while Hong Kong contributes unparalleled international credibility through its established role as a bridge between East and West. Together, they can create a governance model that no single city could achieve alone.
For Hong Kong policymakers, this represents a strategic opportunity to secure meaningful participation in shaping global AI standards while building the city’s long-term capacity for independent leadership. Rather than competing for an all-or-nothing outcome, Hong Kong can position itself as an indispensable partner in China’s AI diplomacy efforts.
The proposed AI centre faces scepticism on the international stage. Critics have warned it could serve as a vehicle for China to set the AI agenda and control the global narrative. Hong Kong, with its transparent legal system and independent judiciary, could help bridge this trust gap.
For Beijing, a Hong Kong-Shanghai co-hosting arrangement would address multiple strategic objectives simultaneously. It would demonstrate China’s commitment to inclusive, multilateral governance while leveraging Shanghai’s technical prowess and Hong Kong’s international accessibility. It would also align with the Global Governance Initiative recently introduced by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Tianjin, which called for China to play a more active role in shaping international norms and multilateral frameworks.

If Hong Kong wants to stay relevant in the global AI governance race, it cannot sit back while Shanghai takes the lead. The formation of a global AI centre offers a rare chance for the city to claim a co-leadership role – but only if it acts quickly.
The government should immediately establish a high-level task force comprising policymakers, business leaders and academics. Hong Kong can leverage existing cooperation agreements with Shanghai to propose joint governance mechanisms, while using its membership in international bodies to build alliances among prospective members of the coming global body.
In the longer term, Hong Kong should position itself as the body’s international coordination hub, complementing Shanghai’s technical research focus. Working groups on cross-border governance, financial regulation and standards would show the city’s comparative advantage: a trusted legal system and regulatory expertise that underpin responsible AI development.
In sum, a dual-city strategy offers the best path for the coming AI centre: meaningful participation in global AI governance, accelerated local AI development and enhanced international standing. Success requires immediate, coordinated action to present this framework to Beijing as serving China’s broader strategic interests.
Without global governance, AI risks becoming the exclusive domain of a few countries. Hong Kong’s bridge role positions it to support the greater good while advancing both local and national interests.