Letters | Hong Kong and Shenzhen: a tale of 2 cashless payment systems
- Readers discuss the need to better integrate the payment systems of the two Chinese cities, and foreigners’ worries about travelling to China
The evolution of cashless payment systems in Shenzhen and Hong Kong reflects the divergent paths these cities have taken towards modernisation. While both cities are renowned for their technological advancements, their approaches to cashless payment systems differ significantly.
Shenzhen, sometimes hailed as China’s Silicon Valley, has been at the forefront of innovation in cashless payment systems. The city’s rapid development as a global technology hub has paved the way for the widespread adoption of digital payment solutions. These include mobile payment platforms like WeChat Pay and Alipay, contactless card systems and even palmprint recognition machines.
In contrast, in Hong Kong, despite its status as a leading international financial centre, cashless payment is often limited to the Octopus card system. Although Octopus has introduced mobile applications, they are not as widely used as in Shenzhen.
Many mobile phones lack near field communication (NFC) capabilities, making them incompatible with the Octopus app. Additionally, while public transport buses in Hong Kong have machines that accept bank cards, Alipay and WeChat Pay, the experience is not always seamless, leaving the Octopus card as the primary cashless payment option for commuters.
This reliance on the Octopus card represents a barrier to the widespread adoption of cashless payment in Hong Kong, especially compared to the ubiquitous nature of WeChat Pay and Alipay in Shenzhen. Hong Kong’s regulatory environment and cultural preferences have led to a slower pace of adoption and limited options available to consumers.
Moreover, the introduction of a separate version of the Alipay app and separate wallet for WeChat Pay for Hong Kong users has added to the complexity of cashless payments for travellers. Chinese citizens can use their WeChat Pay accounts across China, including in Hong Kong, relatively seamlessly. However, foreigners may need to separately activate these services in each region.
WeChat Pay HK and AlipayHK users can use the applications in Shenzhen, and Octopus cards can also be used in certain locations. However, there are still cases where these payment methods are not accepted. This discrepancy in payment systems creates challenges for foreigners navigating cashless payments across different regions.
Both Shenzhen and Hong Kong can learn valuable lessons from each other’s experiences with cashless payment systems. By leveraging each other’s strengths and addressing their respective challenges, they can work towards making life more convenient for their residents and visitors alike.
Collaborative efforts to promote innovation, streamline regulatory processes and enhance consumer education will be essential in driving the evolution of digital finance in both cities.
Syam Melethil Sethumadhavan, Shenzhen
Foreigners’ concerns about China are overblown
To suggest China’s internal economic, political and social mechanisms are inappropriate and leading to a dire and unwelcome position vis-à-vis the Western world is, in my view, feeding into the China-bashing rhetoric from the United Kingdom and United States, which is largely unwarranted.
I have just returned from China; a visa was easily obtained, WeChat and Alipay were convenient (and preferable to cash, although cash is often accepted) and Mastercard and Visa welcome in major outlets and hotels.
Outside mainstream hotels, Meta and Google are indeed unavailable; my understanding is the data harvesting undertaken by these organisations, which takes place in the West and which we seem to accept, was understandably not acceptable to China.
The US’ intended ban on TikTok is no doubt related to this position. On that note, we might also have to accept that the US-led policy by several governments of attempting to cripple Huawei through scaremongering is corporate protectionism by any other name.
The op-ed reflects on the implications of Article 23 legislation. Onerous though the Western media like to interpret this move as being, it must surely be largely in the interests of social and economic stability, following the 2019-20 protests and riots in Hong Kong.
Sadly the op-ed does not reflect on the West’s distorted values, social breakdown, illegal practices and uncalled for wars and acts of aggression.
Tony Price, Mui Wo
