A recent government work report emphasized the need to "introduce lists of encouraged and prohibited items for local government investment promotion," sparking widespread discussion. This brief statement sends a clear signal: by defining the boundaries of government actions, it aims to curb "policy incentive competitions" and shift investment promotion from competing on concessions to competing on environment, and from cost advantages to ecological advantages.

Far away in Daying County, Suining City, Sichuan Province, this direction is being put into practice. Over the past eight months, the local government has utilized a pre-review mechanism called "Five Questions and Two Calculations." Through this process of questioning and calculating, they have screened out 47 low-quality and inefficient projects, including one valued at over ten billion yuan, while precisely identifying 20 suitable projects worth hundreds of millions of yuan. Additionally, they have successfully signed three high-quality projects each valued at around five billion yuan. This mechanism has become the standard for local investment officials to calibrate "industrial ecology" and "output per mu."

Why the need for "questioning"? Reform has been driven by past lessons. Investment promotion was once seen as a "quick-acting rescue pill" for local development, but the "effects" came with hidden side effects. In 2025, a "hundred-billion yuan aerospace technology project" was swiftly signed in one location, only to be later exposed as a scam involving a fake state-owned enterprise, leaving behind unfinished projects and depleted public trust. Daying County's own records also show costly lessons: the project fulfillment rate over the past five years was only 65.25%, with inefficient and idle land accounting for 16%. The current stock of industrial land is merely 1,528 mu, and chemical industrial land is only 537 mu, with costs as high as 3 million yuan per mu. However, the average tax revenue per mu is less than 50,000 yuan, a significant gap compared to the 300,000 to 500,000 yuan standards in eastern regions.

"It's easy to invite deities but hard to send them away. Previously, we treated every project as a catch, but eventually, the 'vegetables' rotted and the 'basket' got dirty," admitted Guo Xiaojun, Party Secretary of the Daying County Bureau of Commerce and Investment Cooperation. He noted that any project failure could leave no land available for subsequent good projects. With the implementation of the Fair Competition Review Regulations, traditional methods like "land concessions and tax rebates" have become ineffective. The Suining Municipal Party Committee's "Efficiency Revolution Action" set a strict target: projects under one billion yuan must be signed within one month. Faced with a market full of pitfalls on one side, and limited, costly land resources coupled with strict timelines on the other, Daying realized that without professional investment promotion, it would be a "dead end." Thus, the "Five Questions and Two Calculations" mechanism, born from lessons and pressure, emerged.

How are the "calculations" done? The standard lies in a hundred-point scoring system. Early on the morning of March 17, Hu Xun, Deputy Director of the Daying County Investment Promotion Service Center, and his colleagues set off for Shenzhen for a new round of investment promotion. Since last July, a file on his phone titled "Quantitative Indicator System for Project Evaluation" has been frequently consulted. This isn't an official policy document but rather a "scorecard" resembling an exam paper. The core of this system is "using data to speak and making decisions based on standards."

"Now when we evaluate projects, we don't just look at the investment amount or how impressive they sound. We use the 'Five Questions' to cut through the fog," explained Hu Xun. The five questions are: First, the industry: Is it encouraged by the state? Can it synergize with the local economy? Second, the technology: Is the process package reliable? Are there any 'chokepoint' risks? Third, the market: Are the orders genuine? What about price fluctuations? Fourth, the company's strength: What is its 'status in the industry'? Is it financially healthy? Fifth, the team: Does the responsible person have any不良 records? Does the technical team have real expertise?

Asking questions isn't enough; the "Two Calculations" are equally crucial. These involve calculating both the near-term "economic account" – fixed investment, tax revenue, employment – and the long-term "industrial account" – building industrial clusters and strengthening chains. They also involve calculating the benefits the government can gain versus the costs it must bear, such as land acquisition and demolition costs, energy consumption quotas, and even safety risks. In this hundred-point model, the "Five Questions" account for 50 points, and the "Two Calculations" account for the other 50 points. Projects scoring above 80 are prioritized, while those below 60 are vetoed.

To understand this "algorithm" more intuitively, let's look at two contrasting stories from Daying.

**Case 1: The 85-Point Project That Was 'Fought' For** This was a project that was a "natural fit" with the local industrial chain. In the "Five Questions," it scored high because its core technology was independently developed, it collaborated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and its projected tax revenue per mu was as high as 440,000 yuan. However, when calculating the return, officials hesitated: it required 680 mu of land and 300 million cubic meters of natural gas quota. Ultimately, by "calculating the bigger picture," they concluded that the project could fill a key gap in the "natural gas - fine chemicals" industrial chain. Its comprehensive score was 85. The decision-makers acted decisively: not only to attract it, but to do so quickly. The process from initial contact to signing was accelerated.

"Initially, when we encountered this mechanism, it felt like the government didn't trust us," admitted the project's business representative, noting some initial resistance from the company. But later, they realized it wasn't just about the government's due diligence; it also served as a health check and industry analysis for the enterprise itself.

**Case 2: The Painful Decision to Abandon the Multi-Billion Yuan Project** This was a highly tempting "giant" – an industrial project with an investment exceeding ten billion yuan. But under the spotlight of the "Five Questions," problems emerged: the industry was already suffering from overcapacity; the actual controller of the enterprise was a失信被执行人 (discredited person subject to enforcement); the core team had no experience in the chemical industry. Even more critical were the "Two Calculations": it would monopolize 1,400 mu of chemical industrial land and consume 960 million cubic meters of natural gas annually, potentially bringing huge environmental risks and resource idleness. It scored 65 points, warranting cautious consideration. Faced with the temptation of massive GDP growth, Daying chose to walk away.

"As facts proved, shortly afterwards, prices in that industry plummeted. What would have been an impulse became a lesson for others," reflected an official. Even if built, it would likely have faced the awkward situation where "the flour is more expensive than the bread": investing heavily to secure natural gas only to produce products that were unprofitable across the entire industry.

Some investment officials admitted there were dissenting voices about rejecting such a large project. "In the past, this is something we would have strived hard to secure. Now that the company is willing to come, we're refusing them. It was indeed difficult." However, under the "Questioning and Calculating" mechanism, mindsets have changed. "We can't just say 'whatever, sign it first and deal with the consequences later'."

"In the past, decisions were made by leaders; now, they are made by the system," Guo Xiaojun remarked with feeling. He noted that the "Five Questions and Two Calculations" not only scores enterprises but also acts as a "detox" for the concept of political achievement. It's worth mentioning that when a project scores high but doesn't fit the county's layout, Daying recommends it to more suitable neighboring counties. "This implements the city's policy of 'acting as one whole piece on the chessboard'," Guo said.

**Highlight: From Experiential Decision-Making to Process Re-engineering** The true highlight of the "Five Questions and Two Calculations" lies in building an interlinked "decision-making closed loop." First, the process is made "foolproof" and "penetrating." Addressing the pain points of high turnover and lack of expertise among grassroots investment cadres, this mechanism simplifies complex due diligence into the "Five Questions." Initial online research is followed by team visits for verification, with a preliminary judgment made within two days, significantly reducing trial-and-error costs.

Second, professionalism is enhanced through "external brainpower" and "integration." The investment promotion office doesn't decide alone. Financial institutions and tax departments are brought in for background checks; industry association experts are invited for technical analysis; then, county leaders in charge organize multi-dimensional reviews involving finance, natural resources, environmental protection, and other departments. This is equivalent to forming an "expert consultation panel" for each project.

Third, time management is strict with "reverse scheduling" and "high efficiency." The mechanism sets clear time limits for each stage: two days for investment cadres, three days for expert review, seven days for the integrated task force, and collective decision-making completed within ten days, truly realizing an "efficiency revolution" throughout the entire process.

This process re-engineering has brought tangible changes: since the beginning of the year, the number of fulfilled projects in Daying has increased by 37.5% year-on-year, and the fulfillment cycle has shortened by 25%. Fifteen cadres have grown into core business talents, and some have been promoted due to their outstanding professional abilities – the best positive feedback for "scientific investment promotion."

**After the Calculation: Transitioning from Actuaries to Partners** Bringing in projects is only the first step. How to serve these "good seedlings" well in the "post-investment promotion era" is the "second half of the article" that Daying is contemplating. The National Two Sessions report proposed to "deepen the reform of the bidding and tendering system," signaling that future competition will shift from "policy dividends" to "service dividends" and "ecological dividends."

Daying is experimenting with extending the rigor of the "Five Questions and Two Calculations" to the entire lifecycle of project implementation, exploring seamless connections between pre-review and backend processes like "integrated multi-assessment" and "joint acceptance." For projects with high scores and promising prospects, the government not only provides land but also attempts "partner" models, such as equity participation by state-owned platform companies, to share risks and growth with enterprises.

This shift in role requires cadres to be not only "actuaries" who understand economics but also "service providers" who understand industries and enterprises. "Investment promotion should not 'bury landmines for the future' but rather 'plant good trees for the future'," said Tang Ziwei, Party Secretary of Daying County. She stated that the "Five Questions and Two Calculations" is not just a screening mechanism but a transformation in development philosophy. What Daying is giving up is the impulse for short-term political achievements, guarding instead the bottom line of high-quality development.

In the future, Daying will continue to be led by institutional innovation, promoting a shift in investment promotion from "policy dividends" to "service dividends," and from "single-point breakthroughs" to "ecological construction," truly forging a new path of scientific, precise, and sustainable investment promotion.