In the middle of the Sino-US trade and technology war, one important question is raised about whether China's technological power has risen to threaten the U.S. or not. In order to find an answer to this question, this report aims to evaluate the current status of China's technological catch-up or convergence to the global top level by using the data-based statistics and materials. In particular, this report starts from the authors' tireless effort to analyze China's industrial competitiveness by employing various microeconomic data. As well acknowledged, the most difficult task in the microeconomic analysis is to acquire relevant microeconomic data, which is not much available vis-a-vis macroeconomic data. In this report, each chapter is basically independent and self-complete as a research paper. Each author's main research questions and major findings are summarized below.
   The second chapter is written by Pilsoo Choi. He analyzes how the diversification strategy pursued by Chinese enterprises improve or worsen their competitiveness. He focuses on how different that diversification strategy of Chinese enterprises happened over time among different groups by the ownership, what sectors are the most actively diversified, and finally how much the diversification strategy affected corporate profitability. To answer these questions, he used Chinese corporate data. The diversification issue is nothing novel in the management science. In the corporation's evolution process, some corporations pursue the diversification strategy, while others not. That is solely the corporation's own choice, depending upon the market environment which the corporation belongs to. Many Chinese enterprises have also utilized the diversification strategy to cope with marketization and globalization of the Chinese economy through various forms - related or unrelated diversification. It may be said that the diversification strategy has nothing to do with technological improvement itself. However, that is closely related to strengthening enterprises' overall competitiveness.
   The author does not draw the conclusion that the Chinese enterprises' diversification strategy necessarily had led to the overall improvement of competitiveness. State-owned enterprises and private enterprises showed different patterns over time. On interesting finding is that high-profit services and high-tech enterprises most actively pursued diversification. By first developing core business platform and later linking many related businesses to this core platform, they could make much greater profits.
   The chapter 3 is written by Sungho Roh. He explores how Chinese enterprises' technologcial power has changed over time by analyzing their foreign and domestic patent application map. In particular, he focuses on the question of whether recent surge in the Chinese enterprises' patent applications have contributed to industrial competitiveness or not. He also diagnoses how major Chinese ITC companies' patent strategy has affected their competitiveness position in the global markets. For example, Huawei has been unique and unmatched in numbers of patent applications, but it is still qualitatively behind the U.S. tech companies such as Intel and Qualcom. Nevertheless, as the quantity expansion lasts long over time, a qualitative change will ensue.
   He finds that local patent applications increased more rapidly than the average of innovative companies in China. This result implies that patent activities among the local innovative companies are more or less overheated due to various policy measures supported and encouraged by the local governments. But the contribution of these patent activities to the improvement of productivity is inconclusive, depending on the sectors. Furthermore, the active patent applications do not necessarily lead to technology diffusion. In sum, evidently Chinese enterprises' R&D capacity tends to improve in some sectors. For example, Chinese innovative agents more actively pursue joint R&D cooperation with foreign tech companies in order to acquire R&D-related knowledge and technology and at the same time, more aggressively acquires patents and advanced technology through international mergers and acquisitions (M&As).
   The chapter 4 is written by Jong-Hak Eun. He analyzes China's scientific research capabilities by employing the research approach of bibliometrics, which is a empirical methodology to use very extensive date set. This approach is recently often used in economics as well. He collects most recent data up to 2018, in comparison with other researches. In 2018 alone, 1,470,000 research papers were published in the category of SCIE(Science Citation Index Expanded). In 2018 Chinese researchers' publication in the SCIE surpassed that of the United States in terms of number. He moves one step further to find out whether China's scientific research can be self-complete without any linkage or cooperation with the United States or not. He finds some possibilities. He indicates that the evidence of stronger China's scientific research capabilities may lead to the U.S.' recent move to contain China's technological rising. In that regard, he anticipates the possibility of U.S.' much stronger pressure and containment in the field of scientific research collaboration between China and the U.S. Recently, Chinese scientists are often excluded in the U.S.-centered global research collaboration networks. In addition, Chinese students are banned in the high-tech fields by the U.S. universities.
   The chapter 5 is written by Ikjoon Moon. He analyzes the competitiveness of the innovative industrial clusters which has been newly rising since 2013. He considers two types of externalities - Marshall-Arrow-Romer effect and Jacobs-Porter effects. He also carries out two case studies based on the next-generation internet technology cluster in Shenzhen and mobile internet cluster in Zhonggwanchun Beijing. By comparing these two cases, he concludes two different types of innovative clusters are competing to become a national champion. One is mostly driven by private companies, while the other is initiated by the public sector.
   He concludes that these new innovative clusters are not really different from the existing high-tech industrial development zones. And until now, it is difficult to find out the evidence of any visible progress. But, China's new experiment for upgrading industrial clusters will be a challenge to South Korea's do-nothing attitude. Geographical spillover effects can be maximized in the Marshall-Arrow-Romer model, while some positive externalities will happen across the sectors in the type of Jacobs-Porter model. These chinese experiments will be a good benchmark for South Korea in developing the upgraded long-term strategy for designing industry-academy-research clusters, nourishing start-ups and SME(small and medium-sized enterprises), and local innovation movements.
   Finally, the chapter 6 is written by Daewon Oh. He studies how China's entrepreneurship has evolved over time since 1978 (market reform and opening). First, he finds that diverse models in different regions such as collective ownership, private ownership, and foreign ownership model have changed from the early bud to more sophisticated ones. Particularly after the appearance of digital economy, new private start-ups and unicorn companies in China manifest Chinese style entrepreneurship. In his case study on Alibaba, he has shown how the Chinese start-up ecosystem has been organically working. He concludes that there is no one-size-fits-all model for the Chinese entrepreneurship. Too many models are competing in the Chinese-style socialist market economy.
   Nevertheless, Oh finds three characteristics of Chinese-style entrepreneurship. First, it is based on the negative-list approach which allows reform in advance without any institutionalization. This is Chinese-style experimentalism and pragmatism. Without any regulation, entrepreneurs can realize more easily their own vision and potential. Second, it is based on the private-public cooperative state capitalism, particularly in the competitive environment among the local governments. That means there is no single nation-wide model. But, diverse local models have been created based on the regional characteristics. Sometimes, Chinese-style human networking, so called Guanxi, plays an important role in coordinating diverse interests into a common goal, but it also often results in cronyism and corruption. Third, more recently, the central government has executed extensive policy support for mobilizing top brains - such as one thousand man plan and ten thousand man plan. In order to attract those top brains, the local governments provide many pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives.
   This report has some shortcomings. First of all, we do not develop our research into some comparative analysis on industrial competitiveness between China and South Korea. Our research only focuses on China. However, we try to draw some implications for South Korea. Hopefully, we are looking forward to seeing future research by carrying out comparative analysis on these five research subjects. As mentioned above, the five subjects are not organically combined. Each chapter focuses on the independent subject respectively, while a common keyword in this report is industrial competitiveness. Five factors in this report - diversification strategy, patent, basic scientific research, innovation cluster, entrepreneurship - are closely interconnected. We are looking forward to having another future research about how these five factors are interacting each other and forming overall industrial competitiveness.