Dear Editor,

During my recent study tour in Hangzhou, China, one observation became immediately clear. While Western economies are rapidly accelerating models of remote work and redesigning their labour systems around digital flexibility, China is charting a different path.

Across the country, major corporations continue to erect striking office complexes, and universities are expanding their campuses in every direction. In many sectors, work conducted through direct physical presence remains the dominant model, despite China’s extensive technological and digital capabilities that could easily support remote operations on a national scale. This contrast raises a revealing question: Why has China maintained its commitment to in-person work and study at a time when many other societies are moving towards complete virtualisation?

One explanation lies in China’s distinctive approach to social cohesion and collective identity. The Chinese work environment is deeply connected to cultural expectations that value physical presence as a demonstration of commitment. Being present reinforces teamwork, shared responsibility, peer learning, and mentorship. The relationship-centred nature of work is preserved when colleagues occupy the same space, allowing the workplace to function not only as an operational site but as a social community. This cultural orientation shapes perceptions of productivity as well.

In many Chinese industries productivity is still understood to emerge from environments where supervision, collaboration, and real-time decision-making occur in shared physical spaces. Large projects often rely on on-site coordination, and many leaders regard visible presence as a sign of discipline and work ethic. Even sectors with the capacity for full digitisation frequently choose to retain physical or hybrid structures because in-person engagement is perceived to enhance efficiency and collective focus.

China’s continued commitment to rapid urban development further reinforces this preference. While some Western cities are moving away from concentrated business districts, China continues to invest heavily in industrial parks, university towns, research campuses, and multi-storey corporate buildings. These developments support internal migration patterns, long-term urbanisation goals, and the creation of innovation clusters where close proximity fuels discovery and growth.

Additionally, China’s transportation systems provide a level of mobility that reduces the necessity for remote work. With high-speed rail, expansive subway networks, and closely connected cities, movement between home and work is fast, predictable, and affordable. Remote work becomes a choice rather than a requirement. Cultural attitudes reinforce this dynamic. Many companies continue to view working from home as less efficient, less cohesive, and less compatible with established management practices, even though the nation possesses every tool required for a digital labour shift.

These realities carry important lessons for small island developing states (SID), including those in the Caribbean. First, China demonstrates that physical development retains enormous value even in digital economies. Schools, campuses, and innovation hubs remain symbols of national confidence and long-term planning. Second, SIDS must recognise that imported Western models of remote work may not align with local culture, sectoral demands, or productivity patterns. A one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to support growth or community life.

Education systems must, therefore, equip students for both physical and digital models. China’s sustained investment in in-person education highlights the importance of social learning, structured environments, and research ecosystems that depend on proximity. Finally, SIDS must carefully evaluate the economic implications of leaning too quickly into remote systems. If one of the world’s most technologically advanced nations continues to prioritise physical engagement, smaller nations should critically examine whether they are overlooking important opportunities for collaboration, innovation, and cohesion.

This global divergence presents a timely opportunity for academic inquiry. Comparative research exploring China’s face-to-face economic culture, the Western embrace of remote work, and the implications for SIDs would provide valuable evidence for policymaking and educational reform. As SIDS navigate rapidly shifting global trends, our strategies must be informed, culturally grounded, and contextually appropriate.

China’s example serves as a reminder that human connection, shared spaces, and collective engagement remain powerful forces in national development, and these insights can help shape a resilient and forward-looking future for the Caribbean and other developing regions.

Leroy Fearon Jr

Lecturer

leroyfearon85@gmail.com