China’s “Data IP”: Fast Pilots, Big Ambitions, and Open Questions – by Jili Chung

Why China is inventing a new kind of IP
​
In the past two years, China has been experimenting with something it calls 数据知识产权, translated as “Intellectual Property for Data (Data IP).” At first glance, the term can be confusing—surely we already have patents, trademarks, and copyrights. But China is not creating a fifth classic IP right.

Instead, “Data IP” is a practical tool. The idea is simple: if a company takes raw, non-public data, processes it into a structured dataset or product, and meets certain compliance rules, it can apply for a government-issued certificate. That certificate doesn’t magically make the company own “facts.” What it does is provide proof of rights, so that dataset can be licensed, traded, or even used as loan collateral.
​
To make this easier for outsiders to follow, Chinese policymakers often explain the process as a “three-step ladder”:

• Data resourceization – organizing messy raw data into structured, usable resources.
• Data assetization – defining rights and valuation so data can be treated like a tradable asset.
• Data capitalization – using those assets to generate money through licensing, financing, or securitization.

“Data IP” is China’s way of compressing the last two steps into a framework that lowers transaction costs and increases market confidence.

How a policy blueprint turned into real experiments？

This journey started with a national blueprint in late 2022, which called for new mechanisms around data property rights, circulation, income sharing, and security. Many countries talk about data governance in abstract terms, but what happened next in China is unusual: local governments were asked to move quickly and test concrete rules.

By mid-2023, pilots were already rolling out. Zhejiang launched a one-stop platform called Shu-Zhi-Tong, handling everything from registration to dispute resolution. Shanghai chose a narrower path with “data product IP”, focusing on packaged outputs that could be listed on the city’s data exchange. Beijing followed with its own measures, emphasizing that certificates could stand up in enforcement or litigation.
In less than two years, a concept on paper became working systems that companies and banks can actually use.

What the numbers reveal about traction？

When we look at the statistics, the pilots are no longer symbolic. Zhejiang reported tens of thousands of applications and over 16,000 certificates issued by the end of 2024, with billions of RMB in value generated through licensing, financing, and even one securitization deal.

Shanghai’s figures may be smaller but are equally telling: nearly 300 certificates issued by spring 2025, more than 100 data products listed for trading, and over RMB 3 billion in transactions linked to these registrations. Meanwhile, Changzhou is experimenting with using public data assets to secure multi-billion-RMB credit lines.

These numbers are still tiny compared with China’s vast digital economy, but they prove that the idea is gaining traction in finance and commerce.

Stories that show how it works in practice

Statistics are important, but examples speak louder. Two cases highlight the possibilities.

Case one: Pledging a data product for a loan in Shanghai.

A company processed a dataset, registered it as a “data product,” and obtained a certificate. With that in hand, it went to a bank. Instead of dismissing the request, the bank accepted the certificate as collateral and extended a nine-figure RMB loan. This was unthinkable just a few years ago.

Case two: Turning public data into bankable assets in Changzhou.

A municipal data group aggregated transportation and utility datasets, documented compliance, and secured a multi-billion-RMB credit line from local banks. That facility then supported local enterprises, proving that even city-held data can become a financial resource if structured properly.

These cases illustrate the real ambition: to give data a clear legal and financial identity that market players can trust.

Why speed is China’s advantage—but not the whole story

What sets China apart is how quickly the pilots have moved from idea to execution. In Europe or the US, discussions about data trusts or data ownership often remain at the level of policy papers and conferences. In China, within eighteen months, certificates were issued, data products were listed, and loans were secured. That speed demonstrates political will and administrative focus.

But speed alone does not guarantee a sustainable market. The system still faces two big challenges. First, the legal foundation remains fragmented across local rules; for a national market to function, China needs consistent legislation defining scope, rights, and effects. Second, the global connection is uncertain. If China wants these certificates to matter internationally, they must align with global technical and legal standards—whether through common metadata formats, valuation methods auditors trust, or even anchoring evidence on widely used public blockchains.

My perspective: impressive pace, but future depends on law and standards

From a business perspective, China’s “Data IP” pilots deserve attention. They show how a government can move fast and create market-ready mechanisms where other countries are still debating. Certificates, transactions, and financing deals are already happening on the ground.

Yet whether this becomes a lasting industry with global influence depends on what happens next. Stronger, unified legislation will be needed to ensure certificates carry real weight across provinces. And technical standards must connect with international practices if China hopes to export this model.

In short: China has built a fast-moving laboratory for data commercialization. The question now is whether it can grow into a trusted market—and perhaps a global reference point—or whether it remains a bold but local experiment.

Gain more insights by visiting our blog at  ICTiger2020.com or follow us on Facebook @ICTiger2020 for more related news updates.  Feel free to contact the author at [email protected].