21世纪经济报道记者 赵娜 上海报道 国庆节前，在苏州吴江一场股权投资行业论坛的圆桌讨论环节上，来自多地的母基金管理人和创投机构 代表共同探讨"长三角母基金如何助推区域一体化高质量发展"。 圆桌主持人、上海科创基金总裁杨斌的一问，引出了一个核心议题：当长三角的产业链越织越密，母基 金该如何实现跨区域统筹与协同？ 这正呼应了母基金研究中心创始人、水木资本董事长唐劲草在大会致辞中的呼吁，大力发展兼具"大胆 资本"风险承受力与"耐心资本"长期陪伴特性的"放心资本"，通过引入长期资金、完善风控、创新退出 机制及完善对创业投资的差异化监管等方式破局。 事实上，近年来各地母基金的角色早已超越单一的出资功能，正成为创新生态的重要参与者，甚至是关 键构建者之一。谈及如何优化跨区域基金布局与返投机制，地方母基金管理人们大多认可：一体化的关 键，不在谁得分更多，而在谁的位置最合适。在他们看来，把环节放在最具比较优势的地方，并建立可 复用的利益与治理机制，才是一体化的核心。 南京市创新投资集团副总经理王正明则重点谈到了"三张地图""两种机制"与"一个导向"，其中："三张 地图"侧重于产业链、价值链与资本链在长三角跨行政区划的共同" ...

以下文章来源于耐心资本V ，作者一根笔直甜罗素 关注长期、价值、责任投资；降低风险投资；发现稳定性，科技创新，实体经济，新质生产力；促进资 本市场稳定性。 审计的聚光灯下，政府投资基金的 "沉睡"资金令人触目惊心：北方某省7支基金方向不明， 5000万科技成果转 化资金滞留五年未动； 南方某省 14支基金长期"趴窝"，28.85亿元在账 上纹丝不动。其他等地审计报告同样指向定位不清、效率低下——这不仅是地方个案，更是当 下政府投资基金困局的缩影。 当手握重金的 GP们苦于"戴着返投脚镣跳舞"，当政府LP焦虑于"今年必须投出去"的考核压 力，这支撑起中国创投半壁江山（认缴7.7万亿、管理市场七成资金）的巨量资本，正经历一 场深刻的效率拷问。 困局亦是破局之始。从年初国务院 "国办1号文"首次明确分类管理、鼓励松绑返投，到7月发 改委新政剑指"防止同质化"、"不以招商为目的"，一场自上而下的变革浪潮已然涌动。审计报 告揭开的痛点，正成为撬动政府投资基金焕发活力、精准浇灌创新的支点。沉睡的资本巨轮， 能否就此校准航向？ 审计报告如同一把手术刀，精准剖开了政府投资基金的沉疴。河北的审计结果令人咋舌： 7支 基金未明确 ...

Core Insights - Government investment funds are increasingly playing a crucial role in driving industrial upgrades and innovation while facing various challenges [1][2][3] Group 1: Role and Impact of Government Investment Funds - Government investment funds have become more significant in recent years, with a notable increase in the number of institutional LPs, reaching 2,709 in 2024, accounting for nearly 60% of the total, a year-on-year increase of 19.55% [2] - In 2024, government investment funds are projected to contribute 39,933 investments, representing 65.5% of the total, with a cumulative subscribed capital of 1.25 trillion yuan, accounting for 82% of the total [2] - The focus of state-owned capital institutions is primarily on hard technology sectors, with semiconductor and electronic equipment investments leading in both case numbers and amounts [2] Group 2: Challenges Faced by Government Investment Funds - Government investment funds encounter several challenges, including insufficient risk tolerance in assessments, leading to hesitance in investment [3][4] - The traditional evaluation mechanisms emphasize short-term financial returns, lacking support for long-term industrial cultivation [3] - The exit paths for investments are relatively limited, with insufficient scale in merger funds and S funds, and low efficiency in cross-departmental collaboration [3][4] Group 3: Strategies for Improvement - To enhance the effectiveness of government investment funds, it is suggested to build a multi-layered product system and deepen participation in industries [5][6] - The design of return mechanisms should consider regional industrial characteristics and development needs, promoting local quality projects while attracting external quality projects [6][7] - Emphasizing the importance of human capital, investment strategies should focus on connecting with leading figures in relevant fields and fostering collaboration with technical communities [7][8] Group 4: Balancing Diverse Fund Objectives - Government investment funds need to balance diverse objectives, including financial returns and social benefits, by formulating diversified investment strategies [8] - It is essential to respect market mechanisms and industry development rules to avoid issues like overcapacity and internal competition [8][9] - The transformation of investment actions should follow market-oriented and commercial paths, ensuring that scientific innovations effectively reach the market [9][10]

长期以来，返投要求始终是创投机构与地方政府投资基金合作中的核心矛盾点，既制约了基金的市场化 运作效率，也导致实际效果与政策初衷出现偏差。业内一线投资人普遍认为，"基金注册本地化+硬性 返投任务"的传统管理模式，已难以适配当前资本市场的发展节奏。 具体来看，记者与业内人士交流了解到，传统返投模式的弊端集中体现在两个层面：一方面，投资机构 为满足地域限制，被迫将目光局限于特定区域的固定赛道，可能错失全国范围内更优质的科创项目，制 约了资本配置效率；另一方面，部分机构为完成指标，通过设立空壳公司等"假返投"手段规避监管，不 仅背离了引导基金支持科技创新的初心，更造成地方产业重复建设、财政资源浪费等问题。这种现象在 欠发达地区尤为突出——由于本地缺乏符合要求的项目，部分管理人不得不"为返投而投资"，陷入"乱 投资""重复投资"的困境。 追根溯源，"返投难"的核心症结在于产业定位与区域禀赋的错配。当前，多数地方政府投资基金扎堆聚 焦人工智能、生物医药、新能源、高端装备制造等战略性新兴产业，但这类产业与不同区域的优势产业 未必匹配，导致基金管理人难以找到真正优质的返投标的。 政府投资基金正逐步迈入科学规范、提质增效的新阶 ...

Core Viewpoint - Government investment funds are entering a new stage of scientific regulation and efficiency improvement, as indicated by recent policy changes aimed at optimizing the investment return mechanism and reducing the emphasis on local investment requirements [1][2][3]. Group 1: Policy Changes - The National Development and Reform Commission has solicited public opinions on guidelines that encourage reducing or eliminating return investment ratios, aligning with earlier directives that also discourage local investment as a primary goal [1]. - Since the issuance of the "Guiding Opinions on Promoting the High-Quality Development of Government Investment Funds," nearly ten provinces and cities, including Guangdong and Shenzhen, have introduced measures to optimize return investment mechanisms [1][2]. Group 2: Issues with Traditional Models - The traditional return investment model has created significant inefficiencies, limiting investment institutions to specific regions and potentially missing out on high-quality projects nationwide [2]. - Some institutions have resorted to "fake return investments" through shell companies to meet local requirements, which undermines the original intent of guiding funds to support technological innovation and leads to resource wastage [2]. Group 3: Regional Initiatives - Various regions are actively exploring solutions to the return investment dilemma by establishing project pools that meet investment criteria, thereby improving the quality of return projects [3]. - Initiatives such as profit-sharing mechanisms have been introduced, exemplified by Shenzhen's angel fund, which allows excess returns to be fully passed on to fund managers and investors after recovering initial costs [3]. Group 4: Future Outlook - Government investment funds have become a significant source of capital in the primary market, and with the implementation of new regulatory documents, they are transitioning towards a more scientific and efficient operational model, which is expected to drive high-quality development in the venture capital industry [3].

以下文章来源于超募研究所 ，作者FOFWEEKLY研究 超募研究所 . 结合实操业务及公域&私域数据，为私募股权行业从业者（FOF、LP、GP等）提供专业性、垂直类研究内容输出。 地市级引导基金主要特征及优势 当前，地市级引导基金凭借其独特的政策优势和资源禀赋，正日益成为GP募资的重要选择。GP选择地市级引导基金的核心逻辑在于平衡政策红利与 市场化运作，优先考虑产业匹配度高、条款灵活、资源协同性强的区域合作。其基金不仅能为GP提供稳定的资金来源和项目资源，更能通过政府背 书和产业协同，为投资组合创造多维度的战略价值，实现长期可持续发展。同时，地市级引导基金提供产业链精准扶持、创新返投机制、高效决策通 道、综合服务支持和多元退出方案，赋能GP实现高效投资与退出。 地级基金具备以下主要特征： 本期导读： 据不完全统计，截止至2025年4月，我国地市级引导基金总计584支，累计注册资本约为1.69万亿。 而从近5年的情况来看，新设立的地市级引导基金则主要分布于南宁、南通、无锡与苏州等靠近长 三角城市。 作者丨FOFWEEKLY研究 本期推荐阅读5分钟 引言 为了帮助GP及市场参与者穿透市场迷雾把握配置风向，我们对一 ...