City of London invented the modern financial center. Although later supplanted by various other contenders, the top centers in the world have all followed the models pioneered in Britain.

Pivotal to this development, in turn, were the contributions of the Renaissance-era polymath Sir Thomas Gresham. While on paper he worked as a trader and financier, his vision extended far beyond just professional excellence. He founded the Royal Exchange, importing the concept of the bourse from Antwerp, where he did extensive business, but meanwhile also formalized the notion of retail with stalls in the upper floors. He later founded Gresham College on the basis of his so-called “new learning,” moving instruction from Latin into English, and focusing on economically relevant topics like geometry and astronomy (which aided navigation).

“Finance and science and tech were in his mind the same thing,” says Michael Mainelli, Chairman of Z/Yen, which publishes several well-known indices measuring the strength of financial centers around the world. Mainelli also happens to be a Professor Emeritus of Commerce at Gresham College, as well as a Gresham scholar himself, and even former member of the Joint Grand Gresham Committee, which was established in 1579 to execute his will.

The Global Financial Centres Index (GFCI), published by Z/Yen, is the best-known comprehensive index of financial centers. Taipei’s ranking has improved significantly in recent years as the FSC has promoted the Asian Asset Management Center policy, rising from 70^th place in 2024 to 51^st in the most recent edition; yet these results still lag far behind Taiwan’s ranking among global stock markets, where Taiwan recently surpassed London to rank 5^th in the world. While Taiwan has certain structural disadvantages for becoming a full financial center, including geopolitical instability and the lack of a common law system, it is reasonable for it to imagine that untapped growth potential exists.

Despite being the flagship product of Z/Yen, meanwhile, the GFCI is not the only index it produces. For the first time in 2026, Taipei was included in the Global Green Financial Index (GGFI), ranking 40^th – outperforming some other financial centers within Asia. The index positioned Taipei as a “global specialist,” globally connected, and with a deep specialty in green finance, but with less breadth than some “global leaders,” mainly based in Europe and North America.

Besides these two, which have received somewhat more attention, Mainelli also points to the Smart Centres Index (SCI), which attempts to measure the ability of financial centers to execute long-term strategies. Not every financial center needs to be strong in a comprehensive way; differentiation is often sufficient – however it takes sustained effort to transform a raw comparative advantage into policies, resource networks, and eventually reputation. The SCI aims to capture this process through three dimensions: innovation support, creative intensity, and delivery capability.

Ireland forms one example of such specialization, handling over 60% of aircraft leasing in the world, which can be attributed in part to favorable tax and legal frameworks. Some centers focus on access to larger adjacent economies – such as the Cayman Islands for the US, Barbados for Canada, or Guernsey for the UK. A third category also focuses on specialized financial structures. With countries around the world implementing financial center policies, a certain amount of heterogeneity is to be expected.

Mainelli made special note of Busan, Korea as an example which has consistently listened to advice from his project over the past three decades. These improvements range from basic to strategic. One of the first of these recommendations was simply street signs in English – which were later adopted nationwide, based on the model set in Busan. Later, again based on their recommendation, Busan implemented a free “concierge” service, in which government officials helped foreign investors navigate the bureaucracy, at no cost to them.

While general ideas like these apply broadly, it is also important to think about strengths specific to a location. Busan also has a long history as maritime trading hub, having first emerged as an iron trading and shipbuilding hub 1,500 years ago, and becoming Korea’s port for container traffic in modern times. Building on this natural advantage, the local Korea Maritime & Ocean University has a number of degree programs related to finance. Scholarships for foreign students ultimately help promote Busan as a financial center.

The most important factor is generally to first assemble the right people; a specific focus on finance is not even a prerequisite. This approach is supported by the most recent SCI report, which notes that “assessments in the SCI survey appear to favour centres with strong people skills.” Gresham’s new learning, for reference, was less a specific research agenda, and more space and financial model for smart people to gather – which later led to the development of other hallowed institutions like the Royal Society.

As for Taiwan, the tech sector is an obvious starting point in its search for a sustainable niche; Mainelli offers quantum sensors and photonics as specific frontier areas whose general applications are still being discovered. He also stresses, however, that “it doesn't have to be science, it could be the creative industries or something, but given where Taiwan is, science is definitely one natural avenue.”

These ideas generally revolve around academics, and internationally-competitive education is indeed a worthwhile goal for any country – much less one with demonstrated technological leadership. There are also less ambitious paths to consider as well. Busan found that subsidizing overseas studies is a good way to internationalize local talent, meanwhile, without requiring direct contact with the global labor market.

Ideas like this will be needed to help Taiwan get around one of its most vexing challenges: its salary differential. “People in finance are, as we well know, very sensitive to their bonuses and their paychecks and all that. They're in it for the money, apparently.” Taiwan may well offer unique advantages in quality of life, but a certain amount of creativity and flexibility may be required to attract the exact type of people who can rigorously quantify their options.

The problem is not that such people will never prioritize anything above money, but that they need specific reasons to do so. Intellectual ecosystems can serve as a form of optionality, allowing individuals to develop their careers without necessarily earning the largest commissions. In that way, regardless of the formidable chicken-and-egg difficulties in the earlier stages, building the foundations first can still be more economical than counting on a quantum leap directly to global superstar status.