East Asian countries frequently consider the diversification of social power and how to balance power relations through policy formulation and implementation when developing public policies on industrial heritage. In terms of industrial heritage transformation and renewal, the Chinese and Japanese governments have developed two distinct cases. In general, the Chinese government favors real estate projects, whereas Japan favors tourism projects. However, the examples used in this article, Hanyang Steel Factory and Tomioka Silk Mill, demonstrate a more complicated situation. First, these two cases can be viewed as two distinct cultural markets under the leadership of the government; second, the responsibilities that the government should bear in the process of industrial heritage transformation should have boundaries. Finally, there is a similarity between the two cases: worker gentrification has not been achieved through the transformation of industrial heritage.