Challnges with Chinese characteristics for Chinese think tanks: CCG book Global Think Tanks (2.0) excerpt
Lack of independence and autonomy are issues for all Chinese think tanks, but non-governmental ones face even greater challenges with limited information access and policy influence channels.
It has been a decade since the concept of "new-type think tanks with Chinese characteristics" was first introduced at the Third Plenum of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 2013. However, do these new-type think tanks also encounter new-type challenges with Chinese characteristics?
The following excerpt is the third post from "Global Think Tanks (2.0)," taken from Chapter 7 titled "Development Challenges of Chinese Think Tanks." It sheds light on the various challenges faced by think tanks in China, particularly non-governmental think tanks striving for survival in a predominantly state-controlled environment.
Global Think Tanks (2.0), written by Henry Huiyao Wang, President of Center for China & Globalization (CCG) and Mabel Lu Miao, Secretary-General of CCG, delves into the mission, challenges, and future development of Chinese think tanks against complexities in the international arena.
The book is published by 人民出版社 the People's Publishing House. A book release, hosted by CCG on August 18, 2023, featured a seminar of leading figures from Chinese think tanks and renowned experts and scholars in globalization research.
Development Obstacles for the Three Major Types of Think Tanks in China
I. Governmental Think Tanks
De-administration and independence need to be strengthened
Governmental and semi-governmental think tanks are often public institutions under government auspices, which always results in a strong administrative atmosphere and poor independence.
On one hand, these think tanks have organizational structures similar to government departments, highlighting their bureaucratic nature. For instance, in personnel evaluations, factors like job position and seniority are important, while research outcomes may not be emphasized, thus failing to motivate staff, affecting efficiency, and stifling innovation.
On the other hand, funding for these think tanks primarily comes from government allocations, and most research topics are assigned by the government. This financial dependence and administrative assignment of these think tanks often lead to a significant allocation of resources and budget towards interpreting and publicizing government policies, sometimes at the expense of pursuing innovative research and lacking the necessary independence to explore independent research avenues.
The Slightly-Opened "Revolving Door" Between Politics and Academia
Think tanks serve as talent platforms, and Chinese think tanks are no exception. They undertake talent training, with institutions like the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) recruiting postgraduate students nationwide on a yearly basis. Most university-affiliated think tanks also have educational functions.
The educational function of a think tank, of course, is predominantly exemplified by the "revolving door" mechanism, which is now beginning to manifest its impact within Chinese think tanks. Some researchers from Chinese think tanks join the government after gaining recognition, and many senior government officials join think tanks after retirement. A classic example is 朱镕基 Zhu Rongji, who was the director of the Institute of Industrial Economics of CASS before becoming the Premier of the State Council. 王岐山 Wang Qishan, once a researcher at the Research Center for Rural Economy(RCRE) of the State Council, is another example. Among those who transitioned from government to think tanks after retirement include 曾培炎 Zeng Peiyan, former Vice Premier of the State Council, who became the Chairman of the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, and 魏建国 Wei Jianguo, former Vice Minister of Commerce, who took the role of Vice Chairman of the same center.
These examples indicate that Chinese think tanks' "revolving door" mechanism is beginning to take shape, but it is not yet fully developed and could be described as only "ajar." The inability to facilitate a two-way flow between the political sphere and think tanks is evident in two main aspects:
On one hand, most political figures who move to think tanks or academia are retired officials who aim to utilize their remaining potential. However, only a small portion of these individuals opt for the "revolving door" path into think tanks. Many of China's retired senior government officials and political elites, including ambassadors and advisors with international experience, often join various associations and organizations, though they are fully capable of contributing to think tanks.
On the other hand, the opportunities for individuals from think tanks or academia to enter the political realm are quite limited, with few successful examples. Therefore, in China, a two-way personnel flow between the government and think tanks is not a common occurrence. With the development of think tanks in China, there is an urgent need for change in this area.
II. University-Affiliated Think Tanks
Identity Crisis
The majority of Chinese universities are public institutions, and their affiliated think tanks are not independent entities with legal personalities, resulting in a quasi-governmental or semi-governmental nature. This is in contrast to Western university-affiliated think tanks, which operate independently from the government.
This distinctive identity of university-affiliated think tanks in China provides them with the advantage of having robust institutional backing, including stable funding sources and greater accessibility to various national projects and research topics. This sets them apart from non-governmental think tanks, which often contend with existential challenges.
However, this also places them in a predicament where they lack the authority to independently sign contracts with external legal entities and to have independent financial accounting. This constrained autonomy due to their subsidiary status represents a widespread identity crisis among university-affiliated think tanks in China, which imposes various limitations on these think tanks when it comes to embarking on projects and researching topics, thereby restricting their capacity to engage in independent research and activities. Consequently, the substantial academic research capabilities of these university-affiliated think tanks often remain underutilized, resulting in a missed opportunity to fully harness their potential.
It is evident that this identity crisis has become the biggest obstacle hindering the further development of university-affiliated think tanks in China. To fully utilize the role of these university-affiliated think tanks and unleash their research potential, it is necessary to first extricate them from this predicament of identity.
Lack of Problem-Orientated Approach
University-affiliated think tanks in China have significant advantages compared to governmental and non-governmental think tanks. Their funding primarily comes from university allocations, foundations, corporations, and individual donations, offering more financial stability compared to private, non-governmental think tanks, and they are subject to fewer governmental restrictions than purely governmental entities. Furthermore, university-affiliated think tanks have the unique advantage of bringing together numerous experts and scholars, including seasoned researchers in various fields, which provides them with unparalleled human resource capabilities. Affiliated with academic institutions, they can fully leverage academic resources, allowing for extensive research scope and depth, and their findings are often rooted in rigorous scientific methodologies.
Nonetheless, these advantages also carry certain disadvantages. While the research capabilities of university-affiliated think tanks are academically robust, this strength can also lead to a disconnect from practical applications. Their research often leans towards the theoretical, which can limit its feasibility and real-world impact. Furthermore, university professors are often burdened with heavy teaching and publication responsibilities, leaving them with limited time to dedicate exclusively to think tank research.
As a result, the research produced by Chinese university-affiliated think tanks frequently lacks practical orientation. This limitation makes it challenging to apply their findings to real-world problems effectively and diminishes their role in providing policy advice and fulfilling the broader functions expected of think tanks.
III. Non-Governmental Think Tanks
Need for Easier Legal Acknowledgment
As non-profit research institutions, non-governmental think tanks in China are primarily governed by regulations such as the "社会团体登记管理条例 Regulation on the Administration of the Registration of Non-Governmental Organizations," the "民办非企业单位登记管理暂行条例 Interim Regulations on Registration Administration of Non-Enterprise Private Entities," and the "基金会管理条例 Regulation on the Management of Foundations."
Additionally, the "关于社会智库健康发展的若干意见 Opinions on the Healthy Development of Non-Governmental Think Tanks" specify a dual management system by both civil affairs departments and relevant supervisory departments. Private non-governmental science research institutions are managed by 社会科学界联合会 the Federations of Social Science of the provinces, autonomous regions, or municipalities directly under the Central Government and registered by the civil affairs departments of the provincial-level people's governments. Other non-governmental think tanks are managed by the supervisory departments relevant to their field of activities and are registered by the civil affairs departments of the same-level people's government.
This means that for a non-governmental think tank to obtain a legal personality, it must first get approval from the industry's supervisory department before applying for registration with the civil affairs authority. However, for many non-governmental think tanks, it is challenging to find an appropriate supervisory department to affiliate with, making the registration process difficult to initiate.
Despite the eight standards set by the "关于加强中国特色新型智库建设的意见 Opinions on Strengthening the Construction of New-Types Think Tanks with Chinese Characteristics," non-governmental think tanks lack a complete and standardized recognition mechanism, which is crucial for their regulated development. Therefore, the legal recognition standards for non-governmental think tanks urgently need to be improved.
Non-governmental think tanks are non-profit research and consulting organizations with primary focus on strategic issues and public policies; their mission is underpinned by the principle of serving the Party and government in scientific, democratic, and lawful decision-making. They should meet the following basic criteria:
Comply with the laws and regulations of the PRC, maintain relative stability, and operate in a standardized manner as a substantive research institution.
Have characteristic, long-term focus areas in policy advisory and research, leading to the generation of research outcomes.
Have influential professionals and full-time researchers.
Have secured and sustainable sources of funding.
Have multi-level academic exchange platforms and channels for outcome transformation.
Have a fully functional information collection and analysis system.
Have sound governance structures and organizational regulations.
Have favorable conditions for international cooperation and exchanges.
— 关于加强中国特色新型智库建设的意见 Opinions on Strengthening the Construction of New-Types Think Tanks with Chinese Characteristics, released in January, 2015
Weak Financial Support
The famous Chinese saying, "Only with full granaries can one know rituals; only with sufficient clothing and food can one know honor and disgrace," underscores the significance of a strong material foundation for progress. However, the material footing of non-governmental think tanks in China remains precarious. Their funding primarily relies on donations from individuals, companies, governments, foundations, in addtion to contracts with commercial or governmental entities.
However, in the Chinese context, the dominance of large governmental and semi-governmental think tanks in securing research projects and funding from government and public institutions leaves limited opportunities for non-governmental think tanks. Even when non-governmental think tanks manage to engage in government or public institution projects, compromises are often necessary, resulting in a sacrifice of their independence for mere survival.
Furthermore, while charitable giving is on the rise in China, the culture of donating to think tanks has not yet come into being, making it challenging for non-governmental think tanks to secure financial support from the public. This financial bottleneck hampers the development of non-governmental think tanks in China, compelling them to pursue profit-oriented projects from various parties for their continued existence.
These factors lead to significant instability in the funding of non-governmental think tanks in China, creating precarious conditions that severely limit their development and growth.
Restrained Information Access
Beyond funding issues, the development of non-governmental think tanks in China is also constrained by the current system and realities of the country. At present, with the lack of complete transparency in government information, non-governmental think tanks are unable to access various official data like governmental or semi-governmental think tanks can.
This limitation results in non-governmental think tanks lacking access to crucial data, which hinders their capacity to conduct in-depth research. The restricted identity of non-governmental think tanks results in their viewpoints and positions lacking essential informational support, consequently diminishing the quality and impact of their research. Weaker and less influential viewpoints and positions pose challenges for these think tanks in terms of building their reputation and impact. Consequently, it becomes harder for them to attract public funding, which is detrimental to the survival of non-governmental think tanks in China.
These issues concerning funding and identity are key to the survival of non-governmental think tanks in China. To promote their survival and development, it's essential to provide them with a solid, stable material foundation and equal, open opportunities for information sharing.
Limited Policy Influence Channels
Despite their challenging circumstances, non-governmental think tanks in China remain committed to influencing government decision-making. However, their channels for policy advice are limited, constraining their overall development. It is recommended to institutionalize non-governmental think tanks into the government's decision-making advisory system. The government could consciously commission non-governmental think tanks for research through projects, delegation, or outsourcing services. Additionally, channels for reporting and feedback on research findings by non-governmental think tanks need to be improved.
Difficulty in Gaining Influence and Attention
One of the greatest strengths of non-governmental think tanks is their grassroots connection, reflecting public opinion and influencing societal discourse, thus contributing to more comprehensive and informed government decisions. However, this strength is not fully realized in China, as the channels for non-governmental think tanks to offer policy advice are limited, and their research findings do not receive enough government attention. Additionally, non-governmental think tanks have not yet formed significant societal influence, failing to gain public trust and attention, which limits their role in guiding public opinion.
The difficulty in gaining influence and attention stems from two main reasons:
First, the inherent limitations of non-governmental think tanks, including a lack of crucial government data for public policy research, leading to gaps in their research findings;
Second, the public's lack of awareness about think tanks. Non-governmental think tanks in China are relatively new, and due to insufficient publicity, they are still largely unfamiliar to the public. Changing public curiosity into trust and attention will take time. Moreover, the traditional Chinese culture, which links trust in authority with power, makes it inherently difficult for the public to trust non-governmental think tanks that operate independently of power structures.
For China to usher in a new era of think tank development and to build new-type think tanks with Chinese characteristics, it's crucial to allow market forces to play a decisive role in the marketplace of ideas, with non-governmental think tanks playing a significant part. Chinese non-governmental think tanks, though in their nascent stages, are developing rapidly and have great potential for growth. As China's systems improve, the public become more open-minded, and think tanks continue their efforts, non-governmental think tanks are likely to emerge as a significant force in influencing government decisions and guiding public opinion in the near future.
CCG Update has already published two previous sections of Global Think Tanks (2.0), which explore think tank categorization and address broader challenges facing Chinese think tanks respectively:
 | A guest post by
|
 | A guest post by
|