Introduction of the Lecturer:

Pascal Abb

GIGA German Institute of Global and AreaStudies

http://www.giga-hamburg.de/english/index.php?folder=staff/abb&file=abb_en.html

Introduction: what is a think tank?

When addressing the question “what is athink tank?” we must first consider a variety of competing definitions.  The most basic, broad definition is the“policy institute,” an organization that conducts research and engages inpolicy work.  This broad construction of“think tank” can be used to encompass a wide range of research organizations,including university centers, independent institutes, academies, some NGOs,etc.  The early American definition of“think tank” is comparatively narrow: it specifically refers to independentlyfunded, public policy-oriented groups that perform research and provide advice,excluding organizations that have close ties to government or corporations.  Although this American definition hadsignificant influence during much of the 20^th century, in recentyears the proliferation of research groups worldwide has led to an increasinglyabstract definition and more variety in terms of the types of organizationsthat can be labeled think tanks.

As a result of the forces of globalization,the end of the Cold War, and the appearance of new transnational problems, thenumber of think tanks around the world has grown rapidly since the 1980s.  This is especially the case in East Asia, andwhile other nations—Japan, Korea, etc—have large and expanding sectors, todayChina is probably home to the largest number of such institutes.  As the widely accepted definition of “thinktank” moves away from the traditional Western definition, common assumptionsthat think tanks are players in a pluralist system independent from governmentstructures must be abandoned.  Whilethink tanks are expanding their activity and taking on new roles, establishedcategories are losing meaning. Therefore, a new framework is needed.

Framework

For a landscape in which many institutionsare increasingly playing a variety of roles, a useful way to develop a newframework for describing think tanks is to focus on their essentialactivities.  This presentation identifiedthree main roles: academic work, advisory work, and advocacy work.  By tracking differences in the degree towhich these roles are pursued, we can take a step closer towards understandingthe organizations' positioning and influence.

▪     Academic work

 Focus on scholarly publications

  Short- and long-term research projects, theory development

  Teaching and training

▪     Advisory work

  Offering policy advice and evaluation to decision-makers

  Short-term and applied research

  Training programs for officials, consultancy and employment ingovernment agencies

▪     Advocacy work

  Attempt to influence the general public through media commentaries

  Policy promotion and public diplomacy

  Hosting and participating in public debates

Most institutions engage in all threeroles, though the extent to which one role is emphasized over others isdifferent.  In China, we can observethree major groups of foreign policy research organizations:

  University departments and affiliated research centers

◦     Have advantages in experienceand prestige

◦     ex. Peking University'sCISS;  Fudan University's CAS

  Academic institutes

◦     Important because of theirdirect channels to government, size, and prestige

◦     ex. CASS

  Comprehensive institutes

◦     The most similar to traditionalWestern think tanks, these focus on applied research and policy advice, andhave recently become major players in academia, with many publishing top-rankedjournals

◦     ex. CIIS, CICIR, SIIS

Development Trends and Explanations

Over the last 10-15 years, these instituteshave all benefited from more funding and talent, while all three main rolesidentified above have seen increased demand and activity.  The theoretical aspect is distinguished byefforts to develop an international relations theory with Chinesecharacteristics.  Policy advice hasbecome a necessity when confronting the range of new global and regional issuesthat China is faced with, and notably the Chinese public has becomeincreasingly interested in international affairs. 

A distinct trend is that we have seen adecrease in the frequency of academic publications coming from universities,and at the same time an increase in the number of think tanks producingresearch for policy analysis.  Althoughsome institutions still maintain their traditional focus, all are branching outinto other fields, and as they compete for the same resources on the sameissues, they must develop similar capabilities. Given this development, an important question is whether or not we areseeing a process of convergence.  Thinktanks in China are becoming part of an environment of comprehensive nationalsocial and political advancement, away from the “Ivory tower” effect ofirrelevance seen in the Western tradition. This phenomenon more closely resembles the Chinese tradition of “scholarofficials,” who in the present day are overseeing a synthesis of both academicsand policymaking.  Another newdevelopment is that given the growing market for educating the Chinese publicabout the world, individual scholars have more freedom to choose differentpaths to become academic, policy, or media-oriented scholars. 

Affiliation with government and politicalparties is not unique to Chinese think tanks. However, the “black box” effect of China's political system means thatit is unclear how much influence think tanks have on both domestic policy andforeign academic circles.  As a result,think tanks and scholars must focus undue amounts of energy on self-promotionin an effort to increase individual academic standing and influence.  Since most interaction between academics andChinese decision-makers takes place through unofficial channels, internationalpartnerships and foreign academic exchange programs are increasingly important,yet their relevance and efficacy is still undetermined. 

The relationship between think tanks andgovernment is complicated.  The power ofgovernment funding places strong constraints on Chinese think tanks whencompared to independently-funded institutions. As a result, foreign funding has become more important as a drivingforce.  This raises concerns aboutpolitical orientation, and directly emphasizes the importance of more academicopenness within the system if Chinese think tanks are to be an effectiveforeign policy tool.