國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.2Pathways of Research Utilisation in China
The models of research utilisation are informative yet abstract. In the Chinese context, in what concrete ways does research reach decision makers and subsequently have the opportunity to influence policy? These concrete ways, which combine features of the different models of research utilisation, are referred to as ‘pathways’ by Glaser and Saunders (2002). Zhu (2009) also outlines direct and indirect pathways to influence.
Zhu (2009) points out that, in terms of direct pathways to influence, “expert consultation by the Chinese government has been institutionalised… The Chinese government not only seeks and sponsors think tank consultants to conduct long-term research projects but also invites them to government meetings and seminars on more immediate policy issues.” (p. 340) This combines a problem-solving and interactive approach; often policy makers are unsure of the most appropriate direction to take and consult with expert academics to gain the information needed to make the choice.
Occasionally policy makers instead hope to gain initial viewpoints from a range of sources, including researchers, to build a foundation upon which to better understand policy concerns. Academics with relevant research interests are invited to put forward their views and recommendations during small group (小组, xiaozu) meetings with policy decision makers, or to submit reports on specific issues when required. (Glaser and Saunders, 2002)
A similar approach also involves policy makers seeking out information: “Policy makers occasionally solicit opinions and advice on policy issues from research institute analysts.” (Glaser and Saunders, 2002: 607) However, in this case, these consultations are informal in nature. Both Zhu and Glaser and Saunders note that this pathway is
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
really only available to those academics with connections to policy makers (关系, guanxi), or to those who have caught the attention of policy makers through other means.
One of the key ways in which policy makers can become aware of the work of academics is through internal reports (内部参考, neibu cankao), considered by Glaser and Saunders to be “the most regular means through which foreign policy analysis reaches senior leaders and policy makers.” (p. 607) Zhu explains that news agencies are responsible for filtering information from a range of sources and collating it into internal publications for review by senior leaders. Internal reports arehighly confidential edited news reports circulated only to the highest leadership. There are different levels of clearance within the CCP; each level is allowed access to an increasingly restricted amount of sensitive information, which in addition to basic facts and news reports, may also include policy recommendations and comments by academics. (Grant, 1988) As such, any research selected for inclusion in these top-level internal reports is likely to gain a boost in potential influence; in this pathway, decision makers do not seek information actively but have it presented to them through other sources. In the case that a specific policy dilemma has arisen, this information may help resolve the issue, as in the problem-solving model. However, it may be instead that information included in these internal reports ‘enlightens’ policy makers who later incorporate these ideas into their decisions.
The more prominent a researcher or a research unit, the more likely their work is to be transmitted to decision makers. There are many ways academic bodies can achieve prominence, including through official status or personal affiliations. One other effective way is by raising their public profile. Glaser and Saunders note that
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
“appearances in Chinese or Western media” are an important pathway to influence, pointing out that “Quotations in an article by an important foreign journalist can place an analyst’s words directly on the desks of senior policy makers and analysts the next day.” (p. 607) In other words, if academics catch the attention of the media or the public, the likelihood of their message being conveyed to policy makers grows exponentially.
Glaser and Medeiros (2007) contend that as the media continues to liberalise, this pathway will become more widely and openly available to academics, who will be able to build their influence greatly if they know how to ‘work’ the media.
One rapidly developing pathway falls squarely into the interactive model:
internal conferences. According to Glaser and Saunders, “Chinese think tanks sometimes hold internal conferences that bring together experts on a particular subject to exchange views.” (p. 607) These conferences allow research institute academics to interact with their peers and is a sign of the trend of horizontalisation across the academic sphere in China, cutting across the rigid stove-pipe system. Conference reports may be passed on to policy makers, gaining influential currency.
Finally, academics can secure influence through their publications and research output. Depending on how research products come to be utilised by policy making actors, this pathway can incorporate problem-solving, interactive, enlightenment or even political models, as well as contributing to intellectual enterprise in general.
Successful publication in the academic world may also on occasion lead to greater public presence and media attention, especially when concerned with pertinent or controversial issues, increasing the likelihood that policy makers will hear tell of their work. Once publications have come or been brought to the attention of policy makers,
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
or academics’ ideas have percolated opinion on certain policy-relevant topics, the groundwork is laid for their research to influence policy in practice.