Scholars in Beijing called for a more independent and transparent mechanism to regulate Chinese think tanks at a conference yesterday held to announce the Global Think Tank Rankings 2014 compiled by the University of Pennsylvania.

Scholars hold a conference on Jan. 22 at the launch of the Eighth Global Think Tanks Report compiled by the Lauder Institute of the University of Pennsylvania. [China.org.cn/ by Wu Jin]

The publication of the "2014 Global Go to Think Tank Index Report" compiled by the Lauder Institute of the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) has stirred a big splash among the Chinese academic circle.

According to the report's "Top Think Tank Worldwide (Non-U.S.)" list, an important ranking incorporated in the report issued simultaneously yesterday in 55 cities, Chinese think tanks dropped out of the top 10 influential institutes in the world.

The highest position of a Chinese institute was occupied by China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR) at number 16. Following it was the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), one of the largest institutes of social sciences studies in China, which ranked 28th.

"Despite China's comprehensive capacity, which ranks second in the world, the competence of its think tanks, representing the knowledge and thoughts of a country, lags far behind developments in trade, economy, military power and science and technology," said Wang Wen, executive dean at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University in Beijing.

Wang made his remarks at the sub-conference of the meeting for the global publication of the report in Beijing, at a symposium organized by the Global Times. The Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, a non-governmental think tank has been included for the first time in the top 110 global think tanks, ranked in 106th position.

Using a set of criteria, including quality, reputation, research and analysis produced, academic performance, website and digital presence and overall impact on society, the report, which has been issued for eight consecutive years, gives some clues to Chinese scholars.

Zhang Shengjun, director at the Institute of International Relations of Beijing Normal University, said: "Chinese think tanks should focus more on public affairs rather than confidential agendas for personal use."

"The tradition for Chinese scholars to write clandestine reports to policy makers has become obsolete in modern times when the accuracy and influence of think tanks are being evaluated publicly."

Only a few days ahead of the report, the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinion on Forging the Construction of New Type Think Tanks with Chinese Characteristics".

According to the Opinion, China aims to establish a more transparent think tank system with information such as budgets, expenditures and evaluation mechanisms, accessible to the public.

However, the Opinion, which is being considered a prescience to a boom in China's think tanks also warned of overlapping and disorderly development in the intellectual market. Hu Hao, deputy director of the China Center for Contemporary China Studies, highlighted the point by expressing his expectations for a true think tank scholar at the sub-conference in Beijing.

"Scholars in think tanks should resist the temptation to look for quick successes and work with a scrupulous and patient temperament in their specific field," said Hu.

"Even though their research takes time and receives little attention, their efforts are indispensable and sometimes crucial."

Hu gave the example of China's insufficient knowledge of Sri Lanka and Myanmar, saying: "had there been some independent research into peripheral countries, Chinese investors in Sri Lanka and Myanmar could have avoided huge losses."

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)