Taiwan Today

Three of the best-known think tanks in the private sector are the 21st Century Foundation, the Institute for National Poli­cy Research, and the Asia and World Insti­tute. Each institution has gathered together an impressive group of scholars and advisors to address critical issues in domestic and in­ternational policy.

As the following article by staff writer Leu Chien-ai indicates, government policy-makers can draw upon some impressive voices in the private sector who are eager to contribute to the decision-making process.

"Before we can find the an­swers to these Issues, we need to mobilize knowledge and social forces, and that's why the 21st Century Foundation was established," says Michael Ying-mao Kau (高英茂), the president of one of Taiwan's newest think tanks.

Kau, who is concurrently a professor of political science at Brown University, says there is broad support for the foundation's work: "Actually the idea was brought up seven years ago by our chair­ man, Kao Yu-jen (高育仁), after he completed an Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship program in the U.S." During the program, Kao (who was Speaker of the Taiwan Provincial Assembly until December 1989) visited several well-known American research institutes, including the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution. The visits convinced him that Taiwan needed a similar privately­-sponsored think tank.

"But at first there was little support and funding available in Taiwan, because people prefer contributing to organized charities rather than supporting public policy studies," Professor Kau explains. Only in mid-1988 was there enough financial backing to begin operations.

The 21st Century Foundation joined various other civic organizations set up in the past several years. Their existence demonstrates growing public concern for the future course of Taiwan's development. Some of these organizations, such as the Consumers' Foundation, have done quite well, but they usually focus on specific problems within a narrow range of issues—and very few deal with public policy studies.

"Because of the deep-rooted author­itarian tradition in China, many such organizations in the past tended to study issues from the government's viewpoint and therefore failed to win credibility," Kau says. Given these historical tendencies, the 21st Century Foundation is very much in the public spotlight because many people consider it the first private and well-funded think tank on public policy studies to be established in Taiwan.

The foundation consists of six R&D committees that focus their analytic efforts on political, legal, economic, social, cultural, and educational areas. These are broad areas, and the founda­tion is currently setting more specific pri­orities based upon its identification of the issues that most concern the public. The foundation's overall goal, well in the mainstream of think tanks in other countries, is to act as a catalyst in the process of public policymaking by integrating the scholarly community with the business and governmental sectors.

So far, the foundation's priorities range from issues concerning parliamentary restructuring, mainland policy, the development of party politics, and the rise of social movements, to financial liberalization, university law, and even the year-end bonus disputes between management and labor. It is obviously a large platter of concerns, and the orga­nizational approach to addressing these issues is still quite fluid.

The foundation has no in-house re­search fellows. Instead, each R&D committee is headed by two coordinators and is staffed by five to nine scholars and experts who engage in research on either an individual or collective basis. Illustrating the foundation's international perspective, one of the coordinators is based in Taiwan, the other overseas. The foundation also invites leading spe­cialists, entrepreneurs, scholars, and government officials to serve as advisors.

"Of the government employees who join us as advisors, most are drawn from research institutes or are serving as presidents of national universities," Kau says. "Also we have close affiliation with the American academic sector. Many well-known American specialists in Asian affairs, such as Professors Jonathan Pollack [of the Rand Corporation] and Andrew Nathan [at Columbia Uni­versity] are included in our team as advisors."

The fruits of the foundation's re­ search efforts will be disseminated to the policymaking community and concerned public through publications, conferences, policy hearings, and the mass media. "In addition to irregular publications, we plan to publish a scholarly journal—Public Policy Quarterly— as soon as we are better staffed and funded," Kau says. "To have our research findings more publicized, the heads of the three local TV stations and leading newspapers have also been invited to serve as advisors."

The Sunday public TV program "Issues and Policies" produced by the foundation since last September is anoth­er part of its efforts in the area of public education. The program has covered is­sues like deteriorating public security, skyrocketing housing prices, extension of compulsory education, and the ethics of elections.

The foundation is supported mainly by contributions from about 30 private enterprises, with an initial start-up fund of about US$2 million. Joint projects with other institutions and research con­tracts with government agencies provide additional support. Nevertheless, the foundation is still confronting some financial and personnel difficulties, de­spite its star cast of advisors and re­searchers. Its office on Taipei's Chung­ king South Road is not much larger than a college classroom, and it has only a skeleton staff of only six administrators. As a result, all the research projects are commissioned to scholars outside the foundation.

"Government contracts represent only a small part of the whole. We hope to diversify the sources of our funding to keep the foundation free of personal in­fluence and maintain autonomy and neutrality," Kau says. "We aim to represent the main, enlightened voice in society, so extreme conservatives or liberals are not on our R&D committees."

But support from the business sector can also raise questions of institutional independence, and Kau is well aware of the problem: "Those who contribute to us haven't attempted to influence our operations, and we haven't had any pres­sure from other sectors either. I'm happy to say that Taiwan's society is maturing in this regard. Moreover, the integrity and credibility of our committee members will guarantee our independence and autonomy." Thus far, the foundation has been successful in conveying an image of being "moder­ate" in the political spectrum.

According to Kau, the positive pub­lic reception of the 21st Century Foundation indicates some broader trends emerging in society: "The rise of private think tanks illustrates that the economic and political environment in Taiwan is becoming mature enough to allow dissident voices in public policymaking. Moreover, there is growing recognition in all segments of society that social and political issues have become so complex that there is a greater need for studies generated by think tanks. Transportation issues, for example, are becoming night­marish problems for the government, and their resolution requires sophisticated planning, technological expertise, and even a grasp of sociological dimensions. Oftentimes bureaucrats do not have this sort of in-house expertise, which leaves an opening for assistance from think tanks.

"The private sector is becoming more willing to contribute to public policy analyses. While it's still too early to evaluate what influence the private think tanks have actually had on public policymaking, at least it's clear that the political sector is more responsive to' these voices," Kau says.

A second think tank that has re­cently begun cultivating the intellectual marketplace calls it­ self "the private Academia Sinica." The Institute for National Policy Research (INPR), set up in January 1989, is funded by the Chang Yung­-fa Foundation (張榮發基金會), estab­lished by its namesake, who is chairman of the Evergreen Line and Taiwan's wealthiest shipping magnate. The INPR, which is housed in five floors of a building provided by the Evergreen Line, had a start-up funding of about US$4 million, and its annual operating budget for per­sonnel alone is approximately US$1.2 million.

Raymond Chang (張瑞猛), Presi­dent of INPR, says that Taiwan badly needs the services of private think tanks. Chang, who received his Ph.D. in eco­nomics from Columbia University and was previously a research fellow at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research, had this viewpoint strengthened during a three-month research visit last year at the Heritage Foundation in Wash­ington, D.C. The experience gave him a firsthand look at the roles played by public policy organizations.

"In many countries the government provides research staff for lawmakers," Chang says. "The U.S. budgets millions of dollars for this, and in addition there are hundreds of private organizations in Washington alone that are trying to in­fluence policy." In comparison, the ROC Legislative Yuan established its own research arm—the Legislative Consultation Center—only in 1989.

But a change in thinking is well un­derway. "In the past, scholars studied China, but not Taiwan; we studied history, but not current public policy," says Tsai Tun-ming (蔡墩銘), INPR chair­man and a law professor at National Taiwan University. "But society reached a transition stage in 1987, on the eve of the lifting of the martial law. A number of professors thought that public policy needed to be deliberated and adjusted at that juncture, so a management committee was set up to design a research institute on public policy studies, and INPR was born."

The institute is divided into two de­partments, administration and research. The latter has five sections: international affairs, law and politics, finance and economy, society, and culture. "Those issues the government fails to deal with well are our main target of concern," Chang says. "Three domestic issues are top priorities: the full implementation of the ROC Constitution; environment and ecology, including topics such as land rezoning; and fundamental issues con­cerning culture and ethics." Institute projects also cover global and regional issues, such as Taiwan's economic status in the world and its integration into the political and economic community of Southeast Asia.

Because the INPR staff thought the government's annual National Develop­ment Seminar regularly sidesteps sensitive issues in the area of politics, diplomacy, and defense, the institute held its own "National Policy Seminar" in late December 1989. The seminar invited about 200 local and overseas Chinese participants from the academic and business sectors, the government, and the media. They discussed key issues, such as judicial reform, rezoning of land, and defense spending priorities.

INPR generally hosts lower-cost seminars or press conferences to publicize its research findings, but both Tsai and Chang say that publicity campaigns are not their style. "Honesty is our principle," Chang says. "We only say as much as we've done." The institute makes its research findings known through three publication efforts: the National Policy Backgrounder geared for policy makers; a Think Tank Book Series for the academic sector; and National Policy Quarterly for the general public.

The institute initiates all its research projects and at present does not accept commissioned projects, including those offered by the government. "It may harm our independence," Chang says. "Society needs neutral groups, so we will take such projects only after we have contributed more to solving current is­sues and have developed more public confidence in our work."

Although Chang emphasizes the in­stitute's autonomy, some people have wondered if this is possible because of its total support by the Evergreen Line's Chang Yung-fa Foundation. But Raymond Chang shrugs off the worry: "People who try to do something for the public are often criticized for harboring ulterior motives," he says. "But even the well-known Consumers' Founda­tion, which is obviously concerned with helping everybody's welfare, gains very little financial support from the public. How could we expect to get enough public funding?"

Since the institute has rejected gov­ernment projects for the time being, Chang says the business sector is a natural alternative. "There was no other al­ternative but seek support from among reputable entrepreneurs," he says. Evergreen Line has provided that support, and three of the seven members of INPR's management committee are representatives of the company. "But our sponsor never interferes with our operations, and none of our publications concerns any business of the enterprise," Chang says.

INPR has about 25 full-time research fellows, and a number of consultants who are well-known senior scholars and opinion leaders in Taiwan. But recent M.A. and Ph.D. graduates are preferred for the work at the institute. Chang says these young and enthusiastic scholars are not as set in their ways as some senior scholars, and they tend to have no preconceived political stands. Time is also a factor. The senior scholars in Taiwan are often overloaded, and what can be completed in three months by INPR's young research teams might take twice as long if done by outside professors.

Competition for personnel between the public and private sector and among think tanks themselves is becoming stiff­er. "Not many qualified young men are concerned enough about social justice issues," Chang says. "Moreover, very little public policy analysis has actually been utilized by the government so far, even though a few public and private re­ search organizations appeared long before INPR."

"Lots of Chinese abroad apply to us for research fellowships, but we take only those who demonstrate deep concern about ROC issues and public policy-and there aren't very many of these," Chang complains. In an unusual­ly sagacious bit of long-term planning, I PR is building its research staff by awarding thesis grants for M.A. and Ph.D. candidates who may later join the institute.

In another long-range commitment, the INPR is building a large collection of research materials. It has already invested US$320,000 in stocking its research li­brary. "In addition to our specialized book collection of 7,000 volumes, we subscribe to about 25 newspapers and 700 periodicals," Tsai says. "These are available for public use, and last year 16,000 people used our library, including graduate students, professors, legislative assistants, and media people."

While INPR is too young an organi­zation to expect major results, Chang says they have already had some impact on government decision-making. "The government has adopted some stand-points from our research findings con­cerning the ROC's application for membership to GATT [the General Agree­ment on Tariffs and Trade]," Tsai says. "And our draft study on the relations between the peoples of both sides of the Taiwan Straits has accelerated the government's pace to draft a study of its own."

Tsai is upbeat about the develop­ment of private think tanks in the ROC, but warns that they should take care in selecting their areas of specialization. "There's no doubt that more and more private think tanks will appear, but instead of being too similar and competing with each other, these organizations should develop their own characteristics," he says. "For instance, they may emphasize statistical analyses, studies on domestic issues, or international work."

In addition to having a division of labor evolving among private think tanks, Chang expects them to hold dif­fering political stances as well. "The more pluralistic society becomes, the more different ideologies there will be," he says. "In the future, decision-makers in the private sector and in the government will probably seek assistance from think tanks that have the same ideology as theirs. But the long-term goal of I PR is to become a nonpartisan research institute. We want to help improve politics through upgrading the policymaking process. We hope one day INPR will be the first choice whenever society needs solutions to pressing issues. "

Unlike the 21st Century Founda­tion and INPR, the Asia and World Institute (AWI) is no newcomer to the think tank scene. Although it prefers to maintain a low profile, it has been active in advising the highest levels of government since 1976.

"Because the ROC was still isolated internationally during the 1970s, the institute was founded to help integrate scholars at home and abroad in order to work on issues of key importance to the ROC," says Dr. Phillip M. Chen (陳明), Director of AWI and a professor of political science at Tamkang University.

The institute divides its work on in­ternational affairs into four areas: North America, Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the international economy. Specific studies emphasize the areas of business and management, economics, social environ­ment, trade negotiations, foreign policy, and international affairs.

Most of the institute's projects are under government contract. These are referred to a staff of 25 research fellows chosen from the ROC's leading educa­tional and research institutions. Despite the AWI's ties with the government and its use of office space vented from the military sector, Dr. Chen says there is no problem with maintaining an independent stance.

"Think tanks can take any commis­sioned project, even from the opposition. Otherwise they are labeling themselves," he argues. "Our aim is to provide clients with objective and comprehensive policy analyses on critical world issues." Major AWI clients have included the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Eco­nomic Affairs, and the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission.

Over the past thirteen years, AWI has sponsored over 100 regional and international conferences covering such topics as Asian and Pacific affairs, Sino-American relations, European and Asian relations, and international trade. Programs last year focused on the ROC's new "flexible diplomacy," the ADB annual meeting in Peking, and Peking's "one country, two systems" proposal. More than 800 foreign and Chinese scholars and specialists have participated in these activities.

Current AWl projects include anal­yses of economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, the application of the Taiwan experience in the Third World, economic reform of Communist China, and the interactions among Com­munist China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

Some of the institute's research has limited circulation, making it difficult for the public to understand the scope of its work. "Many of our projects are com­missioned by the government and aren't allowed to be made public according to the contracts," Chen says. "Actually it doesn't really matter if the findings are published or not, because many people, perhaps including some of the academic and business sectors, just don't care about it. They may be interested in materials about the stock market, but not in publications like ours."

But Chen indicates that the situation is changing. "People now are more willing to seek information of this sort." They can find it in AWI's various publi­cations: the AWI Monograph Series, AWI Lectures and Essays Series, AWI Digest (in Chinese), and AWI Library Series (in Chinese).

"The most reputable think tanks in Taiwan are non-profit organizations. I personally think it's right and proper for them to make profits for self-support," Chen says. "Our own funds come mainly from a private endowment by the textile industry, in addition to our contract­ ed projects." Like the 21st Century Foundation and INPR, Chen is looking for even stronger support from the business sector. AWI faces no serious financial difficulties, but it does have some personnel problems because of more competitive salaries elsewhere. Most of its 16 full-time staff members, including administrators and research associates, have recently graduated from universi­ties or graduate schools.

Chen emphasizes honesty and objec­tivity when he discusses AWI's research approach. "Every coin has two sides. I don't think research institutes should be labeled conservatives or liberals, even though people like to do so," Chen says. AWI has tried to establish a balance between conservative and liberal orientations.

"In addition to the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institution, and the American Enterprise Institute, which are regarded as conservative, we were one of the first institutes in Taiwan to as­sociate with liberal American think tanks such as the Brookings Institu­tion-even though the ROC government preferred conservatives at the time" Chen says. He adds that both KMT and DPP members are invited to the confer­ences they host or sponsor, as are people from the media who are considered pro­ government and anti-government.

"AWl didn't start out as a think tank, but it has evolved into one," Chen says. "We're said to be somewhat like the Institute of International Relations, but A WI is less official. During the past four years, we've broadened our approach from foreign policy analyses and now cover domestic political, economic, and trade issues." For instance, Chen adds, not long after AWI began submit­ting a weekly report to the Executive Yuan on the deterioration of public order, the Executive Yuan began drafting a stiff revision of criminal penalties.

Chen thinks the number of think tanks will increase, but there is a limit on how many can operate effectively. "Think tanks demand a large supply of highly-educated and well-trained personnel," he says. "The educated populace in Taiwan isn't small, but the number who specialize in policy analysis is. And unlike our counterparts in Japan, think tanks here aren't able to make enough profit to support themselves. There just isn't the market demand."

But Taiwan's rapid-paced political and economic change may help the market grow in coming years. There are posi­tive indications of this already. "The government used to be very reluctant to listen to think tanks, but it's changing slowly," Chen says. "The traditional thinking that 'the higher one's position, the more learned he must be' is now obsolete. When people don't know, they should ask those who do—or who can find out."