China’s think tanks need to do more. Is stronger research and autonomy the answer?
In 2013, during a core decision-making meeting, Chinese President Xi Jinping used the term “think tank” for the first time as he laid out a case in which such intellectual groups would help advance a sound system of governance and policy consultation for Beijing.
Two years later, Beijing acted on that vision by publishing its first comprehensive document to promote the idea of “think tanks with Chinese characteristics”. Apart from helping with official decision-making, the document highlighted what would be another key feature of these domestic thought groups – instruments of soft power to promote China’s “international influence and discourse”.
The nationwide efforts seem to have paid off, according to analysts. In 2022, the China Think Tank Directory listed nearly 2,000 active organisations in the country, ranking China second in the world, after the United States. In the latest Global Go To Think Tank Report, China accounted for nearly 17 per cent of the of 11,175 internationally identified organisations in 2021.
Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.
But as Beijing seeks urgent economic reforms against the backdrop of a growing geopolitical rivalry between the two countries, several prominent Chinese scholars have said China’s think tanks need to do more.
Despite the rapid expansion and increasing global influence of China’s thought groups, the scholars have cautioned that they still fall short in terms of professionalism and academic achievements – deficiencies that could curb their influence in both domestic and international arenas.
Some experts have also urged the bodies to defend their independence while calling for more privately funded think tanks to diversify in public sectors, despite China’s shrinking space for discourse.
Zheng Yongnian, a scholar at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, who is also a Beijing policy adviser, told a panel last month that despite significant improvement over the past decade, China’s think tanks still lacked “originality” and had produced fewer “constructive comments” in recent years.
“The current situation of [Chinese] think tanks is that … we can apply the policies of the West or other places immediately, but there is less originality based on our own Chinese experience,” he said at a meeting organised by the Centre on Contemporary China and the World at the University of Hong Kong.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly stressed that think tank experts should play a larger role in policymaking, beyond simply supplying the government with intelligence. Photo: Xinhua alt=Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly stressed that think tank experts should play a larger role in policymaking, beyond simply supplying the government with intelligence. Photo: Xinhua>
Zhu Xufeng, dean of the school of public policy and management at Tsinghua University, warned that a lack of meaningful research would make it increasingly difficult to influence decision makers.
“Although China’s think tanks have developed in a relatively comprehensive manner, the general quality of their research still needs improvement,” he said.
“We have a lot of think tank research, but they have not had enough ability to influence decision makers,” the professor said in a speech to the HKU panel.
In 2013, as Xi emphasised their policy advisory features, China’s think tank establishment was initially expected to provide intelligence to the government.
Li Cheng, the founding director of the Centre on Contemporary China and the World at HKU, wrote in a 2022 report – “A Ladder to Power and Influence: China’s Official Think Tanks to Watch“ – that Xi’s clear preference for the participation of academics and technicians in policy discussions was a major factor driving their development.
“From Xi’s perspective, modern governance … requires special knowledge and expertise. China’s economic rise on the world stage, integration with global financial institutions, ambition to catch up to more advanced countries in science and technology … all require that think tank scholars play a larger role in policymaking.”
Zheng, from CUHK, said that solving the output deficit from China’s think tanks was a matter of division of labour.
“If we can develop think tanks based on the principle of the division of labour, we will all have a comparative advantage … Sometimes, when a research topic comes up, many think tanks will rush to it, but the actual content of the research is not enough,” he said.
Cui Hongjian, head of the department of European studies at the China Institute of International Studies – a leading Chinese think tank – said it was also crucial for think tanks to balance their research quality with communication ability to build influence.
“China’s think tanks need to fulfil many functions, including research, communication and influencing decision-making … However, some think tanks favour only one field and are weak in other areas,” he said.
“Chinese think tanks must improve in all three areas. If the research is solid enough, the policy influence will come naturally and can be disseminated,” he added.
Observers have warned that a continued lack of valuable output will not only diminish the influence of think tanks in Beijing, it could also reduce their impact on the global stage, especially compared with their American counterparts.
Wang Lili, an associate professor at Renmin University in Beijing, and a member of its think tank – the National Academy of Development and Strategy – told the HKU panel that “compared with top international think tanks, Chinese think tanks still lag in research on strategic and forward-looking issues”.
Da Wei, director of the Centre for International Security and Strategy (CISS), a think tank at Tsinghua University, said that compared with the US, China’s bodies of experts had yet to play significant roles in shaping Beijing’s international strategies.
“In the past decade, our think tanks have not succeeded in providing particularly important ideas. In comparison, [American] think tanks have played a very big role in adjusting Washington’s strategy towards China in the past 10 years,” he said during the HKU panel.
The role of think tanks in the global rivalry between China and the West, particularly in the realms of knowledge and research, has also drawn increasing attention from observers.
In 2015, the first government document advocating the establishment of think tanks stated that the groups should also play diplomatic roles in enhancing China’s “international influence and discourse”, in line with Xi’s overarching plan to promote China’s governance and “tell China’s story“.
Cui, from the China Institute of International Studies, said that amid the growing competition between China and the West, research output was still the most important way to grow the international influence of think tanks and further China’s soft power.
If Chinese think tanks could offer “better solutions” to the world – especially in the “humanities and social aspects” – their role could gain crucial advantages in countering big powers, he told the Post.
“If China puts forward an important point of view and a doctrine in the field of humanities and social sciences, it could make the West feel that China could be capable of improving the world. China’s intellectual community would then have a greater international presence, which should be the goal that China’s think tanks set for themselves in future foreign exchanges,” he said.
But according to some observers, gaining more presence on the international stage would depend on how much independence Chinese think tanks have – most of the major ones maintain close ties with the government and the Communist Party.
Under Xi, China’s intellectual sector has faced some of the strictest scrutiny since the country’s opening up. The 2015 document on think tanks underscored one basic principle above all others: adherence to the leadership of the Communist Party, the socialist system, and China’s constitution and laws.
But it may fuel backlash and suspicions in their Western peers.
In their report – “Whispering Advice, Roaring Praises: The Role of Chinese Think Tanks under Xi Jinping” – last May, authors Nis Gruenberg and Grzegorz Stec, two leading China analysts at Merics, warned that foreign scholars should be cautious about the narratives fashioned by Chinese think tanks.
“Intensifying political oversight at home means that think tankers are constrained by Beijing’s propaganda red lines, putting Chinese intellectuals and researchers in a tough spot,” they wrote.
“They are tasked to exert more influence; at the same time, they are being limited by growing narrative rigidity and red tape when engaging partners abroad,” the report said.
However, using a Western operating model for Chinese think tanks would not be an optimal solution. Some observers said that think tanks in the West, particularly in the United States, showed tendencies towards political division.
“Compared to think tanks in the US, the relationship between Chinese think tanks and the government is more stable and sustainable. In the past 20 years, think tanks in the United States have had major problems, and the polarisation of politics has affected the development of think tanks,” Tsinghua University’s Da told the HKU panel.
Some observers have suggested that privately owned think tanks could be a remedy for overseas scepticism.
In 2017, Beijing published an official document to promote privately funded think tanks, but years later, they are still excluded from the mainstream marketplace of ideas in China.
Li Wei, former director of the Development Research Centre of the State Council, said China had about 2,000 think tanks, 90 per cent of which were run by the party-state.
When China announced its first group of 25 high-level think tanks in 2015, all of them were state-affiliated.
Wang Huiyao, who founded the Centre for China and Globalisation, a non-governmental think tank, told the HKU panel that Beijing should continue to encourage privately funded think tanks to enhance the pluralism of intellectual debate in the country.
“Private think tanks will promote the better formation of China’s market of ideas and policy, which is very critical. Like our economy, it has to be diversified, it cannot be a single composition,” he said.
Cui, from the China Institute of International Studies, said that amid an intellectual decoupling between the US and China, “social think tanks” – private or non-government think tanks – would be less constrained, therefore helping to deepen exchanges.
“The development of social think tanks in China has filled some of the gaps in China’s intellectual landscape. Social think tanks have the flexibility and, in many cases, the ability to travel abroad without restrictions,” he said.
“In terms of foreign exchanges, social think tanks will have more advantages in the future.”
This article originally appeared in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the most authoritative voice reporting on China and Asia for more than a century. For more SCMP stories, please explore the SCMP app or visit the SCMP’s Facebook and Twitter pages. Copyright © 2025 South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2025. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
