Although The National School of Development (“NSD”) – as well as its predecessor the China Center for Economic Research – moved into the Langrun Gardens two years after establishment, people are used to calling it ‘Langrun Gardens’. This unimposing courtyard is located in the north-western corner of Peking University.
This is the place that, since the 1990s, has witnessed the growth of modern economic research and education from a fragmented to fully functioning system. It is also a template for cooperation between the government and academia, a window into the minds behind China’s economic growth and reform. Most importantly, is its value as a template for reforms of an academicinstitution in China throughout the ups and downs of the last 20 years.
In August 1994, after half a year in preparation, the China Center for Economic Research (CCER) was established. During its planning stage, which coincided with the Chinese government’s establishment of a market-oriented economy,all over China, those within and without the establishment were debating and putting into action this new system.
In its beginnings, the CCER had 6 professors, today known as “the 6 gentlemen entrepreneurs”. They all shared overseas study, having obtained their PhDs in Economic related fields prior to returning to China. In those days, for Chinese society which had only begun to experience the West, these overseas returnees were seen as representing advanced research and a bridge between the two cultures.
Another common factor amongst these six was that they all had significant experience in China prior to going abroad. Justin Lin and Zhou Qiren et. al had already had a large influence on reform in the 1980s, having worked at the State Council’s Rural Development Institute.
NSD Dean Yao Yang summarizes the spirit and origin of the NSD staff into two points: firstly, experience in the Rural Development Institute brings a “responsibility to the countryand study experience in the US brings a world-class economic methodology”. In combining the two, there is a fundamental consensus between this group, which is to use a standardized approach in the study and research of Chinese Economic issues in keeping with modern economic methodologies.
Against this backdrop, Peking University’s CCER was to introduce, systematically, a modern economic education system, modeled on the US way of operatingfrom its beginnings. Lu Feng tells South Reviews that today, the NSD’s quality of education, from a content and training perspective, is essentially level with many overseas academic institutions. The true difference is that, due to a limitation of resources, China has no way of offering small class sizes compared with institutions overseas.
The NSD has made a large investment into the area where education standards can be seen most clearly: the training of PhDs. Not only has it introduced the latest education systems from the US - requiring in the 1st year a thesis and exam before finding an academic supervisor, but also will bear the costs of students travelling to overseas institutions to undertake one year’s research with world-class economists.
What the NSD is particularly known for on the world stage is its government policy research. NSD professors are very highly regarded and have strong relationships with China’s high-level decision makers and in the past have been instrumental in various economic reforms. For example, Justin Lin has previously strongly advocated “new rural construction”, Zhou Qiren has directly driven telecommunications reform and Li Ling has initiated healthcare reform programs that have been widely discussed.
Over the past 20 years, China has had prolonged economic growth and has already become the world’s largest trading country and second largest economy. It is also during these 20 years that the teaching, theoretical research and policy application of modern economics have been ‘unified’ in China. Now, the use of modern economic approaches in Chineseorganizations is widespread. Many recognize much of such use today can be accredited to the former CCER.
“Special Economic Zones” and “the Hunan Army”
Compared with Beijing’s Unirule Institute of Economics and the Guanghua Management School, the last 20 years for the NSD have seemed tranquil and a smooth ride. In reality, it has faced many crises. Thanks to its unique structure, the nimbleness of its leaders and pro-government political leanings, the NSD has overcome these crises and has come out even stronger.
The NSD has been called Peking University’s “Special Zone”. From the beginning, it has had autonomy in its people, finances and management. The most recognized aspect is its faculty meeting style decision making process. Whether it is hiring new teachers, building a new research center, adjusting the curriculum, or seeking partnerships with outside parties, all major decisions are made in a faculty meeting with each member possessing one vote.
Professor Huang Yiping - who is responsible for the think-tank’s work - believed that efficiency was too low when he first arrived;”faculty meetings seemed endless”. However, he later realized this was an important process, particularly amongst a group of highly respected professionals, who each expected their ideas to be respected.
Financial guarantees is another fundamental issue. Talented economists have a high market price – without enough money is it hard to keep such talent. Today, the NSD’s main source of income comes from the EMBA and MBA programs. Huang Yiping
There are many schools of thought that make up the NSD. Justin Lin is of the “government faction”, Zhou Qiren is the “independent faction”, Li Ling who does healthcare research is of the left, whereas Liu Guo’en is also an “independent”. This atmosphere of differing views whilst working towards China’s growth is an aspect scholars of Langrun like to point out.
In order to realize this, Lu Feng believes that a new organization was needed – an individual overseas returnee coming back to an old system is not as strong as a group. After the success of such a group in the CCER, Zhang Wei hired a group of overseas returnees to the Guanghua School of Management. Following this, the same was done at the Tsinghua School of Management. These groups of professors were not only teaching classes but also affecting the management of these institutions and effecting innovation in the old system.
The NSD’s continued growth is linked with its good relations with the government. For many professors, the issue of having influence on decisions is important. According to them, the environment for pure theoretical research is much better overseas – returning to China is to influence the path of China’s growth. Therefore, cooperation and partnership with the government is essential.
NSD professor Wang Dingding, known for his critical nature, was generous in his praise,”The NSD’s system is the best I have seen in an academic institution”. As someone who hates the bureaucratization of universities, Langrun Gardens is, compared to competitors, a “straightforward place”; a true community of great minds.
Nonetheless, bureaucracy is ever-present and governs the operations of the institution. The CCER has always occupied an awkward position at Peking University. Each new Dean will feel it is “neither here nor there”. Langrun Gardens reviews professors and hired students under the name of Peking University but this whole process sits outside of the official system: it is neither a management school nor an economics school and therefore sits outside both the management and economic schools of Peking University.
Yao Yang likens Guanghua’s School of Management to one of the ‘Eight Banners’ whereas the CCER to ZengGuofan, founder of the ‘Hunan Army’, or Xiangjun. When there is a war, you are needed, but when it is peacetime, why would they keep you?
A New Direction
To be established and remain an independent school without the danger of being merged into another school was a major concern of the CCER’s management. It was in these circumstances that, in 2008, that the established brand of the CCER was changed to that of the National School of Development, or NSD, along with a readjustment of its research areas, teaching programs and development path. One of the key plans was to “create a teaching discipline that others could not copy”; from this its mission ‘to foster Chinese growth’ was born.
Firstly, the NSD’s PhD programs was set up, with a focus on practical rather than theoretical training, with classes to cover economics, management, politics, history and philosophy. The final degree conferring body is still under application with the State Council.
Yao Yang explained to this reporter that this required leaders with an all-round skillset, to have a deep understanding of human development and to understand how to negotiate, to lead and understand the statistics.
Yao Yang expects the future development of the NSD to model that of Harvard’s Kennedy School, to focus on Economics, but also to attract talent from government studies, social studies and law. In addition, it will attract foreign students and train talented individuals in China’s economic development, to reflect China’s ‘soft and hard’ power.
He excitedly names three foreign national leaders who have studied at Peking University; that they studied at Peking University is the most obvious reflection of China’s ‘soft and hard’ power.
In the eyes of many foreign observers, this original ‘Chinese Development’ discipline in the model of the Kennedy School is highly anticipated, but how different is it from the government’s management schools?
Yao Yang hopes that the NSD will continue on its path as a think-tank: as many of its scholars have strong relationships and have already had a strong influence on government policy, the NSD was even in its early stages a de facto think tank. He hopes that in the future it will be even more organized and will build an even stronger brand.
He believes that original spirit of the State Council’s Rural Development Institute has passed, the days of individuals such as Justin Lin and Zhou Qiren having direct participation in government decision making is something of the past. In the future it is more likely scholars will provide the government with consulting, with an aim no longer to change the world, but to research the world.
“Changing the world will be left to politicians.”
Source: South Reviews Author: Qin Ailing
http://www.nfcmag.com/article/4783.html
