Boyuan Foundation

Study of Contemporary China Issues:
Mission, Principles, and Methodology

1. I. The mission

   Boyuan Foundation is committed to a mission of research on contemporary China issues. It seeks to facilitate empirically based academic research that evaluate and explain changes in the Chinese political, economic, social and cultural institutions, as well as China’s international environment over the past three decades. Such systematic research, it is hoped, could provide insights for the future direction of China in the next three decades and the path to be chosen.

   Contemporary China Issues can be crystallized as the issue of Chinese social transformation. That is, the transformation of pre-modern (traditional) society to a modern society. Today, this transformation, started in late Qing Dynasty and covering a period of more than 100 years, is still an “unfinished project” (J. Habermas). To re-assess the goal of this social transformation today and to ensure an orderly transformation process is a matter concerning the fate and future of the Chinese nation. It is a reminding call to politicians, social elites and ordinary Chinese citizens of their social and historical duties.

   In the research of Contemporary China Issues, modernization is a commonly used key word. In this discourse, the core of contemporary China issues is viewed as a process towards economic modernization, with the main theme being the reform of the economic system and the pattern of sustainable economic growth. Political, social and cultural development as a whole is seen as the by-products of the economic development, and is determined by the latter.

   We use the term, modernity, instead of modernization, to represent the goal of China’s development. This is because the two terms have different implications, although they share a lot in meaning. Modernity refers to the core values of liberty, rationality and individual rights, advocated by European Enlightenment Movement, which have provided the basis for the modern civil order. This modern civil order is a comprehensive system of a free-market economy, a democratic political system and the nation-state. Modernization, in the current Chinese discourse, mainly refers to economic development and the improvement of the general welfare for the masses. It can also be understood as the strength of the nation and the prosperity of its people. The two terms, modernity and modernization, have been a two-melody duet (Li Zehou) throughout China’s social transformation over the past 100 years, and, because of a variety of subjective and objective reasons, the former has always been overshadowed by the latter.

   The concept of “scientific development approach” and the concept of “harmonious society” are major breakthroughs in thinking and policy making. We should try to understand these two ideas better and advocate them so that they could become commonly accepted ideas in China. “People as the starting point of consideration” should not be understood as a synonym for welfare of the people. It is foremost a consideration about the rights and liberty of the individuals, only upon which, a harmonious society can be built. A major policy must have an institutional basis; otherwise, it could become either some empty slogans or a tool for some interest group to obtain legitimacy (Weber).

2. II. Principles

   Boyuan Foundation believes in the sprit of science and advocates an academic culture of openness and tolerance.

   1.By scientific spirit, we mean what Chen Yinjue has stated, “Independence in sprit and freedom in ideas.” Confucius Culture did not make a distinction between scholars and officials, and a social group of independent and free scholars had never really existed in Chinese history. In the 1980’s, many scholars, especially elite scholars in economics, reached a consensus about China’s economic reform with the political elites. It was the time when many scholars became part of the system, and their research became policy-oriented. In recent years, many scholars have complained that they have been excluded from the system and the government does not consult them when making major policy decisions. It should be pointed out that 1980’s was a special period. In normal times, the academic community should be independent from the government, while the two maintain a healthy interactive relationship. Scholars should maintain their sense of social duty and a critical view; the government should follow a scientific and democratic decision making process and have a greater tolerance for diverse ideas.

   2.Openness and tolerance are what should be advocated for the culture of an academic community. Openness means the liberation of ideas and the elimination of the constraints from various ideologies and traditional views; that is, “One should not do only what he is told by his superior; one should not do only what is said in books; one should face the reality and act accordingly” (Chen Yun). Tolerance means that one should not be blinded by his own opinion, and should treat different opinions rationally. The research process is a process of leaning, communicating and comparing with others, and thinking. Only within a culture of openness and tolerance can we foster a scientific spirit.

   Boyuan Foundation is committed to building a platform for academic research and exchanges. It is hope that we could facilitate scholars to think through ideas and problems, establish theoretical frameworks, build broader consensus so that we could help speed up the process of Chinese social transformation.

3. III. Methodology

   The main methodological approach is a systematic (deductive) approach with an emphasis on empirical data.

   By systematic approach, we mean a deductive analytical framework. It includes identifying the research problem and goals, clarifying the initial state of the problem and constraining conditions; establishing hypothetical conditions, exploring factors that influence the research subject and the interaction among them, finding the best solution to the problem, and finally, making appropriate institutional arrangement. A systematic research is a deductive process with an internal consistency of logic.

   Empirical research attempts to find the patterns and regularities of a social phenomena by observing its conditions and changes in the real world (e.g. by conducting statistical analysis such as conducting a regression analysis on the data ). Unlike the deductive approach, empirical research does not need to establish hypothetical conditions. Therefore, its findings could be misleading because of misinformation or it could reveal the mistakes in the hypotheses and conclusions from a deductive research. Under such a situation, we can view an empirical research as a supplement or an amendment to a deductive research. If there are too many influencing factors, making it hard to distinguish them to make a selection among them, a theoretical framework cannot be established for a deductive research. Then, we’ll have to adopt an empirical research method. Here, an empirical research is a substitute for a deductive research. Whether as a supplement, amendment or a substitute, empirical research is gaining more and more recognition and attention in recent years as an important and indispensable research method.

   In terms of research methodology, we need to do away with some habitual and wrong ways of thinking.

   The first one is about “Determinism” and “the idea of one side dominance between two conflicting sides”. When two sides are in conflict, they are in a mutually dependent state. That is, they interact with one another and they depend on each other. A change in one side will inevitably affect the other side. It is only a temporary state under specific conditions when one side could dominate the situation and determine the action of the other side. The opposite could happen when conditions change. “Economic Determinism,” and “Technology Determinism” are typical examples of “Determinism.” It has affected not only academic research, but also general ways of thinking and policy making. The examples are such as using the concept of modernization to replace the concept of modernity, emphasizing natural sciences over humanities, and government making economic development as its top priority and central concern. All of these come from this “deterministic” way of thinking.

   “The idea of one side dominance between two conflicting sides” is also a form of “Determinism.” Under normal circumstances, the conditions of one thing are influenced and constraints by other things, and vice versa. It is a multi-interactive system. “The One Side Dominance” idea sees the relationship among things as a simple “causal chain,” in which one factor will always determine another. With this way of thinking, one’s view of the matter is always flawed; for example, one will tend to focus on one factor and ignore other factors; in the end, while trying to improve on one condition, one makes other conditions worse. Only when we establish an analytical framework and try to understand the interactive relationship among various factors, can we find the best solution or a solution that costs least.

   The second habitual way of thinking is “Ideal Type Worship.” The goal of our research should not be the establishment of an ideal type through making grand statements. Such ideal types do not exist in reality. We cannot simply adopt models from other countries either. This is because any system is rooted in its specific human and cultural conditions, and it may not survive, if we simply transplant it from one place to another. Even if it survives in its new environment, it may not work well. This is the lesson from the Chinese proverb about how tasty oranges from Southern China became tasteless after being moved to the soil of Northern China. The goal of our research should be to look for a system which is better than what we currently have in reality and which can replace the current one. In this sense, a better system is not one without flaws and without cost to be paid for. It is simply the only way out. The problem of over-heating and imbalance in China’ s economic development today needs to be addressed and adjusted. The macro-background of this problem is a combination of consumption demand caused by the economic globalization and the supply of labors under China’s urbanization. These conditions and trends will not disappear soon. It is unrealistic to try to solve the problem by increasing domestic consumption or by reducing exports, while ignoring the macro-background conditions mentioned above. A rational choice is not to seek, unrealistically, an ideal balanced situation, but to try to reduce the cost caused by the imbalance.

   Social transformation is a process of path-dependence and system innovation under the constraints of external environment and internal conditions. If we want to find out where China is going, we need to know where China came from. Research of China’s social transformation must have a firm footing in today’s China in order to reveal its political, economic, cultural institutions and the structure of its interest groups. Only then, can we find “the other side” and only then, can we find the path that connects the past with the future.