Bridging the Gap with Market-driven Knowledge: The Launching of Asia Policy

[  ] asia policy Bridging the Gap with Market-driven Knowledge: The Launching of Asia Policy Andrew D. Marble This Roundtable brings together a stimulating collection of essays from five experts—Kenneth Lieberthal, Emily Goldman, Robert Sutter, Ezra Vogel, and Celeste Wallander. Drawing on his or her own unique combination of policy and academic experience, each participant presents personal insights into how to integrate the fruits of academic research more effectively into the policymaking process. This essay summarizes the main findings offered up by the Roundtable panelists and draws implications for how Asia Policy can best help bridge the gap between the worlds of academia and policymaking . Challenges to Bridging the Gap One clear insight to emerge from the Roundtable is that academic research findings are seldom translated directly into policy action. The policymaking process is determined by the interplay of a wide array of factors—e.g., the numerous policy priorities that compete for a fixed number of policy resources , the logistics of coordinating different bureaucracies, the time pressure involved in responding to events, the impact of partisan and electoral politics, and the personalities of the individuals involved in the policymaking process. Information—be it academic or otherwise—is simply one of many determinants of policymaking. Moreover, what may appear as an opportunity for scholarly input may sometimes simply be efforts by policymakers to gather support for a predetermined policy direction, to collect sound bites for a speech, or to create the appearance of interest in soliciting policy advice. Despite limited opportunity for scholarly research findings to impact policy, there still exists a crucial need for such academic input. First, there are indeed many instances when policymakers require, and actively seek, scholarly advice on policy issues. As Kenneth Lieberthal and other participants in this Roundtable point out, policymakers are overloaded with information. What makes scholars so uniquely positioned to offer “value-added” analysis of the data is that they possess a wide array of key qualities: a broad and deep Andrew D. Marble (Ph.D., Brown University) is the Editor of Asia Policy and the general editor at The National Bureau of Asian Research. Before coming to NBR, he was the Editor of Issues & Studies: A Social Science Quarterly on China, Taiwan, and Asian Affairs. Submissions to the journal may be sent to . [  ] understanding not only of general political phenomena but also often of a specific region, country, or issue; methodological training that aids in extracting lessons from the exploration of ideas and historical events; the freedom to pursue ideas that might challenge the existing frameworks within which policymakers are compelled to work; and often the language training that can facilitate a more nuanced understanding of events. Despite the clear need for the input of academic research into policymaking , a host of factors intervene to impede efforts to bridge this gap. The Roundtable participants collectively touch upon many of these problems: the increasingly disciplinary-based demands of a career in academia, which act as strong disincentives for younger scholars to produce policy analysis that scholars interested in policy analysis can sometimes be unclear regarding what type of information policymakers need, how such information should be packaged, or when decisionmakers require such input that policymakers tend to be dismissive of the “academic dressing”— abstract theories, citations, and academic terminology—characteristic of much scholarly research the lack of venues and other opportunities for interaction between academics and policymakers. Asia Policy as Bridge-builder The goal then for Asia Policy is to take creative advantage of journal processes, content, and format to help overcome the above barriers to bridgebuilding . There are a number of strategies that the journal can utilize in order to act as a bridge for the fruitful exchange between academia and policymaking circles on policy issues related to the Asia-Pacific. This section will outline several of these strategies. Presenting select, yet unbiased, information • Ezra Vogel notes that information overload makes policymakers feel that they are “drinking from a fire hose.” The goal then for the journal is to become a more specialized “drinking fountain.” But how can the journal stake claim to being a reliable source for the most important information? The Platonic approach to enlightened thought is to listen...