Taiwan is widely regarded to be a vibrant democracy in East Asia. However, its think tank ecosystem still has room to grow, especially in terms of strengthening the foundations of democratic resilience.
At the Yushan Forum this year, several speakers, including James Gomez of the Asia Centre and Tristan Liu (呂曜志) of Taiwan Thinktank, said that Taiwan’s think tanks often maintain strong connections with the government, both financially and institutionally. This close relationship might contribute to relatively uniform policy discussions, and limit Taiwan’s flexibility and visibility in international policy communities.
While this arrangement reflects Taiwan’s historical and political context, it also underscores the importance of rethinking how think tanks operate in a democratic society.
Think tanks are not only providers of technical expertise. They help render public opinion more informed and professionally grounded. A robust think tank ecosystem contributes to public discourse, broadens the range of policy options and enhances transparency in governance. The institutional structure and developmental path of think tanks influence the overall quality of democratic governance, not just policy outcomes.
In Taiwan’s case, the need for strong, independent and globally connected think tanks is especially urgent. As authoritarian regimes increasingly engage in disinformation and historical revisionism, Taiwan must be prepared to defend its narratives with clarity and credibility.
For instance, during a May 8 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized the two countries’ shared stance against “neo-Nazism.” While Taiwan was not named directly, this rhetoric echoes the kind of ideological framing used to justify the invasion of Ukraine, and has appeared over the past few months in Chinese-language disinformation targeting Taiwan.
To strengthen Taiwan’s democratic resilience, the first imperative is to strengthen public recognition and the institutional role of think tanks. Compared with the US, home to one of the most mature think tank ecosystems, with more than 2,200 registered think tanks in 2020, Taiwan’s think tanks are not yet widely seen as central pillars of democratic life. Public awareness of their functions, such as providing expert knowledge to inform policy or amplifying diverse voices, is still relatively limited.
Policymaking remains highly centralized, and think tanks often play a supplementary, rather than formative, role in policy development. Under such conditions, cultivating a robust think tank ecosystem akin to that of the US, which is based on strong demand, is inherently challenging.
To address this, the government could engage more systematically with a wider range of think tanks, including those from civil society, to incorporate their insights into policymaking processes. At the same time, in today’s polarized society, where many commentators argue that the media is a key driver of division, it is also a timely opportunity to strengthen think tanks as trustworthy sources of public knowledge. By increasing their influence and visibility, think tanks can enhance public understanding of their roles and gradually build recognition of their importance in democratic governance.
Second, funding mechanisms and institutional capacity could be improved. As noted by the Taiwan Competitiveness Forum in 2017, unhealthy competition resulting from limited funding channels can compromise research independence. Rather than simply reducing state funding, Taiwan might diversify the types of government-commissioned projects available, making them more open.
Meanwhile, a fair and transparent evaluation system should also be developed to guide funding allocation, not only to reduce alignment incentives between think tanks and government, thereby enhancing their operational independence, but also to signal institutional quality to domestic and international stakeholders.
Third, the government could explore tax incentives, including deductible donations from individuals, or baseline funding to think tanks that meet transparency and performance standards.
It is essential to enhance collaboration among think tanks in democratic countries. While facing narrative challenges, think tanks can offer more flexible and credible platforms than official spokespeople. They could participate in international forums, publish in respected journals, engage foreign media and monitor cognitive operations. Moreover, it is essential to recognize that authoritarianism does not target Taiwan alone, but the broader rules-based international order. In this context, deepening international collaboration is not just desirable, but imperative.
As Taiwan considers the next phase of the New Southbound Policy, think tanks should jointly create strategic frameworks with regional counterparts. This means not only responding to external narratives, but shaping them, offering alternative visions rooted in democratic values and regional solidarity. Such cooperation would help safeguard the resilience of Taiwan and the region’s democratic institutions.
In sum, as global uncertainties intensify, the demand for analysis and recommendations across a wide range of domains, including international relations, defense, economic security and semiconductors, is expected to rise significantly. This trend would likely elevate the visibility and importance of think tanks. Seizing this moment to establish a comprehensive and healthy think tank ecosystem could bring substantial and lasting benefits not only to Taiwan’s democratic resilience, but also to a peaceful and prosperous Indo-Pacific region.
Kuo Ruei is a political worker with experience in international affairs.
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
RSS