tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/asian-century-white-paper-4154/articlesAsian Century White Paper – The Conversation2013-11-08T03:00:51Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/197692013-11-08T03:00:51Z2013-11-08T03:00:51ZAbbott government may have new rhetoric, but it’s still the ‘Asian century’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34515/original/9kt6v9rs-1383711411.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Tony Abbott's focus on Asia early in his term in office signifies that the so-called 'Asian century' - and Australia's role in it - is far from over.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Mast Irham</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is barely a decade old, but some pundits are already declaring the end of the “Asian century”. The Abbott government appeared ready to bury it after the <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/asian-century-plans-consigned-to-history/story-e6frfkp9-1226747866681">recent archiving</a> of the Gillard government’s much-touted <a href="http://www.asiaeducation.edu.au/verve/_resources/australia-in-the-asian-century-white-paper.pdf">Australia in the Asian Century</a> white paper. Even the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">internet version</a> has been laid to rest in the cyber cemetery of the National Library of Australia’s web archive. </p>
<p>Yet the Abbott government’s early activities in office suggest that the Asian century is far from being dead, buried and cremated. In fact, it is an increasingly important political reality.</p>
<h2>The early days of the Abbott government</h2>
<p>Abbott’s days as a greenhorn prime minister were spent on an <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbott-and-the-amazing-asian-adventure/story-e6frfkp9-1226738544507">“amazing Asian Adventure”</a> - first at the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/abbott-apec-final-day/5004268">APEC summit</a> in Jakarta and then the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-09/abbott-to-focus-on-regional-security-at-east-asia-summit/5011930">East Asia Summit</a> in Brunei. He spruiked foreign policy approaches which embraced a pivot to <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbotts-softly-softly-approach-to-asia-pays-off/story-e6frfkp9-1226738565297#">“Jakarta not Geneva”</a>, while <a href="http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2013/10/1/politics/abbott-softens-stance-indonesia">softening</a> his controversial anti-people smuggling campaign in a bid to strengthen the Australia-Indonesia relationship.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, foreign minister Julie Bishop has been a frequent flyer in the region, pursuing a sweeping southeast Asian agenda. This is while seeking a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/coalition-vows-ftas-with-china-korea-and-japan/story-e6frfkp9-1226731877708">trifecta of free trade agreements</a> with China, Japan and South Korea. In a <a href="http://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2013/jb_mr_130918.html">statement</a> released in advance of her swearing-in as foreign minister, Bishop is quoted as saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is vital that Australia’s foreign policy is positioned to take advantage of the global shift in economic power to Asia. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>While in opposition, Bishop was a vocal supporter of “Asia literacy” in the form of <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/asian-language-should-be-mandatory-for-australian-schoolchildren-julie-bishop-says/story-e6frfkvr-1226207249844">mandatory school language programs</a>. In office, she is pursuing the “grand initiative” of a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/julia-bishop-is-bent-on-broader-vistas-for-students/story-e6frfkp9-1226740473936">new Colombo Plan</a> in which Australian students’ endeavours into Asia will be so integral to their tertiary education experience as to be a “rite of passage”. </p>
<p>This appears less like evidence of an about-turn in government policy and more like new rhetoric for a similarly Asia-focused agenda. But why should we care about the government’s semantic machinations? </p>
<p>Geopolitical, cultural and financial shifts towards Asia will influence far more than Australia’s foreign policy. The Asian century also has widespread social, cultural and domestic policy implications, especially through its potential to influence intercultural relations, alter the context of public policy, and shape the way we address global challenges like climate change. </p>
<p>The globalising processes on the horizon for this century - whatever we deem to call it - will transform how we define public policy, how it is implemented and how it is managed.</p>
<h2>Asian century and public policy</h2>
<p>From <a href="http://thegovlab.org/the-21st-century-public-servant/">New York City</a> to <a href="http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/public-service-academy/themes/twentyfirst-century-public-servant.aspx">Birmingham</a> to <a href="http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/index.php/featured/innovation">Melbourne</a>, public servants and policy scholars are busy determining the skills and competencies vital to effective and efficient 21st century public service. Shortly before its demise, the previous government dedicated A$35 million to establishing a <a href="http://asialink.unimelb.edu.au/media/media_releases/National_Centre_for_Asia_Capability">National Centre for Asia Capability</a>, aimed at improving competencies for business and government throughout Australia. </p>
<p>Importantly, and as <a href="https://theconversation.com/looking-to-asia-to-reform-australias-public-service-10510">argued previously</a>, the capabilities and values which come to define the 21st century public servant must subvert the usual “West to the rest” model. Instead, Australian and other Western public administrations could benefit greatly from consideration and integration of select values and practices honed by Asian nations over centuries, not decades.</p>
<p>China’s original civil service examination, for example, dates back to <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/%7Eelman/documents/Civil%20Service%20Examinations.pdf">circa 600 AD</a>. This is not to suggest that the way to improve Australia’s future public administration is by encouraging public service hopefuls to sharpen their pencils and prepare their bluebooks. </p>
<p>Instead, it is an illustrative reminder of the depth and experience of public service culture in Asia. It is for this reason that the education of future public servants is beginning to integrate regional and global perspectives and non-Western approaches.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34674/original/36nsgtqj-1383810178.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Australia in the Asian Century white paper contains vital lessons for Australia’s public service, despite its consignment to the dustbin of political history.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At the same time, it is vital that Australia does more than simply replicate “the key lessons from Asia”. All public administration systems are products of their own particular history and tradition, and any good analyst knows that lessons cannot simply be transferred. Rather, they must be tested and adapted for a new context. This is what all successful public administration systems do constantly. In fact, it is one of the reasons that Australia’s public service is so highly regarded internationally. </p>
<p>Today, more evidence is available about the merits of different public service systems in Asia. More scholars are <a href="http://www.icpublicpolicy.org/IMG/pdf/panel_83_s3_sullivan_bice.pdf">writing about them</a> in mainstream journals and media, and more space is being created for these ideas in high-profile forums, including <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/eric_x_li_a_tale_of_two_political_systems.html">TED Talks</a>. </p>
<p>Such contributions offer some challenging perspectives on vital policy issues. These include the privileging of age and experience over youth and ideas, the valuing of collective interest over self interest, and the prioritisation of long-term planning over short-term satisfaction. </p>
<p>Getting beyond the rhetoric to the reality and exploring the contribution of these ideas and others to future public administration is critical to ongoing foreign and domestic policy success for Australia. Debates and discussions will further identify new opportunities for research and policy exchange about good public administration in a global context. </p>
<p>Clearly, the Asian century remains a critical concern for public administration, policy and governance. From recent government actions to professional development of Australia’s public servants, research agendas and the education of future public managers, Asia’s development endures as a central concern.</p>
<p>Whatever language you speak or choose, the Asian century is just beginning.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>The University of Melbourne’s School of Government will host the <a href="http://government.unimelb.edu.au/engage/conference-public-policy-in-the-asian-century">Public Policy in the Asian Century</a> conference on December 9-10.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/19769/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Helen Sullivan does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sara Bice does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It is barely a decade old, but some pundits are already declaring the end of the “Asian century”. The Abbott government appeared ready to bury it after the recent archiving of the Gillard government’s…Sara Bice, Research Fellow, Centre for Public Policy, The University of MelbourneHelen Sullivan, Director of the Melbourne School of Government, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/121262013-03-04T00:41:23Z2013-03-04T00:41:23ZGoing local in our relationship with Indonesia<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20842/original/c5jbyhhj-1362354828.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Indonesia and Australia ace many similar challenges, such as intense flooding.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Bagus Indahono</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Queensland Premier Campbell Newman does not often make it into the Indonesian press, but he did in reports on the <a href="http://www.afr.com/p/national/queensland_flood_crisis_state_of_Ag6IpcdF4qAuCJOAl1bDSN">Queensland floods</a>. These reports shared news space with coverage of the even more devastating <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/jakarta-flood-photos-indonesia_n_2534851.html">flooding</a> in Jakarta. Newman and the governor of the province of Jakarta, Joko Widodo – popularly known as Jokowi - have much in common.</p>
<p>They face enormous challenges in trying to manage the recovery of their regions from the flooding, and more importantly, trying to ensure that the impact of future flooding is mitigated, if not entirely eliminated. Newman’s experience as Brisbane Lord Mayor during the <a href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/weather/hope-anger-and-inquiry-a-week-after-the-disaster-20110121-19zx3.html">2011 floods</a> may give him particular insights into the problems Jokowi faces.</p>
<p>They also face the daunting challenge of electoral success: both were recently elected on platforms of shaking up a tired regional government. Citizens’ expectations of their administrations are high – perhaps unrealistically so. Newman has already had some of the gloss knocked off his administration, while this dubious pleasure still awaits Jokowi.</p>
<p>Consideration of the political relationship between Australia and Indonesia usually focuses on the national level of government. From an Australian perspective, the dominant issue at this level for some time has been asylum seekers. The problem here is what is of major interest to Australia is of relatively minor interest to Indonesia, as I have previously <a href="http://theconversation.com/not-our-problem-the-indonesian-perspective-on-asylum-seekers-8053">suggested</a>.</p>
<p>From an Indonesian perspective – there probably isn’t a dominant issue in terms of Australia. Concern is routinely expressed about Australian <a href="http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/australian-ministers-comments-on-papuan-independence-show-disconnect-down-under/542339">support</a> for the separatist movement in Papua. There is also the occasional mixture of amusement and bewilderment about the degree of inconsistency – not to say downright instability - in the federal government and its policies. But that’s about it. Australia simply doesn’t loom large on the national radar.</p>
<p>Recently two respected Indonesian journalists [urged](<a href="http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/11/14/ri-australia-ties-it-s-more-important-be-nice.html">http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/11/14/ri-australia-ties-it-s-more-important-be-nice.html</a> their fellow-citizens to “be nice to Australia, not for the sake of being nice, but for the sake of our national interests”. The phrase “whistling in the wind” comes to mind.</p>
<p>This focus on national politics is understandable, and perhaps necessary in terms of the formal relationship. But it is always going to be an imbalanced focus, more significant to Australia than to Indonesia. And the Australian public as a whole has shown a distinct disinterest in national political issues in Indonesia. The government’s <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/white-paper">Asian Century White Paper</a> can insist on the diplomatic and strategic importance of Australia to Indonesia all it likes, but Australians simply aren’t listening.</p>
<p>The White Paper is right, and efforts to stimulate such interest in national politics in Indonesia need to continue. But the focus on national politics obscures the fact that - for the majority of citizens of both countries - it is decisions taken at the regional and local levels of government which impact most directly on their lives: issues such as flood mitigation, education, work opportunities, health services. It might, therefore, be more useful to focus efforts more at trying to stimulate Australians’ interests in Indonesia at the local level, rather than the national.</p>
<p>Indonesia is still struggling with the effects of the massive wave of political decentralisation put in place following the downfall of the Suharto government, with its powerful centralising imperative. With a few exceptions - including foreign affairs, defence and religious affairs - regional and local governments now effectively control day-to-day politics in Indonesia.</p>
<p>By contrast, Australia has a long history of decentralisation, as a federation. The word “federal” is the F-word as far as Indonesian politics is concerned. But in many respects, Indonesia is moving towards a quasi-federal system of government. At this level, Australians and Indonesians have a lot they could talk about and experiences they could share - outside the more complex national political issues.</p>
<p>Yet we have seen relatively little activity at this level. Western Australia is perhaps the most advanced state in this regard, maintaining a very active and successful trade office in Jakarta. This is perhaps all the more surprising given that the state Premier, Colin Barnett, seems adamantly opposed to setting foot in the country.</p>
<p>But where is the local government and community involvement, in both countries, in the exchange of ideas and information on fire services, flood rescue, culturally inclusive education, sporting competitions, the management of regional newspapers and television stations?</p>
<p>State and local governments, and local community organisations, should be thinking about their own foreign policies - in the context of the Asian Century, and in particular in the context of relations with their counterparts in Indonesia.</p>
<p>National political issues remain important. Australians and Indonesians alike should remain interested in what happens in the Canberra-Jakarta relationship. But this should not be at the expense of activity at the regional and local levels.</p>
<p>Campbell Newman and Jokowi face many of the same challenges. When are they next scheduled to meet?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12126/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colin Brown does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Queensland Premier Campbell Newman does not often make it into the Indonesian press, but he did in reports on the Queensland floods. These reports shared news space with coverage of the even more devastating…Colin Brown, Adjunct Professor, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/111342012-12-11T19:14:34Z2012-12-11T19:14:34ZOpportunities abound for Australia in Taiwan<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/18318/original/9zszd6y2-1354595118.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">With a growing economy and closer links to China, Taiwan offers great potential for Australian trade and investment.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As noted by the Prime Minister’s White Paper on Australia in the Asian Century, managing the opportunities presented by the profound changes underway in the Asia‑Pacific is a major challenge for all regional economies.</p>
<p>A bilateral relationship that is deserving of further engagement is Australia’s economic relationship with Taiwan.</p>
<p>Taiwan is our sixth largest merchandise export market. Two-way bilateral trade between Australia and Taiwan was valued at <a href="http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/fs/taiw.pdf">A$13.3 billion</a> in 2011, with Australia primarily exporting commodity goods and importing telecommunications equipment.</p>
<p>Australia also received A$4.9 billion in Taiwanese investment last year, while investing A$3.7 billion in Taiwan.</p>
<p>This robust trade and investment relationship has been facilitated by mutual understandings achieved through annual bilateral economic consultations (BEC), a process which covers issues ranging from market access to agriculture and clean energy development. The <a href="http://www.atbc.asn.au/">Australia-Taiwan Business Council</a> plays an active role in promoting trade and investment between the two economies.</p>
<p>The BEC process represents a creative approach to engaging with Taiwan within the parameters of Australia’s <a href="http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/taiwan/taiwan_brief.html">“One China” policy</a>, which precludes formal state-to-state relationships with Taiwan. While arrangements under BEC are in good repair, it is timely to broaden our economic engagement with Taiwan. There are two reasons why this matters.</p>
<p>Firstly, Taiwan is a rapidly industrialising economy with a large and growing middle class. It is liberalising its economic structures to welcome more foreign investment as a driver of growth. This presents opportunities for Australian businesses to enhance commercial links with Taiwan through increased trade in goods and services and, greater investment flows in areas such as education, tourism, financial services and clean energy-related markets.</p>
<p>Secondly, the deepening of Taiwan’s relationship with China through the signing of the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11275274">Economic Framework Cooperation Agreement</a> (ECFA) in 2010 has opened doors for Taiwan to play a more influential role in shaping regional financial and commercial policies.</p>
<p>Under ECFA, barriers to investment across the Taiwan Straits are being liberalised. One notable measure, among others, includes the lifting of a previous ban on non‑Taiwanese investors from raising funds in Taiwan to invest in China. These policy reforms are aimed at developing the funds management industry in Taiwan and a deeper and more liquid financial sector.</p>
<p>The contemporary environment offers significant opportunities for Australian fund managers to not only invest in Taiwanese assets to diversify their portfolios, but to also enter the Taiwanese market as an investment gateway into China.</p>
<p>Australian fund managers, who operate the largest asset management industry in the Asia-Pacific and the fourth largest in the world, can also provide a unique value-add to regional clients by providing expert wealth management and investment banking advisory services. This will enable Australia to attract more portfolio investment from Taiwan.</p>
<p>However, these developments will not just happen in a vacuum. It will require the concerted effort of all stakeholders, from governments to private businesses to individual communities in Australia and Taiwan. Existing avenues of engagement between Taiwanese and Australian businesses, such as the Australia-Taiwan Business Council will be important.</p>
<p>Governments — the final arbiters of policymaking in the national interest — also have a special role to play. They have to demonstrate political leadership through appropriate policy support, which may vary in some cases from facilitating economic transactions and growth to removing or renewing policies that, in time, have become barriers to greater economic cooperation.</p>
<p>Governments will also need to harmonise policy and regulatory cooperation to meet the needs that businesses will require to excel in a region undergoing economic integration. </p>
<p><strong>Suggestions for policymakers</strong></p>
<p>Consideration should be given to the following proposals to enhance and deepen the partnership arrangements that exist between Australia and Taiwan.</p>
<p>Official and business discussions under the BEC should be widened to include education, financial services, tourism, ICT and intellectual property rights.</p>
<p>Transparency in official and business publications on existing bilateral arrangements should be improved to raise business confidence.</p>
<p>Ministers and officials in both economies could support a review of existing impediments to trade and investment flows, followed by action to remove them.</p>
<p>A cooperative relationship between Taiwanese economic policymaking institutions and the Australian Productivity Commission should be encouraged, with a view to establish an independent advisory body in Taiwan to promote structural reforms to enhance competition and productivity.</p>
<p>Peak Taiwanese and Australian university bodies could collaborate to establish and broaden delivery of tertiary educational services.</p>
<p>Commission a review to determine interest in establishing joint research groups, funded by the public and private sectors, to promote collaboration on leading research in IT and business technology, logistics and supply chains, and biochemistry.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/11134/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ken Waller is the Director of the Australian APEC Study Centre. He consults to the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office (TECO).</span></em></p>As noted by the Prime Minister’s White Paper on Australia in the Asian Century, managing the opportunities presented by the profound changes underway in the Asia‑Pacific is a major challenge for all regional…Ken Waller, Director, Australian APEC Study Centre, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105102012-11-23T00:54:08Z2012-11-23T00:54:08ZLooking to Asia to reform Australia’s public service<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17792/original/wjv66t65-1353302648.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The role of politicians and public servants are blurred in countries such as China, which announced its new leadership last week.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Adrian Bradshaw</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>What will the Asian Century mean for public administration in Australia? This probably isn’t the first question that occurs to people pondering the implications of shifting economic and political power from West to East. But it’s a more important question than it sounds.</p>
<p>That’s why the authors of the Asian Century White Paper have proposed that by 2025, a third of the senior leadership of the Australian Public Service will have deep knowledge of Asia.</p>
<p>Achieving this requires a new approach to the continuing professional development of public servants, including building in opportunities to study and work elsewhere in Asia as a matter of course. This is a significant practical and cultural challenge for a country more used to receiving study delegations from countries in Asia than sending them.</p>
<p>It also requires that we pay attention to the content of public education so that all potential public servants have a much better grounding in Asian language, histories and cultures.</p>
<p>But it doesn’t stop with language teaching. Deepening Australian public servants’ understanding of the traditions and practices that inform other nations’ systems of public administration could prove to be an important mechanism for what John Lenarcic <a href="http://theconversation.com/why-australia-needs-an-asian-century-institute-6217">calls</a> “learning to think in another culture”.</p>
<p>This in turn could lead to an exchange of ideas about the nature of public administration itself in Australia and beyond, how it is organised and the respective roles of politicians, public servants and citizens.</p>
<p>This idea might sound fanciful to hard-boiled public servants who have observed the almost ceaseless promotion of “<a href="http://epress.anu.edu.au/public_sector/mobile_devices/ch08s02.html">new public management</a>” strategies across public or civil service systems throughout the world. The ubiquity of new public management, which sees ministers as “customers” and citizens as “consumers” is partly a result of a particular economic orthodoxy. It continues to exert a powerful influence, even though many of its key tenets have fallen out of favour.</p>
<p>This approach is the source of considerable concern among some Asian scholars, who are frustrated with what they consider to be the perpetuation of Anglo-Saxon ideas and norms into Asian countries regardless of their unique cultural, political, and societal backgrounds.</p>
<p>This problem persists partly because so many Asian students continue to be educated in the West. This emphasises the salience of repeated calls for an alternative approach rooted in Asian philosophies and cultures.</p>
<p>While this concern is well founded there is evidence to suggest that public management is always tempered by context, wherever it is implemented. <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19460171.2011.628003#preview">My own research</a> across Europe, South America, Africa and Asia found considerable variation in public management determined by local contextual factors including long-standing public service traditions.</p>
<p>Confucianism is often cited as a philosophy that continues to be influential in parts of Asia. <a href="http://philpapers.org/rec/JINCEA">Research from Thailand</a> suggests that the deep-seated Confucian ethical values generated a particular hybrid system that remained largely intact despite the advent of a major program of reform. This echoes historians who argue that new ideas are always diffused through their interaction with established local cultures. </p>
<p>Cross-cultural analysis can also help. Daniel Bell’s recent contribution on <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-a-bell/political-meritocracy-china_b_1815245.html">political meritocracy in China</a> highlights a different understanding of the relationship between politicians and civil servants in that country. In contrast to the Westminster model, which privileges a clear distinction between the roles of politicians and civil servants, Bell suggests that in China the system of political meritocracy works to select both. The two are not distinguished in the same way, and in fact it is hard to do so, as officials have political power. Recent debates in Australia, Europe and the US have focused on the <a href="https://theconversation.com/dealing-with-ministerial-advisers-a-practical-guide-for-public-servants-10031">role of public servants</a> and the extent to which they should exercise political power.</p>
<p>Appeals to meritocracy or more accurately to political guardianship are also evident in public debate in Australia and beyond when discussing “what to do” about particularly challenging policy problems such as climate change or the decline in political party membership. These appeals have been strongly resisted by scholars and others who insist that what is required is a better democracy, with more engaged and informed citizens, rather than a thinner democracy run by an elite. The relationship between public administration and democracy is central to this discussion. It is here that more instructive insights may emerge from India, a complex democracy that has its own experience of how processes of “modernisation” may risk the loss of cultural identities.</p>
<p>The discussion of the relationship between democracy and public administration is an important reminder to not to romanticise Asian traditions. But it does suggest that the impact of the trends outlined in the Asian Century White Paper will be more significant than we appreciate. Public administration is as likely to be affected by the Asian Century as business and civil society, and it’s time we got prepared.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10510/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Helen Sullivan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What will the Asian Century mean for public administration in Australia? This probably isn’t the first question that occurs to people pondering the implications of shifting economic and political power…Helen Sullivan, Professor and DIrector of the Centre for Public Policy, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/107522012-11-18T19:20:49Z2012-11-18T19:20:49ZWithout business on side, the Asian Century White Paper just gets whiter<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17727/original/f34qhwmh-1353031321.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=32%2C44%2C1922%2C1110&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia needs to engage with Indonesia, but in the region there is the perception it makes mistakes.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The dust has settled on the Asian Century White Paper. It is time to reflect on the challenges the Australian government might have in getting the rest of the country to engage with Asia, in particular Indonesia. Australia has had an accidental Asian focus over the past few years. </p>
<p>First the pull through effect of the high growth Chinese economy on Australia’s coal and iron ore mining industries. Also the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/top-end-wins-24bn-gas-plant/story-e6frg9ef-1111117598497">Japanese gas supply project</a> in the north of Australia is at the beginning of the construction phase.</p>
<p>The relationship with China and Japan has two stages. First, investment and construction and second is long-term commodity supply. In the case of China, we are shifting out of the investment stage and into the supply stage. </p>
<p>This becomes the economically challenging period when Australia has the facilities and needs China to keep using them. The threat China could find other suppliers would mean Australia is left with large mining and port infrastructure without a market. Supply diplomacy will be a big issue over the next few decades. Our policy of not allowing Chinese firms to “lock into” Australia with some ownership might come back to bite.</p>
<p>The trade opportunities that exist in Indonesia are less clear than in the case of China and Japan. Indonesia is relatively resource rich, and therefore unlikely to depend on Australia for whatever Australian companies can dig up. The relationship will be based on bilateral trade. </p>
<p>Perhaps it could lead to a more predictable long-term political relationship. This raises the critical issue for the Australian Asian century plan, suggested in <a href="http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/10/30/white-paper-australia-asian-century-or-lost-asia.html">one story published</a> in Jakarta recently that: “with Australia, old habits die hard. Australia also has a track record of falling over itself in Asia”.</p>
<p>Australia businesses need to engage with Indonesia. Prime Minister Gillard has called for this at the release of the white paper. The truth is many Australian firms, even the very biggest, have overt or covert “do not buy Indonesian” policies effectively shutting the doors hard against Indonesian firms putting a business case. Long-term campaigns by environmental NGOs and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/live-cattle-ban-to-stay-20110607-1fr8b.html">media stories</a> about animal slaughter only add the rhetoric.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/11/14/ri-australia-ties-it-s-more-important-be-nice.html">Another story</a> in Jakarta last week acknowledges Australia’s difficulty in liking Indonesia because of the difficult historical events that have gone on between the two nations such as the Bali bombing and embassy attacks in Jakarta. </p>
<p>Many Australians tend to take a one-way view of these issues and not understanding the deeper detail. The point is to truly engage with Indonesia it needs commitment to action from the Australian business sector, without business it’s just a bit of very white paper.</p>
<p>Australia society has been intolerant of Indonesia for many years, despite such positive and supportive beginnings following World War 2. Indonesia is a nation new to democracy after 50 years of dictatorships following 350 years of brutal colonial rule by the Dutch who left it with almost no government institutions and processes. The nation has come out of a financial crisis a decade ago that all but completely destroyed the nation. Now Indonesia is a key actor on the world stage and a Mecca for international political leaders such is the nation’s strategic importance. </p>
<p>At a political level Australia has tried hard — Prime Minister Gillard is not the first national leader to want to charge into an Indonesian-Australian relationship. Paul Keating’s first overseas trip as Prime Minister was to Jakarta - his focus on Asia was legendary - but amounted to little perhaps because of the anchor formed by Australian business.</p>
<p>The key for the Gillard government to bring business along with them, otherwise this most recent Asian statement will wither on the vine along with the past attempts. Australian businesses need to understand that Indonesians are different to Australians in both their society and history for many reasons. </p>
<p>Perhaps it’s time to ask what is wrong with us, rather than what is wrong with them?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10752/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Phillip Lawrence is consults to a number of Indonesian organizations.
PhD Scholar Sydney University, Department of Government and International Relations:
Barriers and Incentives to the Ecological Modernization of the Indonesian Economy</span></em></p>The dust has settled on the Asian Century White Paper. It is time to reflect on the challenges the Australian government might have in getting the rest of the country to engage with Asia, in particular…Dr Phillip Lawrence, PhD Scholar, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/106512012-11-15T03:29:32Z2012-11-15T03:29:32ZCharting a sustainable future will be fraught with challenges in the Asian Century<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17576/original/fx6k28qw-1352849338.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia must resolve numerous social, economic and environmental obstacles if it wants to reap the benefits of the Asian Century. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Governments are forever immersed in the daily challenge of responding to what the former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan once knowingly described as “events.” It was he who coined the resounding phrase the “winds of change”. Governments become so embroiled in the details of policy, and the political in-fighting to secure their survival, they rarely have the opportunity to look over the horizon to see what may be heading our way.</p>
<p>Closely constrained as a minority government, employing the sterling services of Ken Henry, the Gillard government has had the courage and vision to focus — just for once — on what lies ahead for Australia. The global and economic shifts we face outlined in the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">White Paper</a> are truly astounding:</p>
<p>The Asian century is an Australian opportunity. As the global centre of gravity shifts to our region, the tyranny of distance is being replaced by the prospects of proximity.</p>
<p>The share of world output within 10,000 kilometres of Australia has more than doubled over the past 50 years to more than a third of global output today, and this share will rise to around half of global output in 2025.</p>
<p>If Asia’s development proceeds, the number of middle class consumers in the region will grow from around 500 million today to 3.2 billion by 2030. Nine out of ten new middle class consumers worldwide will be in the region.</p>
<p>While we may hope that successive governments will have the capacity to resource some of the immense initiatives that will be required to respond to this great opportunity, the key message of Julia Gillard in launching the report was that an effective response must be multi-dimensional and collective: “This is not just about the role of government but also about challenging business, unions, universities, civil society and the media to engage in the region… a coordinated effort from the entire community.”</p>
<p><strong>Economic growth</strong></p>
<p>The continued rapid economic growth of Asia is projected in the White Paper, with huge gains in productivity anticipated. (Presently, per capita productivity in China is only 20% that of the United States.) Effectively the Australian economy will be carried along in the slipstream of the advancing Asian economy, continuing Australia’s record of economic growth. This places Australia in the happy position of being an advanced industrial country with a consistent 20-year growth rate comfortably between the low rates of growth of the West, and the high growth rates of Asia.</p>
<p>However, the emphasis upon Australia’s economic contribution to Asia’s growth is forecasted in the White Paper to be dependent upon commodity exports. Mining exports are forecast to increase to 65% of the total by 2025; manufacturing will reduce from 30% of exports in 2015 to 15% by 2025; while services that compose 80% of the Australian economy will only rise from 8% of exports in 2015 to 10% in 2025.</p>
<p>While Australia’s career as the lucky country seems destined to continue, there are two deeply worrying aspects to this export profile. Firstly, why is Australia apparently trapped at the low value-added end of the international value chain? Secondly, what on earth is going to happen to global emissions and other pollution when another 3.2 billion people begin to consume like the middle classes of the West?</p>
<p>Fortunately the answer to both these dilemmas is the same: Australia must strive to use all of its skills, knowledge and ingenuity to make the Asian Century a sustainable century. Government, business, professions, and universities must endeavour to transform production processes, materials, technologies, products and consumption to achieve sustainability. This expertise in sustainability could be a key success factor in Australia’s engagement with the Asian century.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C0%2C2819%2C3501&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C0%2C2819%2C3501&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/17538/original/8w5m6mz4-1352766840.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Exporting sustainable technology: Energy Minister Martin Ferguson and Trina Solar vice president Dr Qiang Huang</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>The sustainability imperative</strong></p>
<p>In 1996, while teaching at the CEIBS Business School in Shanghai, I encountered a senior executive of General Motors. He told me that when he first arrived in China, looking out of his apartment window in Beijing in the morning, he saw thousands of cyclists briskly making their way to work. Now he looked out of his window and all he could see was traffic gridlock of cars and trucks barely moving at all. I asked him what he was presently working on, and he replied: “We are building the biggest car plant in China in Shanghai.”</p>
<p>China is now the world’s largest vehicle market with in excess of 30% annual growth. Despite this record growth in China’s automobile industry, as of 2010 average car ownership in China was just 38 cars per 1000 people, compared to 815 cars per 1000 people in the United States. If China reached the level of car ownership of the United States, there would be more cars in China than currently exist in the whole world.</p>
<p><strong>The future of urban transport in Asia?</strong></p>
<p>Highlighting the White Paper’s whitewash on sustainability, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/paper-a-whitewash-of-the-environment-20121104-28s3p.html#ixzz2BUZXCQeR">Ross Gittins focused on the significance of the figures buried in the report</a>: in the 19 years to 2009, Asia’s energy consumption more than doubled and its share of world energy consumption jumped from 25 to 38%. In 2009, fossil fuels accounted for about 82% of Asia’s energy mix. As a consequence Asia accounts for about 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions - up from 31 per cent in 2001. China recently overtook the US as the world’s largest emitter. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/31/world-carbon-dioxideemissions-country-data-co2">China now emits 7,711 million tons of carbon, with the United States following with 5,425 million tons</a>. The US is still number one in terms of per capita emissions among the big economies - with 18 tonnes emitted per person, while China, by contrast, emits under six tonnes per person, and India only 1.38 tonnes per person.</p>
<p>However, if the middle class of Asia grows at the rate projected in the White Paper, and consumes products made out of the same materials by the same technologies in the same way as the West, the planet’s environment will be in desperate trouble.</p>
<p>None of this is inevitable. China plans to extend the rail network by 24,900 miles to a total of 74,600 miles by 2020, offering a viable transport alternative. China has set targets for limiting greenhouse gas pollution and other dangerous emissions. China’s 12th Five Year Plan (2011-2015) calls for a 17% reduction in carbon intensity and a 10 % reduction in total NOx emissions. <a href="http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Documents/Final%20Draft%20Marshall%20Dong.pdf">Restructuring and reforming China’s transportation system</a> will make a significant contribution to these goals.</p>
<p>China once had the view that the primarily objective was to pursue Deng Xiaoping’s injunction to get rich, and they could clean up afterwards. With their water, air and environment facing serious threat, China now realises this is not a viable strategy. As Ross Garnaut argued in The Conversation last week serious improvements in energy efficiency are being made, along with transfer from fossil fuels to hydro, wind, nuclear, biomass and solar. A similar trajectory in the use of steel is awaited.</p>
<p><strong>Australia’s role in Asia’s sustainability</strong></p>
<p>Australia’s contribution to making Asia’s value chains sustainable, designing new sustainable products and services, and developing new business models could be critical. In infrastructure and property development Australian companies have world-class expertise in designing and building to the highest environmental standards. As the CSIRO’s <a href="http://www.csiro.au/news/newsletters/manufacturing_future/201006_ManFuture/htm/SustainableManufacturing.htm">Future of Manufacturing</a> initiative shows, we are becoming versed in flexible manufacturing with advanced materials. Australia’s advances in clean energy technologies and energy management systems will prove invaluable to Asia.</p>
<p>Australia’s lengthy experience in producing wholesome food will be appreciated throughout Asia. The expertise of the Australian finance sector in providing sustainable financial products and solutions in Asia will be valued. The educational role of Australia in providing world class opportunities for Asia will continue to grow. Finally there is the potential for a growing market for legal, professional and technical services as Asia strives to enhance the performance of its markets and institutions.</p>
<p>In helping to transform Asia, Australia can transform itself into an agile, flexible, knowledge-based economy in the coming century. But first, it requires a coherent and strategic policy framework that makes sense of the political, economic and social challenges ahead.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10651/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thomas Clarke does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Governments are forever immersed in the daily challenge of responding to what the former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan once knowingly described as “events.” It was he who coined the resounding…Thomas Clarke, Professor, Centre for Corporate Governance , University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105872012-11-14T04:16:06Z2012-11-14T04:16:06ZWhere is regional Australia in our Asian Century future?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17398/original/hhm4rtnc-1352348726.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mining is a major regional activity - yet as we ready ourselves for the Asian century, very little research has been undertaken on other growth opportunities in these areas.</span> </figcaption></figure><p>A stocktake of research conducted into regional development in Australia shows that we are failing to do sufficient research on opportunities for sustainable growth and prosperity in regional Australia.</p>
<p>Anyone even remotely engaged in the public discussion of regional issues will know that we often get bogged down in the challenges faced by areas outside of our major cities. It is surprising then to learn this pre-occupation with regional problems in the media also extends deeply into the research that we do in Australia.</p>
<p>As one of its first initiatives, the <a href="http://www.regionalaustralia.org.au">Regional Australia Institute</a> has conducted a comprehensive stocktake of research on regional development since 2000 which was launched last week in Wagga Wagga. The <a href="http://www.regionalaustralia.org.au/index.php/regional-knowledge-base">online database of regional research and data</a> we compiled and the associated <a href="http://www.regionalaustralia.org.au/index.php/rai-research-and-policy/research/stocktake-of-regional-research">analysis</a> of this work shows at best 10% of the research undertaken since 2000 is focused on opportunities for growth and development. There is also comparatively little work done to understand the inherent future potential of regions.</p>
<p>This research profile is in stark contrast to the projections for the future of the economy outlined in the recent Asian Century White Paper and the fact that it has been mining (an almost exclusively regional industry) that has driven our national economy in recent years. It also ignores the strong international <a href="http://www.oecd.org/site/govrdpc/50138839.pdf">evidence from the OECD</a> that demonstrates the role that a diversity of regions have played in the growth story of the developed world for the last 15 years.</p>
<p>Importantly, this approach does not reflect policy makers and regional leaders interest and thirst for knowledge about potential and future opportunities which was expressed to us during consultation for the project.</p>
<p>So how do we fix this?</p>
<p>Firstly, we need to rebalance the diverse research already underway on regional issues to ensure we are recognising and exploring the upsides of change.</p>
<p>The stocktake suggested some high level priorities for structuring new research on regional opportunity:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The resource sector and regional areas - what are the best ways for policy-makers to help extend and maximise the benefits (and minimise costs and disruption) for localised and sustainable community advantage?</p></li>
<li><p>The Asian Century and Australia’s regional areas - what does regional Australia need to do to position itself to be benefit from the expansion of the Asian economic size and increasing demand?</p></li>
<li><p>The major transformative opportunities for regional Australia - what are the lessons and ideas that the current generation of policy-makers need to understand and consider to help enhance confidence to plan future major transformative initiatives?</p></li>
<li><p>The National Broadband Network and regional Australia - What are the specific ways of best leveraging off the NBN to maximise its economic and social value in regional Australia?</p></li>
<li><p>Enhancing the productivity of regional areas - what are the specific opportunities for regional Australia to pursue productivity-enhancing initiatives? Does the answer lie in “soft” or “hard” investments?</p></li>
<li><p>Learning from Australia’s history of achieved potential - what is the recent history of realised potential in regional Australia? What tools will best assist policymakers to replicate these successes in their own localities?</p></li>
</ul>
<p>At the RAI we are thinking about work in each of these areas and how we can better define and understand ‘regional potential’ so that regions and governments can explore these issues in planning and policy making. We would encourage others establishing their research plans to also consider how their work can contribute to these priorities.</p>
<p>The key driver of change however will be the attitude and perspective we choose to adopt when thinking about regional Australia.</p>
<p>In looking to the future we can be confident that there will droughts, fires and floods; that exposure of regions to the vagaries of international markets will continue to drive rapid economic change; that our populations will age; and that our natural environments will remain at risk of decline and destruction.</p>
<p>But there will also be massive opportunities for regional Australia in the Asian Century – in resources, in agriculture and in services. These will be driven by the innate strength and innovation of regional businesses and communities. Associated with this will be new investment, new residents, new businesses and a better quality of life for people prepared to have a go in regional areas.</p>
<p>We certainly need to understand the challenges we face and how to respond to them, but we also need research that helps us to recognise and grasp these opportunities. We are by no means doing enough work on this at the moment.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10587/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Regional Australia Institute (RAI) is an independent policy think tank and research organisation
for regional Australia. It was established in 2011 with the support of the Australian Government.
RAI is governed by Board of eminent Australians including distinguished academics Professor Sandra Harding (Vice-Chancellor of James Cook University) and Professor Ngiare Brown (University of Sydney). All of our research is overseen by a Research Advisory Committee comprised of leading national and international academics with expertise in regional development.
</span></em></p>A stocktake of research conducted into regional development in Australia shows that we are failing to do sufficient research on opportunities for sustainable growth and prosperity in regional Australia…Jack Archer, General Manager - Research and Policy, Regional Australia InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/98822012-11-04T19:34:11Z2012-11-04T19:34:11ZWhy the US election matters for Australian higher education<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17162/original/n95f5ht9-1351740605.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C24%2C4071%2C2005&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">President Barack Obama addressing a large crowd at University of Wisconsin – could he or his competitor Mitt Romney change higher education in Australia?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Tannen Maury</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>US presidential elections generally have little direct impact on Australia. And broadly speaking, this campaign is shaping up to be no different. </p>
<p>Despite their ideological differences, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have adopted similar positions on major foreign policy questions especially in relation to our Asian region. And our two countries will remain close allies regardless of whoever wins the presidency.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, there’s something under the surface of this campaign that could have major ramifications for higher education, one of our most important sectors, and just as our universities were hoping to get back on their feet.</p>
<h2>Fierce competition</h2>
<p>Since 2009, Australian universities have been battered by the “perfect storm” — an intractably high Australian dollar, bad foreign press about the education experience in Australia, and tighter visa restrictions.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.immi.gov.au/students/_pdf/2011-knight-review.pdf">Knight Review released last year</a> held out much promise for the sector to regain some lost competitive advantage in the international student market, in large part through enhanced work options for foreign graduates. </p>
<p>These reforms seem to be working. Several universities have reported that the new policy settings have caused a small uptick in student enrolments from Asia.</p>
<p>But a new challenge is emerging. Obama and Romney each have plans to attract more highly skilled immigrants with the lure of American residency.</p>
<h2>Attractive offers</h2>
<p>According to the <a href="http://www.mittromney.com/issues/immigration">Romney campaign website</a>: “every foreign student who obtains an advanced degree in math, science, or engineering at a US university should be granted permanent residency”. These changes, a Romney campaign <a href="http://www.mittromney.com/sites/default/files/shared/HumanCapital.pdf">report</a> explains, would offer graduates “the certainty required to start businesses and drive American innovation”.</p>
<p>While Obama has made no similar policy pronouncements during this campaign, his intentions are clear. In January this year, the president favoured “stapling greencards to the diplomas of certain foreign-born graduates in science, technology, engineering and math fields”, as per a US federal government <a href="http://www.dhs.gov/news/2012/01/31/dhs-reforms-attract-and-retain-highly-skilled-immigrants">report</a>.</p>
<p>Whatever the outcome of the election, it seems likely that comprehensive immigration reform is on the agenda in the US.</p>
<p>This would be a smart win-win for America. The US would attract talented foreign students to its universities and encourage those already in the country to remain after graduation. These changes could be especially beneficial in helping create the advanced manufacturing jobs both candidates have talked so much about on the hustings. </p>
<p>Bringing in talented science and math graduates is a key foundational step in spurring the innovation that leads to job growth and wealth creation.</p>
<p>But America’s gain could come at Australia’s expense.</p>
<h2>Real implications</h2>
<p>Asian students are attracted by what US colleges offer; an outstanding education, safe residential communities, an extraordinary network of influential alumni and a degree from a university with a global brand. It’s the total package, and it’s seen as a higher quality education than that offered by Australian universities. Or indeed anywhere else.</p>
<p>And cash-strapped US universities know it. Last year, there was a 43% increase in new Chinese undergraduates on US campuses alone. The added drawcard of US residency for science, maths and engineering graduates could supercharge recruiting efforts of US universities in Asia.</p>
<p>The US also has tremendous capacity for growth. The American education sector is 15 times the size of Australia’s but less than 5% of students on campus currently come from overseas. This untapped potential could signal trouble on the horizon for Australia.</p>
<h2>A precious resource</h2>
<p>The recently released Asian Century <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/about">White Paper</a> makes clear just how critical international students are to Australia’s universities. </p>
<p>Roughly one in four students on Australian campuses come from Asia, making it the main revenue source of this $15 billion industry. And Australian residency is a leading reason why students come here for their education.</p>
<p>Of course, immigration and education is not a zero-sum game. But if these new policies in the US come into effect, it could result in many more quality foreign students choosing to enrol in American universities instead of coming to Australia.</p>
<p>However, there are even bigger 21st century shifts underway. The momentum of global job opportunities is decidedly moving towards Asia. As such, new residency pathways are likely to be less attractive to Asian students over the next decade or so if their future jobs are going to be back home. And the continued rise in quality of Asia’s universities means they, too, are a growing threat to Australian universities. </p>
<p>Indeed, the Asian Century white paper correctly recommends all Australian universities should have a greater “in-Asia” presence.</p>
<h2>Times of change</h2>
<p>The global financial crisis heralded the arrival of a new era for international higher education. It is an era defined as much by the rapid emergence of educational innovations — like multinational universities and Massive Open Online Courses “MOOCs” — as by the rapid and unpredictable dynamics of the global marketplace.</p>
<p>Australia still has significant leverage with Asian students. It remains a premium destination and was first-to-market in recruiting Asian students and developing excellent relationships across the region. Residency policy levers, therefore, have their place.</p>
<p>But the competitive advantage challenge now facing Australian universities is to build an educational experience that will continue to draw foreign students to Australia. This means ensuring our universities best prepare Asian students to succeed in the 21st century global job market.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9882/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sean Gallagher receives funding from NSW Government.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Freedman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>US presidential elections generally have little direct impact on Australia. And broadly speaking, this campaign is shaping up to be no different. Despite their ideological differences, Barack Obama and…Sean Gallagher, Chief Operating Officer, United States Studies Centre, University of SydneyLuke Freedman, US Election Analyst, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104742012-11-01T06:47:05Z2012-11-01T06:47:05ZRoss Garnaut: will the Asian Century reboot our debate on growth?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17176/original/vprdwg76-1351745333.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We've been told our incomes should grow in the Asian century; but first we need a "soft" landing from the heights of our resources boom and more sustainable ways of growing our economy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dmitri Ometsinsky/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australia in the Asian Century White Paper is the first large-scale official look in the 21st Century at economic change in Asia and how it affects Australian opportunities and challenges. It is ambitious as well as comprehensive.</p>
<p>Maybe it will reboot the Australian conversation about our country’s future. Many Australians — maybe all who are thoughtful about our country’s future - have been troubled by the raucous, ignorant noise that has crowded out the national policy discourse in recent years. The White Paper provides us with an opportunity to talk differently.</p>
<p>The White Paper’s story of past and future growth and structural change in Asia is brief. This is because the paper is mostly about Australia, rather than Asia. It happens that Australian opportunity will be shaped by developments in Asia.</p>
<p>But it does enough to set the scene. The growth projections seem about right for the region as a whole. I won’t quibble about the growth outlook for China, Japan and Korea. The projections might be slightly underdone for the countries that have been on a slower trajectory of economic growth and fertility decline, including India, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. More could have been said about some other large countries which may contribute considerably to expansion of Asian output to 2025, notably Vietnam and Bangladesh.</p>
<h2>Asian growth ascendancy - and the Australian experience</h2>
<p>It is worth reminding ourselves in some additional ways of how sharply the fortunes of developing Asia have diverged from those of the developed world over the first 11 years of the century. The real international value of output per person (current output converted into United States dollars and deflated by the United States Consumer Price Index) fell in Japan (minus 6%). It rose a little in the United States (plus 6%). In the major European States, real output per person grew, but by less than in similarly extended periods over the postwar period (France 49%, Germany 46%, the United Kingdom 18%).</p>
<p>By contrast, the international value of output per person increased over the first 11 years of the Century by 339% in China, 246% in Indonesia and 153% in India. The high-income developing countries of Asia fell into the range of the large European economies: Singapore 36% and Korea 51%.</p>
<p>In this League table, Australia looks nothing like other high-income countries: international value of output per person increased by 113%. </p>
<p>By 2011, the international value of output per person in Australia stands one quarter above the United States, one third above Japan, and almost one half above the large Europeans.</p>
<p>Only small countries with exceptional endowments had higher per capita international value of output per person than Australia: Luxembourg, Kuwait, Norway, Qatar, Switzerland and Macao.</p>
<p>The general story of divergence between developed country and both Asian developing country and Australian experience survives refocusing on national income rather than domestic product. The increase in Australian per capita income in real international value was a little lower, at 108% between 2000 and 2011. The fall in Japan’s was smaller (minus 1%). The differences reflect incomes paid abroad from Australia and from abroad to Japan.</p>
<h2>Japanese story</h2>
<p>Japan’s income per work-age person actually rose a little (7%) over the first 11 years of the century, a little more than United States income per work-age person (6%). The difference reflects the ageing of the Japanese population. The proportion of the population in the 15-64 years age group that is usually considered to cover the working ages fell from 68.2% in 2000 to 63.3% in 2011. </p>
<p>The United States ratio of people aged 15 to 64 to total population remained fairly steady. The United States and Japanese economies performed similarly in output and income per work-age person, and less strongly than other high-income countries.</p>
<p>Some observers see Japan’s economic stagnation as a failure of the Japanese economy and polity. Many Japanese do not feel that their country is in crisis. Unemployment is low. Income is more equitably distributed than in the United States, although some Japanese are disturbed by increasing disparities. Health services are excellent by global standards and longevity incomparably high. Japanese enjoy high and subtle literacy and good education, and a rich cultural life. There is high degree private financial and personal security and incomparable public security — natural disasters aside. </p>
<p>To be sure, the ageing of the population slows national economic growth and reduces national strategic weight, and a more dynamic polity would remove some longstanding imperfections. But if Japan exemplifies the end point of modern economic growth, then modern economic growth is no bad thing.</p>
<p>Since the White Paper emphasises mean output, I should draw attention to a weakness in that measure of an average before we leave the comparative statistics. The mean can be held up by increases in incomes to a small number of high income people, so that it may say little about the circumstances of most people. While mean real incomes rose in the United States by about 7% between 2000 and 2011, the median income fell by 9%. The difference between changes in the mean and the median income do not seem to have been as large in other developed countries.</p>
<h2>Missed risks around the impact of climate change</h2>
<p>The White Paper mentions a couple of risks to growth in the large Asian developing countries, including the impact of climate change, but doesn’t say much about them. My list of risks includes increasing costs of adapting to the inevitable climate change which would accompany even successful global mitigation in pursuit of the international community’s <a href="http://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/2009/Meeting-the-2-degree-target.-From-climate-objective-to-emission-reduction-measures">2 degree target</a> objective. It includes the possibility of irruptions of military activity. It includes policy paralysis as a result of political tensions over policies that are necessary to sustain growth.</p>
<p>We see manifestations of each of these risks now in Asia. The costs of adapting to climate change are already emerging but, if the mainstream science is broadly right the consequences of substantial failure of global mitigation would be much greater later in the Asian century than in the period to 2025 that is the main focus of the White Paper.</p>
<p>The security risks are greatest in South Asia, where Australia has limited influence on these matters. The Paper contributes positively by declining the opportunity to repeat the naive and non-strategic talk about military conflict with China that have emanated from official sources in recent years. We have seen political tensions having negative effects on growth policy in each of the three large Asian countries this year, and they could increase in any of them, but the odds favour the avoidance of major fractures in the political fabric.</p>
<h2>Structural change and the rise of the Asian middle class</h2>
<p>The Paper doesn’t say much at all about the large structural changes that are now taking place in Northeast Asia in particular: the demographic change that accompanies continuing low fertility; (it discusses the “demographic dividend” of early Asian development but not the structural implications of the demographic implosion that is now apparent in the more advanced economies including China); the reorientation of policy towards meeting domestic demand including consumer requirements; and the higher priority that is now being given to environmental amenity, local and global, and more generally to the accompaniments of secure and prosperous human civilisation.</p>
<p>The Paper correctly draws the most important implication for Australia from the structural change in Asia: the increase in importance of goods and services demanded in much larger volumes by a rapidly expanding “middle class” in the high-income emerging economies of Asia. Less is said about the other side of this coin to this helpful structural change: the decline in the rate of expansion of opportunity for increased exports at high prices of the staples of the resources boom of the early 21st century, iron ore, thermal coal and metallurgical coal.</p>
<p>There has been much recent Australian talk of a slowing of Asian growth. Slowing Asian growth has been much less important to Australia’s immediate prospects than change in the structure of China’s growth. I have discussed the structural change elsewhere. It involves increased focus of demand on consumption and less on investment and exports, a higher priority for services including public health and education, and the elevation of the priority of local and global environmental amenity.</p>
<p>It happens that the structural change has its most severe effect on the three commodities which have been at the centre of the Australian resources boom of the early twenty first century: iron ore, metallurgical coal and thermal coal.</p>
<p>I drew attention in my <a href="http://www.uq.edu.au/events/event_view.php?event_id=8706">Colin Clark lecture</a> at the University of Queensland last month to the awful reality that parts of corporate Australia had wasted shareholders’ funds by underestimating the seriousness of Chinese commitments to reduce the emissions intensity of economic growth. This had led to wasteful over-investment in thermal coal mining and exporting capacity. Investment decisions had been based on the premise that the extraordinarily rapid growth in Chinese thermal coal use and imports of the immediately preceding years would continue.</p>
<p>New data releases have confirmed the perspective presented in the Clark Lecture. Reductions in energy use per unit of output and reductions in the emissions intensity of Chinese electricity generation have been exceeding the ambitious targets of the twelfth five year plan 2011-15. Coal-fired electricity production in August was more than 7% lower than the corresponding month of 2011. </p>
<p>Increased energy efficiency has been accompanied by rapid expansion of generation from all the low-emissions alternatives to coal: especially hydro, but also, wind, nuclear, biomass and solar. Coal’s share of energy production was down from 85% in February to 73% in August. Naturally the impact on demand is greatest for coal imports.</p>
<p>The change in the trajectory of opportunity is not quite as fundamental for steel-making raw materials. For iron ore, however, we have to contend with huge expansion of supply capacity around the world, some of it encouraged by misguided Australian restriction of Chinese direct investment in this country. The optimists of the early 21st century resources boom have been and are likely to be disappointed by volume and price. Of course, price and volume interact with each other: price will have to remain sufficiently low to discourage enough production to equilibrate supply with constrained demand.</p>
<p>The White Paper saves its credibility on projections of demand for coal and iron ore by providing medium, high and low projections of export volumes drawn from the Bureau of Resource and Energy Economics. The credibility is protected by the presence of the low projections.</p>
<p>The paper correctly draws attention to expanding markets for high value agricultural produce. Here the renewed emphasis on multilateral trade liberalisation is appropriate. Australian agriculture has been damaged by the proliferation of discriminatory arrangements for agricultural trade in Asia in the early 21st century, after the breaching of the earlier Asian commitment to non-discriminatory multilateral trade.</p>
<p>The White Paper correctly observes that some major Australian commodity exports will benefit exceptionally from rising Asian prosperity, gold amongst them. It notes that rare earths and some other minerals in which Australia is well-endowed with resources will benefit from expansion of renewable energy and electrification of transport within an effective global climate change mitigation effort.</p>
<h2>Which natural resources will benefit?</h2>
<p>The White Paper could usefully have drawn a stronger distinction between minerals and energy resources that will be negatively affected by structural change in Asia in the period ahead, and those that will not, or which may benefit from the change. Uranium will benefit from Chinese and Indian expansion of low-emissions nuclear energy generation.</p>
<p>Natural gas will for a time be the largest beneficiary of Asian intentions to change the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and economic growth. The uncertainty about Australia’s terms of trade in the 2020s has less to do with the diminished prospects for the staples of the early twenty first century boom–thermal and metallurgical coal and iron ore—than with the extent to which sources of lower-emissions energy will be boosted by structural change in Asia.</p>
<h2>Raising incomes sustainably</h2>
<p>So the White Paper scene is set for discussion of how Australia makes the most of a rapidly expanding Asian economy, whose import demand is focused increasingly on high-value goods and services. The points are well made about the more demanding requirements of opportunities for export of high-skill services and manufactured goods. There is no doubting the extent of the opportunities. Our success will depend on the skills of our people, and our capacity for innovation and continuing structural change. This will require a reformed education system, much better transport and communications and energy infrastructure, a better tax system.</p>
<p>This is where the White Paper should be grabbing our attention.</p>
<p>It sets challenging goals — perhaps the most challenging that an Australian Government has ever set - of raising per capita real incomes from $62,000 now to $73,000 by 2025. The Paper says that this would place us in the top 10 countries in output per person in purchasing parity terms.</p>
<p>It is noted that Australia’s terms of trade will fall somewhat by 2025 (and I expect them to fall further than the paper anticipates) and that ageing will slow growth in economic output. It notes that this increases the challenge of meeting the target.</p>
<p>Before we reject these goals as unattainable, let us consider what would be necessary to attain them, and whether their attainment would be worth the necessary disruption of temporary contemporary comforts. </p>
<p>Increasing average real incomes by 17% or 18% over 13 years may not sound that much. After all, we have seen that mean Australian real incomes rose by 108% from 2000 to 2011—through the tech-wreck recession in the United States and then the Great Crash of 2008 and its recessionary aftermath in the North Atlantic. What’s the big deal?</p>
<p>The hard bit is our starting point. Our growth in average incomes over the past 11 years has been driven by two exceptional and unsustainable economic expansions, following each other with a neatness of fit that goes well beyond ordinary good fortune. By the early years of the 21st century the strong productivity growth of the 1990s had run its course. </p>
<p>Strong growth in economic output and incomes was sustained by the largest consumption and housing boom that we have ever known, funded overwhelmingly by overseas wholesale borrowing by our banks. We enjoyed much of the pattern and extent of growth that is now recognised as having taken Spain and Ireland and the United Kingdom and the United States into a new era of slow growth, high unemployment and social tension. </p>
<p>We did some things better than Spain and our fellows of the Anglosphere. We did not go so far in the removal of official regulation of the financial sector. Our authorities began to impose tighter prudential constraints before the boomconditions had reached their natural apogee.</p>
<p>There is no doubting the contribution that economic reform over a quarter century. But for all that, the early pulling back from the consumption and housing boom was possible without recessionary consequences only because of the scale and timing of the China resources boom, with rising demand for thermal coal and steel-making raw materials at its centre.</p>
<p>The high incomes and expenditure after two successive booms of historic proportions define the starting point proposed for the goals on increases in output and incomes.</p>
<h2>An economic “soft landing”</h2>
<p>The first challenge is to come down from our hump in incomes and expenditure without precipitating recession and unemployment that will make every long-term goal more difficult to reach.</p>
<p>An Australian “soft landing” will require effective action on many fronts — all of them canvassed as being necessary from Australia doing well in the Asian Century. And all of these things are worth doing: maintenance of the disciplined fiscal framework within which we have been working since the stimulus in response to the Great Crash of 2008; radical lifting of education performance at schools and universities—in general and in relation to understanding Asia; providing transport and communications infrastructure in radically different ways; reforming the tax system for greater efficiency while maintaining and probably increasing the revenue yield; and more generally building a high-skill economy that responds quickly and flexibly to myriad new opportunities in Asia.</p>
<p>Following an Australian “soft landing” with a sustainable return to incomes growth is possible only if we remove many barriers to economic efficiency that have previously been too hard to confront. It requires us to face up to reform of Commonwealth-State fiscal relations, because the education and infrastructure problems will not be overcome unless we do. It means many hard things.</p>
<p>The best thing about the White Paper is that it could provide us with a framework for breaking away from the <a href="http://www.rossgarnaut.com.au/Documents/Breaking%20the%20Australian%20Complacency%20of%20the%2021st%20Century%202005.pdf">Great Australian Complacency of the Early Twenty First Century</a>. It may make it possible for mean Australian incomes to be 17% or 18% higher in 2025 than they are today.</p>
<p>But in the meantime and for quite a while, we have to hold our expenditures within the diminished constraints imposed by the end of the two great booms, and the structural change in Chinese economic growth. That doesn’t mean not doing any new things; it does mean not doing new things without cutting out old ones of lower priority. That won’t be easy after the doubling of average real incomes over the past 11 years. Our history informs us that it won’t be possible except in a context of shared sacrifice.</p>
<p>But it will be worth the effort. This is the next step towards making the most of the immense opportunities for Australia in the Asian century.</p>
<p>It will be time to think about spending increased incomes from successful reform to hitch a ride on the Asian century after we have earned them and they are in the bank.</p>
<p><em>Ross Garnaut is the author of the 1989 report, <a href="http://www.rossgarnaut.com.au/Papers.html">Australia and the Northeast Asian Ascendancy</a>. He delivered this speech at the <a href="http://melbourneinstitute.com/miaesr/events/conferences/Outlook_2012/conference_outlook_2012_default.html">Securing the Future 2012 Economic and Social Outlook Conference</a>, held at the University of Melbourne.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10474/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>I chair the Board of mining company that is owned by a charitable trust, Papua New Guinea Sustainable Development Limited, but I do not see any conflict between that role and the authorship of this article. My superannuation fund owns shares in a number of countries that export goods and services to Asia, but I do not see how this creates a conflict of interest with authorship of this article. </span></em></p>The Australia in the Asian Century White Paper is the first large-scale official look in the 21st Century at economic change in Asia and how it affects Australian opportunities and challenges. It is ambitious…Ross Garnaut, Vice-Chancellor's Fellow, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104552012-11-01T05:10:32Z2012-11-01T05:10:32ZAsian century goal relies on unjust rankings for universities<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17129/original/wg5wb2dm-1351659183.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4368%2C2641&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Older universities are at a clear advantage in certain rankings – Monash University's Vice-Chancellor Ed Byrne explains why.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">University image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Asian century white paper – <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/about">released this week</a> – presents a clear vision for the role of Australian universities in building links with Asia. </p>
<p>To underscore this, the government announced a new target to have ten Australian universities among the top 100 in the world by 2025. But instead of using a composite or average of all the university ranking measures, the paper suggests just one – the Shanghai Jiao Tong rankings.</p>
<p>But the Jiao Tong, also known as the <a href="http://www.arwu.org/">Academic Ranking of World Universities</a> (ARWU), has flaws and should not be relied upon as the sole measure for Australian universities.</p>
<h2>Reliable rankings?</h2>
<p>Ranking universities is notoriously difficult and many use different criteria to assess research output and quality. Around 70% of the evaluation in the ARWU rankings is robust, but the remaining 30% is based solely on the number of Fields and Nobel Prize winners. </p>
<p>On this criteria, younger universities can’t compete – they tend to have fewer prize-winners and are put at a real disadvantage. They are effectively judged on only .7 of the total score. </p>
<p>With so many young institutions in Australia, the government’s target for Australian universities using just ARWU is almost impossible.</p>
<h2>Why younger universities miss out</h2>
<p>There are several reasons why younger universities are less likely to have Nobel Prize winners. </p>
<p>First, the work that leads to these awards is often done decades before the prize is received. This is because it usually takes that long for the significance of the work to become clear. For example, one of the recipients of this year’s Nobel Prize in Medicine, John Gurdon, was recognised for a discovery he made in 1962.</p>
<p>Second, credence is only given to the graduating institution and the current institution. The connection between the site of one’s original graduation and the work that earns a Nobel Prize is often tenuous – the work is usually done quite some time afterwards, typically after much post-doctoral experience and a series of academic positions in a range of institutions.</p>
<p>Third, a maximum of three scientists can receive the awards, but often many more than three people are involved in the discovery. In great discoveries one typically stands on the shoulders of other people - some giants and some not. An <em>ad hoc</em> committee’s determination of who the three most significant contributors were may be somewhat arbitrary.</p>
<p>Ultimately the committee’s decision is also subjective. When a committee distinguishes one achievement as standing head and shoulders above others, it necessarily calls upon personal opinion as much as scientific data. This is obviously true for the literature prize but just as true in the sciences. </p>
<p>It’s also true that the Nobel Laureate may have a relatively weak link with the university to which they are attributed. Often the work is done in an affiliated institution, such as a medical research institution. The scientist may have little contact across the university or with teaching or students.</p>
<p>Finally, the inclusion of Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals is to some extent double dipping. Scientists’ output is already recognised in rankings scales through high-impact, high-citation papers and that indeed is how they should be judged.</p>
<h2>Research favouritism</h2>
<p>The use of measures such as a Nobel Prize favours older, better-established institutions that go back decades. It is very hard for younger institutions, even those that are breaking through very rapidly to great excellence, to have the same opportunities for Nobels.</p>
<p>The ARWU rankings put far too much emphasis on this single award. There are a large number of awards in academia and science, some of which have great prestige in themselves.</p>
<p>Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are lagging indicators. At a time of such rapid change in
human knowledge and science it is a major flaw to use a university ranking system that
places such weight from measures from the past.</p>
<p>Of course, those who get Nobel Prizes fully deserve them but there are often many other candidates who could have been considered with equal validity.</p>
<p>We are a young country with young institutions – getting ten Australian Universities into the top 100 in the ARWU will be difficult. The government needs to consider a broader based assessment of university excellence, not just one problematic measure.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10455/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ed Byrne is Vice Chancellor of Monash University. He has received a wide range of funding over his career.</span></em></p>The Asian century white paper – released this week – presents a clear vision for the role of Australian universities in building links with Asia. To underscore this, the government announced a new target…Ed Byrne, Vice Chancellor, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104272012-10-31T23:20:57Z2012-10-31T23:20:57ZAcross the curriculum: access to Asian languages isn’t everything<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17109/original/sxrtf494-1351646056.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4288%2C2708&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Asian languages are important, but they should be one part of a greater focus on Asia in the curriculum.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Asian image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Despite the breadth of issues in the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/about">Australia in the Asian Century White Paper</a> released this week, so far the debate has focused largely on language learning in schools. With fewer and fewer students taking up Asian languages at all levels of education this is an important issue. </p>
<p>But there are big questions around whether this focus on access to Asian languages is all that’s needed. And how, in the first place, we can convince young Australians to learn an Asian language. After all, just because school children have access to Asian languages (<a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-depth/online-no-substitute-for-teachers/story-fng5k1ek-1226505648897">via the NBN</a>) doesn’t mean they will sign up for them. </p>
<p>The key is to think broadly about teaching both Asian studies and Asian languages at the same time.</p>
<h2>Wider focus</h2>
<p>First, let’s look at why the focus can’t all be about access to Asian languages. The new, national curriculum has a cross-curriculum priority called “Asia and Australia’s Engagement with Asia”. </p>
<p>This important statement means teachers should prioritise Asian case studies and examples when developing classroom content. But how this translates into the practical application in schools is important. </p>
<p>There is a concern that principals may guide teachers to think that given the Asian language priority, there’s no need to worry about teaching Asian studies in the rest of the curriculum. But this undermines the aim of the new national curriculum and could work against language learning in the long-term.</p>
<p>If we have good Asian studies examples, students will see the benefit of learning Asian languages as part of their education.
Placing Asian case studies in history, geography, even maths, will encourage students to see the importance of Asia and could help increase demand for Asian language learning later on.</p>
<p>This cross-curriculum priority cannot just be words on a page. It will need to fund good programs to encourage teachers to study the dynamic and evolving nature of Asian society, culture and politics.</p>
<h2>Asian literacy</h2>
<p>So we need a dual focus here, to encourage an understanding of Asia as well as its languages. But that doesn’t mean, like some have suggested that Asian languages aren’t crucial, or that they <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/lost-in-translation--why-gillards-plan-wont-work-20121030-28hs3.html">should remain in the too hard basket</a>. </p>
<p>It can be hard to explain the importance of being able to communicate in another language. More intelligent, eloquent and worldly people than me have tried and failed, but here’s my attempt.</p>
<p>It is a bit like explaining to someone who can’t swim, why they should learn to. The prospect is a bit daunting, particularly if they haven’t learnt as a child. And barring an emergency, if you try hard enough, you can get by on this earth without ever needing to jump in the ocean or swim in a lake. Swimming is also taught at school, despite the fact we are not all going to be the next Ian Thorpe or Stephanie Rice.</p>
<p>Similarly, most of us aren’t going to end up as expert Indonesian linguists or completely fluent in Mandarin. You can avoid travelling overseas to non-English speaking countries, or rely on everyone speaking English when you get there, or even on translation programs when you need. But this seems to me like relying on state-of-the-art life jackets, instead of learning to breaststroke.</p>
<p>Learning a language, like swimming, can be a life-changing experience. And just as most people don’t regret learning to swim, most who have learnt another language and have used that language at some point in their lives don’t regret that either. </p>
<p>As more people learn an Asian language in the Asian Century, they’ll come to see the benefit of this skill, just as we eventually come to see the benefit of attending all those swimming classes.</p>
<h2>The challenge ahead</h2>
<p>At the front line in this battle is the decline of Indonesian languages and studies in Australia. The white paper singles out Indonesian as one of the four key Asian languages to which students should have access, but how do we encourage Australian schools to sign up for Indonesian? </p>
<p>In NSW public schools, more than 44,000 students were studying Indonesian in 1996. In 2011, that number has been reduced to only 6,000, with only 82 students studying Indonesian language in year 12 last year. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://theconversation.com/indonesian-knowledge-is-dying-just-when-we-need-it-most-5630">Professor David Hill’s report</a> has found, at the present drop-off rate, most Indonesian departments at Australian universities will die out by 2020. </p>
<p>It is partly why, when the live cattle dispute erupted last year, we didn’t have many experts on the ground in Indonesia with sound knowledge of the cattle industry. It’s essential that the government implements the recommendations in Hill’s report.</p>
<h2>Study support</h2>
<p>Long-term support for both Asian studies and languages will be key, as schools and universities won’t bother with difficult change if they think this is a flash-in-the-pan initiative. </p>
<p>As the white paper clearly explains, if we are going to negotiate future challenges, and make the most of any opportunities that might come our way in the Asian Century, we want to give our children the best education to do so. </p>
<p>Implementing long-term programs which support both Asian studies and languages concurrently will give us the best chance of success.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10427/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ross Tapsell is a lecturer in Asian studies at the Australian National University. He is co-ordinating the ANU's EngageAsia program.</span></em></p>Despite the breadth of issues in the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper released this week, so far the debate has focused largely on language learning in schools. With fewer and fewer students…Ross Tapsell, Lecturer in Asian Studies, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103712012-10-30T22:57:45Z2012-10-30T22:57:45ZAustralia has to fund the Asian century, whether we like it or not<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17014/original/jnptk64d-1351494132.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia is all for engaging with India. But are we willing to pay?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Anindito Mukherjee</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It will take some time for the full detail of the Asian Century White Paper to be digested by the public and elaborated by the government, especially by Craig Emerson as the designated Asian century minister.</p>
<p>However, at this very early point there are apparent continuities between what we saw the Prime Minister do in her recent trip to India, and what appears in the report. Put perhaps too crassly, in India we saw a lot of reference to what is already going on, and an absence of a clear forward funding direction and commitment. The same might be said of the White Paper.</p>
<h2>All talk, no cash</h2>
<p>For example, during the prime minister’s stay in India, the Indian Council for Cultural Relations announced it would [fund five professorial chairs](http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/joint-statement-prime-minister-australia-and-prime-minister-india](http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/joint-statement-prime-minister-australia-and-prime-minister-india ) in Australian universities. While full details are not yet available, if those chairs were to be fully funded (including Australian salaries plus on-costs), that would mean India was supporting at least $1 million per year. In return, Prime Minister Gillard announced that the already established Australia India Institute at the University of Melbourne would be funded at $500,000 per year over the next three years.</p>
<p>There are two notable things about this. First, there was no reciprocal move to fund, say, Australian Studies chairs in India, where some small but excellent institutional efforts are helping deepen understanding about Australia. Second, “investment” in the Australia India Institute must be seen as puny, at best. </p>
<p>Beyond even that minimal investment, there was little else in New Delhi but a repetition of past initiatives. The Australia-India Strategic Research Fund, the Australia-India Fellowship Scheme and the Australia-India Education Council are all under way, the first having done good work, but there was really nothing new, substantive or ground-breaking. The new Water Technology Partnership will be helpful, but is unlikely to take the overall relationship to the new levels being talked about.</p>
<h2>Asian literacy</h2>
<p>Chapter six in the report concerns “<a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/white-paper/chapter-6">Building Capabilities</a>)”, and covers educational issues. This is an important section. Whatever else might be argued, the educational platform on which we build our Asian capability will determine the ultimate success of future regional engagement, and the report essentially acknowledges this.</p>
<p>While there is an essence of truth in suggestions that Australia’s expertise in, say, India, has shifted away from a traditional base in the humanities that is no argument against the need to increase broad Asia literacy. It might well be, for example, that medical scientists and engineers are now venturing into India from Australia, but without a cultural understanding base those ventures will prove problematic. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102944731">Green Revolution in India</a>, initially a more technocratic development, ended up with a lot of unforseen social consequences simply because of the absence of a cultural basis of understanding. The white paper does argue for such an understanding being developed – there will be more Asia expertise on company boards, for example – but there is no real explanation of or practical mechanism for creating that understanding.</p>
<h2>Fighting the funding freeze</h2>
<p>As far as universities go, one main “objective” is to have ten Australian institutions in the world’s top 100 by 2025 (there is no mention of which ranking system might be the arbiter). The school system will be in the top five globally. The logic is that the current tertiary sector reforms will keep assisting Australia to better engage with Asia over the coming period. Australia will provide a “world-class education” as a result of those ongoing reforms and as part of that will produce “Asia-relevant capabilities”. Indeed, the universities are seen as the site for the production of top-level expertise and specialised knowledge/skills on Asia.</p>
<p>It should be noted here that these aims are set against an awkward backdrop. There is a war of words between the government and the higher education sector about <a href="https://theconversation.com/research-funding-falls-victim-to-short-term-politics-10215">research funding</a> “increases” or “decreases”. This is funding that has a significant bearing on universities’ ability to investigate then enlighten about Asian subjects and issues. </p>
<p>The government sees uncapped university places as an addition to capacity, in that more students get trained, but the sector sees a challenge to the “quality” that government also sees as one of the products of its reforms to date. All that is subsumed with the broader funding debate, with the government effectively sitting on the Base Funding Review report that has investigated the efficacy of current funding systems and levels. This is hardly an indicator of commitment to funding Asian century initiatives, especially in view of the current scramble to create a budget surplus.</p>
<p>That major caveat aside, the objectives in chapter six are sound but unremarkable: a larger number of Australian students will study overseas and take a part of their degrees in Asia, while all universities will have formalised links in Asia. Many in the system will be unmoved by this.</p>
<p>Australia was a leader in the University Mobility in Asia and the Pacific (UMAP) program that encouraged and supported student study exchange that began back in the 1990s – an Asian educational leader recently told me he wished Australia would come back into that program strongly, because we left it. And there must surely be no university in Australia without a formal exchange program in Asia? Most will have had several for years.</p>
<h2>Friends or opportunists?</h2>
<p>India appears in chapter six, mainly in reference to the massive upgrade program there that intends to improve the skills of up to 500 million people. The idea is that Australia will be a major provider of services to that program, an idea that has been working away for some time.</p>
<p>It is a variation on the theme earlier in the Asian Century report that targets the “rising middle class” in Asia as a source for the consumption of Australian goods and services, including the lucrative if now challenging international student industry. The ever-present danger here is that Australia gets read as an opportunist rather than as a partner, despite all the rhetoric that <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-press-conference-new-delhi-india-0">stresses the partnership approach</a>. The Asian century paper does not dispatch that view entirely: there are lofty aims, not much hard cash commitment, but several “opportunities” cited.</p>
<p>The Asian Century White Paper is welcome, then, and will be much pondered upon. However, if the India case is anything to go by, the gap between desire and action might take some time and effort to narrow, and time is not all that readily available.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10371/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian Stoddart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It will take some time for the full detail of the Asian Century White Paper to be digested by the public and elaborated by the government, especially by Craig Emerson as the designated Asian century minister…Brian Stoddart, Emeritus Professor, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104102012-10-30T02:59:31Z2012-10-30T02:59:31ZAsian Century White Paper is a foreign policy fail, but not by accident<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17030/original/4yvjy8hf-1351557781.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Paucity of detail on foreign policy indicates the Federal Government's approach to the Asian Century is more about using Asia as a foil to promote domestic reforms.</span> </figcaption></figure><p>For a policy document purporting to map out future directions for Australia in the so-called “Asian Century”, the recently released White Paper pays remarkably scant regard to foreign policy.</p>
<p>Several chapters discuss in great detail the economic and regulatory reforms required to help Australia thrive in the rapidly changing global economic climate. Changes to school curricula and higher education also get considerable attention. But foreign policy appears to have been left almost as an afterthought.</p>
<p>The only chapter in which traditional foreign policy concerns, such as security and overseas development assistance, are explicitly canvassed is Chapter 8. And in a report in which many recommendations are essentially aspirational and currently unfunded, this chapter’s recommendations are the most aspirational and the least specific of all.</p>
<p>Indeed, the only measures currently funded for immediate implementation by the Foreign Ministry are the deployment of a Jakarta-based ambassador to ASEAN and 12,000 Australia Award (Asian Century) scholarships. To be sure, the latter is a substantial and welcome commitment but reflects an extension of Australia’s current scholarship program and not a new initiative.</p>
<p>The thinness of the White Paper’s foreign policy analysis and recommendations is revealing. It reflects not so much an oversight by the authors, but two important and related factors, which are crucial to understand in order to make sense of the White Paper’s origins and prospects.</p>
<p>First, increasing economic interdependence over the past few decades has blurred the boundaries between domestic and foreign policy to a considerable extent, leading in some cases to the latter’s extinction as a distinct policy realm. This blurring of previously well-demarcated policy realms is not unique to Australia.</p>
<p>Consider the issue of trade – traditionally seen as a foreign policy matter. Australia was a leader in the promotion of trade liberalisation in the Asia Pacific in the 1980s and 1990s, through the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum, and globally through its support for the Uruguay Round and the World Trade Organization.</p>
<p>But as the White Paper mentions in passing, the traditional trade liberalisation agenda is currently stuck. Instead, emphasis has shifted over the past decade from eliminating barriers and tariffs to harmonising regulation of issues such as intellectual property rights, or in some cases labour and environmental standards. These of course are all domestic policy issues and are treated as such by the White Paper.</p>
<p>The second factor is more Australia-specific. It relates to the long-term role played by “Asia” – or Australian imaginings of Asia to be precise – in the constitution of Australian national identity. Right from Federation, Australian governments have sought to justify their domestic political agendas with reference to the supposed implications of proximity to Asia.</p>
<p>As Prime Minister Gillard noted when launching the White Paper, Asia was viewed in the early days of Australian Federation as a threat to Australians, with the “working man’s paradise” seen to be dependent on keeping Asia – and Asians – out.</p>
<p>More recently, during the reform days of the Hawke and Keating governments, the rise of an increasingly affluent and competitive Asia at Australia’s doorstep was the “stick” with which the government sought to beat both unions and business into accepting its economic liberalisation agenda.</p>
<p>Australia, it was often argued then, had no choice but to open up its economy, at a considerable cost to sectors such as manufacturing, or be left behind and become poorer and increasingly irrelevant.</p>
<p>The clothing of deeply political domestic agendas in the technocratic language of economic and regulatory reform borne out of necessity links the current White Paper with its predecessors, notably the 1989 Garnaut Report.</p>
<p>There is, of course, no denying the massive economic and social transformations that have occurred in Asia over the past few decades. But the drivers of these transformations and their implications for Australia are contested.</p>
<p>Critics of the 1980s and 1990s economic liberalisation agenda argued, for example, that the so-called “Asian miracle” was the result of massive state intervention in markets and not wholesale economic liberalisation as the Garnaut Report and the government argued at the time.</p>
<p>Similarly, the governments of China, Japan and Korea are currently busy negotiating free trade agreements with resource-rich countries to secure not freer markets but preferential access to key resources.</p>
<p>This contest of ideas was never reflected in the Garnaut Report and is likewise missing in the recent White Paper. Once again, notwithstanding the White Paper’s promise of inclusive growth, we hear that further economic liberalisation is the only path to future prosperity for Australia. Once again, the reality of painful political battles, of “winners” and “losers” in the Asian Century, is masked by the technocratic tone of the White Paper.</p>
<p>And here is the rub: this White Paper is not really about Asia. It is about using Asia to promote domestic reforms within Australia. The relative insignificance of foreign policy within the White Paper is therefore not a coincidence. But whether this government is capable of harnessing Asia’s rise to win the domestic political battles ahead remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10410/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Shahar Hameiri receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>For a policy document purporting to map out future directions for Australia in the so-called “Asian Century”, the recently released White Paper pays remarkably scant regard to foreign policy. Several chapters…Shahar Hameiri, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Murdoch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103982012-10-29T19:11:19Z2012-10-29T19:11:19ZAsian Century White Paper is big on rhetoric, small on ideas<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17006/original/nrzhd4c7-1351485294.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Asian Century White Paper offers a lot of grand rhetoric, but little in the way of serious policy ideas.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australia in the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Asian Century White Paper</a> has vaulting ambitions equally matched by a limited set of policy ideas for institutional reform.</p>
<p>Unlike Ross Garnaut’s 1989 report, <a href="http://www.rossgarnaut.com.au/Papers.html">Australia and the Northeast Asian Ascendancy</a>, which served a menu of economic reform, the white paper is constituted as a “road map” directed at changing the institutional culture of social, economic, and educational institutions for the Asian century. </p>
<p>But it neglects the real and thorny political choices needed to create the “fair and prosperous society” proposed within its pages. Such a society is a laudable objective and the report is a timely recognition that it is not economic growth alone, but <em>inclusive</em> economic growth that matters. Indeed, the report sets out what you could call a social-democratic model for Australia’s post-industrial economy in the Asian century. But how do we get there? </p>
<p>On this issue, the report is disappointing. Institutional reform is the key to the Asian century, but this boils down to technocratic engineering: making institutions more capable or literate. According to the report, the crucial problem is one of cultural adaptation, and only echoes the old slogan of “Asian literacy”, under the garb of “Asia capability”.</p>
<p>Taking the high road to prosperity in Asia requires the right structural incentives, the capacity to discipline institutions and — above all — an investment in public goods. For example, the report’s authors claim that ANZ is an “Asia-capable institution”, but is this enough to drive ANZ to invest in higher levels of training for their staff, or to contribute to feeding and funding innovation? </p>
<p>Similarly, speaking Mandarin or <a href="https://theconversation.com/india-gains-its-rightful-place-in-the-asian-century-white-paper-10331">Hindi</a> is not going to make us an innovative nation, or even understand the region better. In this regard, the report also ignores the cultural capabilities and resources that already exist within our pluralistic society. Let me take the area of education. There is much in the report about internationalisation, and giving students greater exposure to Asian languages based on the naïve assumption that communication skills will lead to cultural competence. But none of this will lead to the “globalisation” of educational institutions, or promote research collaboration with Asian institutions. </p>
<p>The white paper seems to neglect the growing shift of knowledge to Asia, the <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-12/world-ranking/region/asia">growth of research universities in the region</a> – in China, Korea and India – and the need to build strategic alliances and collaboration with these research institutions. Despite all its exhortations to be “Asia capable”, the white paper appears to have a simplistic view of Asia as a manufacturing platform. And here is the rub: public goods are needed to create, facilitate, and develop collaboration with Asia.</p>
<p>One elephant in the room – though there seems to be a veritable elephant park in the white paper – is fiscal austerity. Over the next decade, fiscal constraints will mean that driving innovation and knowledge for the Asian century will be limited. This means that if we are serious about creating a knowledge economy, we need to face issues of tax reform as well as novel solutions such as the use of super funds to invest in innovation. </p>
<p>One gets the feeling that the <a href="http://www.taxreview.treasury.gov.au/Content/Content.aspx?doc=html/home.htm">Henry tax review</a> probably had more relevance for the Asian Century. But all of this requires serious, hard political choices that the report ducks.</p>
<p>The related point here is that the “cultural adaptation” argument invariably refers to a region “out there”, rather than seeing Australia as a part of the region. For example, one of the great benefits of research and strategic collaboration with the region is that we can partner with Asia to confront the societal and scientific challenges confronting all of us in the region. If we do really want to take the high road to Asia, we need to see the region as part of us — and not a canvas on which to etch out our particular vision of prosperity.</p>
<p>Just as we make political choices, the direction and patterns of growth in Asia will also be shaped by political choices in places like China. We need to be conscious of the fact that the growth model in China is tied to the US. With low growth for the foreseeable future in the US, this places lot of pressure on the export model upon which Chinese growth is pinned. What are the political pressures involved in China shifting to a new growth model, and what are its implications for Australia? A report with a different intellectual frame is needed to comprehend and confront the institutional reforms here and in the region.</p>
<p>The Asian Century white paper sets out the major question for the next decade: How do we get to the high road of innovation and productivity in the Asian Century? This is a laudable objective, but we need more work on the policies to get us on that road in the first place.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10398/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kanishka Jayasuriya University of Adelaide. He receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>The Australia in the Asian Century White Paper has vaulting ambitions equally matched by a limited set of policy ideas for institutional reform. Unlike Ross Garnaut’s 1989 report, Australia and the Northeast…Kanishka Jayasuriya, Professor of International Politics and Director of the Indo-Pacific Governance Research Centre, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103672012-10-29T02:56:53Z2012-10-29T02:56:53ZIn the Asian Century, there’s no such thing as success without sacrifice<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16989/original/nh7b669z-1351477900.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Asian Century will present Australia with economic opportunities, as well as significant challenges.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>By 2025, Asia will account for nearly half of world output. Even under conservative growth scenarios, three out of the world’s five largest economies will be in Asia.</p>
<p>By the same year, income per person in Australia will be in the world’s top 10, up 18% from its current level.</p>
<p>It will be Asia’s economic rise that will underpin Australia’s prosperity.</p>
<p>Such are the bright economic possibilities painted by the federal government’s white paper on <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Australia in the Asian Century</a>.</p>
<p>The white paper is the natural successor to Ross Garnaut’s <a href="http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2864496">Australia and the North East Asian Ascendancy</a>, a report commissioned by the Federal Government in the late 1980s. Both are couched in the same terms: Asia’s economic rise is a great opportunity for Australia, but there is no inevitability about Australian success.</p>
<p>This time around, the white paper emphasises that Asia should no longer be viewed primarily as a source of cheap labour. Rather, what should capture our economic imagination is that it will be home to most of the world’s urban middle class. This group will not only demand our natural resources, but also high value-added manufactured goods, and services such as education and tourism to name but a few.</p>
<p>There is much to like about the white paper.</p>
<p>It focuses on the right part of the world over the right time horizon. Rather than agonising over whether Greece will default, or what China’s growth rate next quarter will be, it focuses on long-term trends about which we can be more confident, and which ultimately are far more important for our national well-being.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, after having perused the document, I had three nagging concerns.</p>
<p>First, in introducing the white paper, the Prime Minister made much of the fact that Australia was embarking on the Asian Century from a position of strength. Unfortunately, such optimism sometimes borders on delusion; we would be better served by a greater sense of urgency.</p>
<p>Our trade links with Asia were trumpeted. Indeed, the white paper undertook to further strengthen these links to account for at least one-third of GDP by 2025, up from the present level of one-quarter. But what about our investment linkages, which are so vibrant with respect to the US and Europe, but which lag so badly with respect to Asia? There was nothing close to even an aspirational numerical target for investment.</p>
<p>The white paper merely observed that “investment links between Australia and the region are low relative to our trade relationship” and contended that “two-way investment links with our region should continue to grow over time”. Can we really simply assume that one day they will catch up?</p>
<p>Asia’s economic rise is not a new phenomenon. Yet according to <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/5352.0">ABS data</a>, over the past decade the five key countries identified in the white paper – China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Korea – only accounted for 9.6% of the increase in the foreign capital stock in Australia. If Japan is taken out of the calculation, then the number falls to just 3.3%. These figures are alarming and certainly do not constitute starting from a position of strength.</p>
<p>Second, in my view, the white paper tended to understate the challenges that many Australian businesses will face in the Asian Century. It was emphasised that businesses must adapt to the demands of Asia’s emerging middle class and position themselves in the global value chain at the high end. Productivity growth would be fundamental.</p>
<p>This is good generic advice. But even the most productive of Australian manufacturing businesses will struggle to achieve export success in a high exchange rate environment caused by the demand for our natural resources. Remember, unlike minerals production, Australia does not have a near-monopoly on high value-added manufacturing, nor education or tourism — far from it. Yet since 2009, the real effective exchange rate in the US has fallen by 10%, while in Australia it has strengthened by 23%. That businesses outside the mining sector are struggling is plainly evident. In 2008-09, Australia’s exports of <a href="http://www.dfat.gov.au/publications/stats-pubs/mtd/australia_trade_1006.pdf">elaboratively transformed manufactures</a> — that is, manufactured goods that have a high value added component — totalled $29.5 billion. By 2011-2012, this number had actually fallen to $28.1 billion. During this period, the structure of Australia’s economy and exports became more skewed towards mining, an industry whose output comes with a use-by date attached.</p>
<p>Third, in articulating the types of policies that will be needed to succeed in the Asian Century, the white paper was mostly silent on what will need to be sacrificed. Nowhere was this more clearly seen than in the case of higher education. If higher value added production is to be the name of the game, then clearly that begins with investing in human capital. Consistent with this, several relevant numerical targets were set: by 2025 the proportion of 25 to 34-year-olds holding a qualification at the bachelor level or above will rise by 5 percentage points, the proportion of higher education enrolments from low socioeconomic backgrounds will rise by 3 percentage points, 10 of Australia’s universities will be in the world’s top 100, and so on. In other words, Australian universities will need to produce more teaching and research, and of a higher quality. Yet at the same time, the fiscal target is to achieve budget surpluses, on average, over the medium term. Something has to give.</p>
<p>The economic rise of Asia provides a worthy focus of government policy. Noting the opportunities it provides is the easy part. What comes now — seizing these opportunities and reaping the rewards — is much harder.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10367/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Laurenceson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>By 2025, Asia will account for nearly half of world output. Even under conservative growth scenarios, three out of the world’s five largest economies will be in Asia. By the same year, income per person…James Laurenceson, Senior Lecturer, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103312012-10-29T00:37:29Z2012-10-29T00:37:29ZIndia gains its rightful place in the Asian century white paper<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16970/original/w6mcc4cn-1351467808.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3344%2C2186&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">India faces many challenges as it rises to prominence in the Asian century.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Jagadeesh NV</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Australia in the Asian Century White Paper</a> places India in a position of much greater significance than it has previously achieved in our national consciousness. After decades of neglect and even a history of suspicion about India’s strategic designs, Australia now clearly attaches serious importance to India across the board – from trade and investment to cultural, sporting education and migration links.</p>
<p>The timing of the launch could not have been better, coming just two weeks after a <a href="https://theconversation.com/gillards-delhi-challenge-win-over-india-and-get-the-pm-down-under-10117">state visit</a> by prime minister Julia Gillard to New Delhi. There, Gillard underlined the increasing importance of India for Australia, announcing plans to remove some lingering irritants in the relationship, by starting negotiations for a safeguards treaty so Australia can proceed with uranium sales to India. The white paper further signals Australia’s new thinking about more comprehensive engagement with India.</p>
<h2>The India of the future</h2>
<p>India is identified as one of five key regional nations that are most important to Australia, along with China, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia. This is not surprising. India has emerged as increasingly attractive to Australia for exports of commodities, as a supplier of large numbers of full-fee paying international students and for two-way investment.</p>
<p>Indeed, the paper projects India as the world’s number three economy by 2025, and with its youthful demographic profile India may become the most economically vibrant destination for Australia’s energy exports, education and other services. The economic imperatives are well understood. </p>
<p>The report is informed and clear-sighted about both the opportunities and risks that face India. India’s middle class will grow in number. The report does not present figures for the <a href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-02-06/news/28424975_1_middle-class-households-applied-economic-research">size of India’s middle class</a> but other estimates for recent years range from 14 to 200 (or even 500) million; clearly, much depends on which consuming groups are included in the definition.</p>
<p>Their disposable income will also rise. In the future Indians will come to Australia in significant numbers as tourists, students, businesspeople and migrants. Indians will continue to move from the countryside to cities. The growing requirement for food and infrastructure will generate continuing demand for resources from Australia.</p>
<h2>Challenges ahead</h2>
<p>But the path ahead is not a smooth one. India will face many challenges. It will have to secure sources of energy for its huge and still growing population. Global warming will pose difficult challenges for agriculture and coastal populations. India’s large cohort of young people will require huge investments in education and training institutions on a scale beyond anything the country has yet tackled. Regional disparities, caste and religious discrimination and the low status of too many of India’s women are also recognised as significant impediments which India will have to overcome.</p>
<p>The report also recognises that India’s unique development model, which is driven by services rather than manufacturing, as was the case in East Asia, also has significant risks. If India is to employ its huge number of semi-skilled young people in manufacturing, it will need to cut government red tape, make land acquisition less cumbersome and free up restrictions on the hiring and firing of workers.</p>
<h2>Switching the hyphens</h2>
<p>Also well understood is India’s rising strategic importance in the Indo-Pacific region, including, of course, a key role in the Indian Ocean where Australia and India can cooperate on a range of issues. More implicit is the broadening of Australia’s strategic thinking beyond the previous approach to India that was narrowly constructed in the context of South Asia. For the past half century this meant “India–Pakistan”, a hyphen signalling that in Australia’s strategic perspective, India and Pakistan were inextricably linked and deserving of equal treatment, despite differences in their population size, political governance and economic and legal structures. </p>
<p>The white paper signals that the hyphen with Pakistan is gone. But now a different type of hyphenation appears to be in place – with China. For example, the paper emphasises that China and India will remain Asia’s two economic growth centres; visitor numbers to Australia from China and India will continue to increase; and importantly, Australia’s relationship with China and India will be the immediate priority for future development. More on this linkage is likely to come in Australia’s defence white paper due early next year.</p>
<h2>Teaching Hindi</h2>
<p>One of the paper’s major surprises is the proposal to make Hindi – India’s main language – one of four priority languages, with Chinese, Japanese and Indonesian. </p>
<p>Hindi has barely figured in foreign language teaching in Australia, although the Asian Studies Association of Australia has always argued for its importance. While this is a welcome move, the real challenge is effective implementation. </p>
<p>Student demand has been weak, and Australian universities have never paid serious attention to teaching Hindi, so there is a serious lack of professionally trained Hindi language teachers. Simply recruiting Hindi-speaking residents in Australia to fill teaching positions as a cost-saving measure will set the program off to a flawed start.</p>
<p>Only a well planned, long-term strategy and significant investment in training skillful teachers can produce the pool of Hindi-speaking businessmen, public servants, educators and citizens that Australia needs to pursue the close linkages with India envisaged in the Asian century white paper.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10331/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Purnendra Jain receives funding from the Australain Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Mayer has received funding in the past decade from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>The Australia in the Asian Century White Paper places India in a position of much greater significance than it has previously achieved in our national consciousness. After decades of neglect and even a…Purnendra Jain, Professor, Asian Studies, University of AdelaidePeter Mayer, Associate Professor, School of History and Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103652012-10-28T13:11:23Z2012-10-28T13:11:23ZAsian century white paper sets tricky targets for universities<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16953/original/xfk2zc8g-1351420224.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The white paper sets high standards for Australian universities in the Asian Century. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the slip-stream of the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Australia in the Asian Century White Paper</a>, released by Julia Gillard yesterday, there is a one-off opportunity to evolve new programs, open up and engage in Asia at scale. Many of the new programs are likely to evolve in education and research.</p>
<p>The report is short on specific ideas because it wants them to bubble up from below. For a year or two, government will support program initiatives with unusual generosity. Asian Century Taskforce leader Ken Henry has created a window for Asianists with ideas.</p>
<h2>Asia for the mainstream</h2>
<p>The paper works as a strategy because it is utterly mainstream in tone. It does not rail at middle Anglo-Australia’s lack of Asian awareness from outside, though it could have. It does not dwell on the highly varied specifics of the sub-regions and nations under the heading “Asia”. Nor is it drenched in the rich excitement of 3000 years of Sinic, Indian and Southeast Asian cultures.</p>
<p>Instead it positions itself squarely in the Anglo-Australian mind. It wants to be Tony Abbott as much as it wants to be Julia Gillard. A laconic local drawl lurks behind the spare factual prose and in places you can almost hear it.</p>
<p>The white paper sets out to capture the mainstream, to change its thinking, naturalising regional engagement. Time will tell whether this works but the shift is essential. We must embed ourselves autonomously in the region. Or Australia, that odd nation at the end of Southeast Asia with a union jack on its flag, will be trapped in its history, in denial of its geography. It will become obsolete.</p>
<h2>Sending students to Asia</h2>
<p>The white paper sets few targets for higher education and science, again fostering an atmosphere where government and non-government initiatives and benchmarks will evolve. It emphasises people-to-people links, local demography and alumni. And it makes all the right noises. Asian languages in schools, compulsory Asia-related curricula (there will be rearguard resistance to this), more language learning in higher education, stronger research links in the region, and many more Australian students going to Asia during their degrees.</p>
<p>The last area on the above list — Australian study abroad — looks the most promising. Only about 4% of first-degree students study in Asia during their degrees. Even growth in two or three week stays will make a difference, starting the social and linguistic immersion which encourages longer stays and provides incentives for more protracted language learning at home.</p>
<p>The number of American students in China is trending sharply upwards, encouraging a behavioural change in Australia. The report goes in hard here. “We will provide more financial support and information for students who study in Asia,” it states. We have yet to see what this means but study abroad is receiving more attention in many universities. They should be talking to government as soon as possible.</p>
<h2>Climbing the rankings</h2>
<p>The white paper sets one new target: “By 2025, 10 of Australia’s universities will be in the world’s top 100”. The global ranking it cites, rightly, is the <a href="http://www.arwu.org">Shanghai Academic Ranking of World Universities</a> (ARWU). This is an objective ranking that excludes reputation surveys and cannot be easily tricked up by universities.</p>
<p>It is also a research-only ranking. The target commits the federal government to a large increase in government research budgets over time. There is a close correlation between the position of universities in the ARWU and the level of public research funding.</p>
<p>Australia currently has five universities in the 2012 top 100: Melbourne (57), ANU (64), Queensland (90), Sydney (93) and Western Australia (98). The UK, which has the second strongest research system after the US, has nine. Canada, Australia’s closest comparator as a nation, has Toronto at 27. So the new target is a stretch. While Monash and UNSW are close to the top 100, the next in line, Adelaide and Macquarie, are in the 200-300 bracket.</p>
<p>It would be better to aim for six or eight in the top 100 and some in the top 40. Very strong research universities build local strength and draw global attention, especially in East Asia. </p>
<p>The National University of Singapore (NUS) has yet to crack the ARWU 100 — it lacks Nobels — but it is ahead of Australia on most research measures. In the <a href="http://www.leidenranking.com/">Leiden ranking</a>, which measures the scientific performance of universities, 13.9% of NUS research papers were in the top 10% of their field on citation rate between 2005-2009. The highest Australian university was ANU at 12.9%. Hong Kong University, Nankai, the University of Science and Technology in China and Postech in Korea were also ahead of ANU.</p>
<p>These rankings are encouraging, but we will need to build top-flight research capacity if we are to hold our own in Asia as the Asian Century White Paper suggests.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10365/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Marginson received funding from the Australian Research Council (2008-2011) to study globalization in East and Southeast Asian higher education. </span></em></p>In the slip-stream of the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper, released by Julia Gillard yesterday, there is a one-off opportunity to evolve new programs, open up and engage in Asia at scale. Many…Simon Marginson, Professor of Higher Education, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/99022012-10-28T13:11:19Z2012-10-28T13:11:19ZAsian century white paper talks the talk, can Australia walk the walk?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16952/original/rd35q8tg-1351418915.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Gillard government has a long road ahead of it to enact the recommendations of the Asian Century White Paper.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ken Henry’s team has provided a detailed and useful blueprint for future action in the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Australia in the Asian Century White Paper</a>. But the government will need to ramp up its domestic efforts to improve scientific and cultural literacy, as well as its engagement with China and Indonesia if Australia is to maximise its competitiveness in Asia.</p>
<p>The white paper sets five tasks: maintaining a productive and resilient Australian economy; building capabilities; operating in growing Asian markets; building sustainable security; and achieving deeper and broader relationships in Asia.</p>
<p>In all these areas, big asks are made of business, NGOs and the Australian people while pledging strong government action and support. This is reasonable. The Australian people as well as their government must commit the resources needed for Australia to fully embrace the benefits of its Asian neighbourhood.</p>
<p>But the government needs to improve its own performance in some domestic and international areas to grasp the opportunities highlighted and provide a model of leadership in the Asian Century.</p>
<h2>Educational challenges</h2>
<p>On the domestic front, the white paper’s authors lament the recent decline in Australian high schoolers’ reading and mathematics performance relative to Asian countries, and the decades-long erosion of Asian language studies. They call for Australia to be ranked as a top-five country in the world for reading, science and mathematics literacy by 2025, and for all Australian students to be encouraged study an Asian language throughout their schooling. </p>
<p>All well and good. </p>
<p>But mapped against what the Chief Scientist has warned is a growing <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/anti-science-culture-endangers-our-economy/story-e6frg8y6-1226364952404">“anti-science culture</a> and the <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/maths-physics-fail-to-get-the-numbers-at-school-20120121-1qbjd.html">avoidance of science and maths courses</a> by Year 11 and 12 students, it is clear that government and educational leaders have their work cut out for them.</p>
<p>It is not encouraging that the new secondary school physics curriculum being considered earlier in the year was <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/experimentation-on-the-science-syllabus-puts-feelings-before-facts/story-fn59nlz9-1226422078412">criticised</a> for containing too much "sociology of physics” and not enough equations. The government’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-real-agenda-behind-gillards-gonski-response-9305">lukewarm response</a> to the educational funding recommendations of the Gonski Review are of further concern.</p>
<p>The commitment to use new school funding arrangements to ensure access to Asian languages is sensible. As is the call for schools, universities, business and the community to encourage Asian language study. But, as with science study, spruiking demand is a vexed issue, and achieving the needed mindset change among young Australians may prove a challenge to the imagination and persuasive ability of the private and public sector alike.</p>
<h2>Talking to Asia</h2>
<p>On the foreign front, the white paper sets an initial priority for developing strategies with China, India, Indonesia, Japan, and South Korea as well as maintaining strong alliance ties with the United States. It envisages official and non-official dialogue with partner countries, and specifically supports “China’s participation in the region’s strategic, political and economic development”.</p>
<p>All this is sensible, and Australia has good ties with its neighbours, but these ties need to be energised. Given the recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/defence-agreements-with-us-harm-australias-reputation-in-asia-6298">controversies</a> over policies towards Beijing and Washington, it would useful for Canberra to take up the recommendation by Linda Jakobson of the Lowy Institute and pursue an annual strategic and economic dialogue with Beijing. Such a dialogue would be a valuable forum to convey Australia’s perspectives on its US alliance and other strategic intents, while better discerning China’s own concerns and intentions.</p>
<p>The government also needs to take the initiative in its relations with Indonesia. President Yudhoyono terms Australia a “close friend”, and tensions arising from the abrupt cut-off of cattle exports early this year have eased. But Yudhoyono departs office in 2014, and Indonesia’s commendable decentralisation and economic growth have been accompanied by the decentralisation of corruption and a trend toward economic nationalism. Before too much longer, Indonesia’s economy will be larger than Australia’s – and future leaders in Jakarta may be less amenable to Australian interests if no initiative is taken in the near term.</p>
<p>The Commonwealth government should jump-start is engagement with private sector organisations with knowledge of Indonesian trade and governance issues, stimulate “second-track” dialogue with Indonesian counterparts on these issues, and organise a long overdue state visit by the prime minister to Jakarta. This should be done well in advance of Youdhoyono’s retirement.</p>
<p>The white paper is a valuable and timely document that will stimulate debate about the dynamic, growing, and crucial region to our north. But to keep faith with its intention to make the most of the Asian Century, the government needs to commit the financial, intellectual, and human resources needed to take a leading role.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9902/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kenneth Chern does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Ken Henry’s team has provided a detailed and useful blueprint for future action in the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper. But the government will need to ramp up its domestic efforts to improve…Kenneth Chern, Professor of Asian Policy, Swinburne University; Executive Director, Swinburne Leadership Institute, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103702012-10-28T08:29:44Z2012-10-28T08:29:44ZAsian Century White Paper: experts respond<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/16951/original/j3svdyr4-1351412724.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Prime minister Julia Gillard has set out Australia's priorities in the Asian Century.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Prime minister Julia Gillard released the <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/">Australia in the Asian Century White Paper</a> in an address to the Lowy Institute on Sunday.</p>
<p>The paper sets out 25 “national objectives” to prepare Australia for the rise of Asia in the 21st Century. These include boosting productivity, encouraging Asian language teaching in schools, strengthening the credentials of Australia’s universities and increasing diplomatic presence in the region.</p>
<p>Earlier this year, The Conversation assembled a <a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/australia-in-the-asian-century">panel of experts</a> from Australia’s academic community to provide their advice to the Asian Century taskforce. Members of the panel met with taskforce leader Ken Henry at an event in Canberra to discuss their proposals.</p>
<p>Representatives of this team provide their view on the paper below.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Northeast Asia - Associate Professor Craig Mark, Kwansei Gakuin University, Japan</strong></p>
<p>Regarding the democracies of Northeast Asia, there are no major surprises in the Government’s White Paper. </p>
<p>The white paper encourages Japan’s continuing involvement in regional and international institutions, such as APEC and the East Asia Summit. It refers to the previous cooperation between Australia and Japan on the International Committee on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament. So there are no real policy changes regarding Japan.</p>
<p>Deeper defence cooperation and joint military exercises are also set to continue with South Korea, including a regular “2+2” defence and foreign ministers’ meeting, as well as increasing cooperation on climate change and non-proliferation. The white paper mentions that negotiations towards bilateral Free Trade Agreements are ongoing with Japan and South Korea, but there is no acknowledgement that both these rounds also face considerable domestic political resistance.</p>
<p>Beyond a commitment to expanding the recently opened consulate in Ulaan Bataar to a full embassy, there is practically no other mention of Mongolia. This is a disappointing omission, given the high level of Australian investment in its mining industry.</p>
<p>The white paper does refer to the tensions over maritime disputes in the South China Sea and North Asia, without explicitly specifying the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, or any other disputed territories. It maintains that Australia takes no position on these disputed claims, urging their peaceful settlement via international law. This is an implicit criticism of China, which refuses to recognise the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.</p>
<p><strong>Culture - Dr John Lenarcic, RMIT</strong></p>
<p>A melange of bland rhetoric and generic management-speak, leavened with policy points as mantra. That pretty much sums up the Asia Century White Paper on the whole. Where are the grand initiatives of a specific nature that display radical novelty under this banner heading? “Culture” as a term is bandied about in the paper without offering any head-turning ideas worth debating. </p>
<p>For example, how about dedicated schemes to address the diversity in philosophical outlooks that may exist in Asian communities as opposed to Australian norms? Learning the mechanics of languages is one thing but learning to think in another culture is another matter entirely. </p>
<p>The refrain of the National Broadband Network as a universal high-tech fix was also evident in the report. Apparently, the NBN will facilitate closer ties with Asia. Closer in comparison to what? Systems analysis 101 will tell you that one has to understand the real world in a deep sense before developing and applying a technological solution. </p>
<p>Points for pop culture inclusion must be awarded, though, to the mention of the Fruit Ninja game-app (on page 270) which is highlighted as a sterling example of the crossover potential of culture, technology and design in Australian-Asian business ventures. If only there was more emphasis on the fun aspects that could be afforded by the Asian Century. I guess it would have been too much to ask to have a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-australia-needs-an-asian-century-institute-6217">K-pop reference</a> in the document, though.</p>
<p><strong>Asian languages – Yuko Kinoshita, University of Canberra</strong></p>
<p>The White paper identifies education in Asian language and culture as a key part of capacity building for Australia’s future. It proposes some clear strategies: all Australian students to have continuous access to high quality language studies in Chinese, Hindi, Indonesian, or Japanese; all schools to collaborate with a school from one of the priority countries; and utilising multilingual people to enhance education. </p>
<p>At the tertiary level, it proposes to support increases in the numbers of Australian students studying in Asia, and the growth of Asian studies. The paper also proposes a target of one third of the nation’s leadership roles in business and government to be carried by individuals with Asian expertise. This would encourage students to study an Asian language and parents to encourage their children to do so.</p>
<p>The White paper recognises the importance of “people-to-people” relationships with Asia for our future prosperity, and identifies our current shortfalls in the language and cultural skills needed for this. </p>
<p>If funding, bipartisan support, and long-term commitment to achievable actions follow, we are looking at a bright future on the edge of Asia. Otherwise this inspiring vision will remain mere aspiration, and others will take our place.</p>
<p><strong>Food security - Professor Peter Batt, Curtin University</strong></p>
<p>Competitive advantage comes from having a strong domestic industry and constant innovation. This approach seems central to the government’s recent position statement on Australia’s role as a supplier of food to Asia. </p>
<p>Innovation is required at all stages of the value chain to meet consumers’ changing demands for more healthy and nutritious food that has been produced in a way that minimises the adverse impact on the environment. Supporting more sustainable production is both a public and a private good, yet most of the responsibility seems to fall only on the producer. Policies to support co-investment in new technology and more efficient use of natural resources are desperately required. Over many years, government investment in agricultural research and development has progressively declined. </p>
<p>Consumers, too, must recognise that role that they have to play in supporting a more sustainable food industry. With as much as 40% of the food that we produce being wasted, the costs are enormous. If reducing waste and maximising value is to become the central tenet, the key argument here is whether Australia can and should support an internationally competitive food processing industry. I fear Australia is likely to remain a net exporter of agricultural commodities and minimally processed food. </p>
<p><strong>Science and research - Sally Gras, University of Melbourne</strong></p>
<p>More research occurs in Asia now than ever before. Today, the prime minister’s launch of the Asian Century White Paper highlighted
the increasing number of <a href="http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/white-paper/chapter-9/the-work-of-communities">research links</a> between Australia and Asia.</p>
<p>Opportunities for collaboration will increase in the Asian century but
so too will the competition to work with the region’s best in the
areas of basic, applied or commercial research. Research and
technology partnerships will therefore be crucial to access ideas and
build our national competitiveness.</p>
<p>Scientific collaboration will benefit from four new Asian
embassies that will assist in the negotiation of science and
technology agreements. Research collaborators will also find it
easier to obtain Australia visas. The importance of diplomatic
networks between universities, dialogues between young leaders and
the flow of people and ideas between academic and research
organisations have been identified as essential to Australia’s
strategic position.</p>
<p>The report provides a commitment to science and innovation but leaves policy details such as links with industry and strategic
priorities to the upcoming Industry and Innovation Statement and the
National Research Investment Plan.
While much needs to be done to better position Australia’s
researchers, this report provides an important first step. These
ideas will require commitment both in the short and long term to make
a significant regional impact.</p>
<p><strong>Climate change – Tim Stephens, University of Sydney</strong> </p>
<p>The White Paper does a good job of highlighting the challenge that climate change poses to food, water, infrastructure and energy. It notes that “projected sea-level rise, more intense tropical storms and higher wind speeds could inundate low-lying port cities, threaten coastal areas, exacerbate flooding and increase the salinity of rivers and bays across the region.” </p>
<p>The authors argue that “not only is action on climate change in the region’s interests … it is critical to a global climate change solution,” noting that Asia is already a major contributor to global emissions.</p>
<p>But despite this, overall the White Paper’s authors assume that business as usual can and will continue into the Asian Century. However, it is a blithe assumption that climate change will only add to, rather than fundamentally change, the character and severity of the challenges faced by many Asian states and, as a consequence, by Australia. </p>
<p>The reality is that climate change will threaten Asia’s food and water security, and have transformative effects on security and stability in the region.</p>
<p><em>More to come</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10370/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sally Gras receives funding from The Australian Research Council, The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation and Dairy Innovation Australia Ltd. She is affiliated with The University of Melbourne.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Stephens has received ARC funding for a project researching deforestation in Indonesia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Yuko Kinoshita works for University of Canberra, teaching the Japanese Language.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Craig Mark, John Lenarcic, and Peter J. Batt do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Prime minister Julia Gillard released the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper in an address to the Lowy Institute on Sunday. The paper sets out 25 “national objectives” to prepare Australia for…Craig Mark, Associate Professor of International Studies, Kwansei Gakuin UniversityJohn Lenarcic, Lecturer in Business IT & Logistics, RMIT UniversityPeter J. Batt, Professor, School of Management, Curtin UniversitySally Gras, Senior Lecturer, Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, The University of MelbourneTim Stephens, Associate Professor and Co-Director, Sydney Centre for International Law, University of SydneyYuko Kinoshita, Senior Lecturer, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.