In this column, I would like to focus on the issue of planning for the future in terms of the policy development process. Much of the argument will be made by comparison of key features in this process between China and Central and Eastern Europe, on the basis of the experience from a study visit to China made in April 2015 at the invitation of CAFIU as a member of a delegation comprising academics, business and NGO representatives, and journalists from Central and Eastern Europe, and Russia.

The first feature is the medium and long-term approach in China when it comes to the future. Medium-term decisions comprised in policy documents such as the Five-Year Plans are perhaps familiar to casual observers outside China. Other documents, such as the Decisions adopted at Plenary Sessions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) are less well known. Some of these decisions weigh far into the future. The best historic example is the 3rd Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee in December 1978, when the reform and opening up policy promoted under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping was adopted, the cornerstone of more than three decades of continuous economic growth, resulting in today’s China. For the current period up to 2020, the relevant document is the Decision adopted at the 3rd Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee on Some Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deeping the Reform. Another milestone, which is getting closer to the medium term day by day, is the centenary of the CPC founding in 2021, by which time the goal is to achieve the status of a moderately prosperous society. Arguably the most revealing for the long-term approach regarding the future is the goal to achieve the status of a prosperous, democratic, culturally advanced and harmonious modern socialist country by the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 2049.

In Central and Eastern Europe, policy planning is on a medium-term at best. Government programs have a timeframe of four years maximum, the standard term duration. Following up on the European Union’s seven-year financial framework, member states draft numerous policy document, usually labelled as strategies, for various fields and subfields related to EU funds. However, past experience has shown a limit to this process in terms of effectiveness and flexibility, especially when faced with economic recession.
A second feature is that the policy development is an internally driven process. This is rather obvious in the case of China and derives from the high degree of sovereignty and strength of the state. However, we must keep in mind this has only been possible since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, which is just two generations ago.

In Central and Eastern European countries, policy development is mainly an external driven process. This is due to lower levels of (pseudo) sovereignty and strength, according to the peripheral status in the interstate system and the world economy. In practice, this means a high level of dependency for policy content on international financial institutions, such as the IMF and the World Bank, and intergovernmental organizations, the EU being first and foremost. In practical terms, policy development at government level is outsourced to these organisations or with NGOs closely aligned to their views, while policy development at party level is very weak or non-existent.

A third feature of the policy development process derives from the institutional setting. Socialism with Chinese characteristics features a unique political structure, with two main pillars that are reinforcing each other, the fundamental political system and the basic political system. The latter’s most important, but not single feature is the CPC-led multiparty system. Through its reinforcing nature, this institution setting fulfills three functions as a path (the way to reach national, long-term, systemic goals), a theory (the ideological cohesiveness that guides actions), and a system (dealing with practical issues under political stability). Especially in the latter function, I suspect the system is highly sensitive to public opinion by use of polling and other modern research methods and techniques. Thus, it derives its legitimacy by achieving a sustained broad majority in terms of satisfaction with the direction of the country, living standards, and social optimism, i.e. the belief that the next generation will do better.

In Central and Eastern Europe there is no meaningful reinforcing second pillar. Under a system best described as a post-democracy by Colin Crouch, elections do take place with a multi-party competition, governments are changed through the ballot box, but the outcome in terms of substantive policy change is very weak. Public debate, especially electoral debate, is a controlled spectacle. The citizens form a passive, quiescent, and reactive mass. Political parties are weak, both organisationally and ideologically. Policy is shaped mainly by the interaction between state and business elites. The main function of the electoral process is not to be an agent of change, but to legitimise a status-quo that registers high levels of dissatisfaction.

The relationship with ideology is another important feature, highly relevant, but rather counter-intuitive in its meaning. One way of understanding ideology is through its function to provide societal goals, dominant values, a worldview. The other one is more thought-provoking and comes from Marx’s German Ideology and its metaphor of ideology as a “camera obscura”, which turns reality on its head. In other words, there is a difference between the truth of reality and perception of reality. This latter meaning is closer, I believe, to Deng Xiaoping’s 1978 call to “seek the truth from the facts” and to “liberate the mind”. Put in practice, one of its manifestations is evidence-based policy development. The size of China and its population has allowed for the opportunity to test policies in the real world before introducing them nationwide. In addition, the principle calls for critical analysis, which leads to economic and political pragmatism.

One of the peculiarities of Central and Eastern Europe is the dominance of neoliberalism as an ideology, despite the severe economic and social costs of the transition period and persistent high levels of dissatisfaction in public opinion. Corollary to this dominance is the line of thought according to which economic, cultural and political relations between Central and Eastern European countries and China should rather not be developed because a choice is to be made between NATO membership and close ties with the United States, on one hand, or better relations with China, on the other hand. In some countries, such as Poland and Serbia, a more pragmatic, open-minded view is dominant.
Other two significant features of the policy development process in China are the scope or scale of the planning and the quality of the policy documents in terms. The former is intuitive considering the historic pace and scale of economic development and poverty reduction in China since 1978. However, it is an entirely experience to actually see with your own eyes the breadth of the infrastructure and urban development, extant and under construction. Looking back, these are the most vivid images I took home from the visit to China. As one delegation colleague, a Czech civil engineer, observed, these projects dwarf any such projects in Europe.

The quality of policy documents, even in English language, is remarkable in terms of clarity, concreteness and, last but not least, brevity. Even on this issue, a brief quantitative comparison is revealing. The election manifestos of the two main British political parties for the 2015 general election totalled around 19,000 words (Labour) and 30,000 words (Conservatives). In Romania a major policy manifesto released during the same period by the party that won the 2014 presidential elections amounted to almost 67,000 words. In comparison, the major document adopted at the Third Plenum of the 18th Central Committee of the PCC back in 2013, which guides China towards 2020, has only 16,200 words.

As any society in the world today, China faces its own economic and social problems. The development gap between the coast and inland, as well as the metropolises of Beijing, Shanghai and smaller cities is evident to any visitor. Inequality is an issue, as is the pressure on the environment from urbanisation and the transition to an energy-intensive, contemporary lifestyle. Considering the size of the country in terms of population and area, the challenges faced by the Chinese nation are on an unique scale. Yet, the Chinese people seem optimistic on their quest for the future. As Henry Kissinger once aptly observed, China's success serves the interests of the world.