Professor Andrew O’Neill, Director, Griffith Asia Institute - Advancing regional engagement and...
-
Upload
informa-australia -
Category
Education
-
view
265 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Professor Andrew O’Neill, Director, Griffith Asia Institute - Advancing regional engagement and...
1
Advancing Regional Engagement and Informed Policy Making: Universities and Track 2 Dialogue
Andrew O’Neil
Presentation to the Australia Asia Education Symposium
Melbourne, 1 April 2014
What is track 2 dialogue?
• Commonly understood as bringing together those outside government for full and frank exchange of perspectives on specific policy related questions.
• Historically they have merged with 1.5 track dialogues where policy makers have had the opportunity to float new ideas without committing to them.
• Based on a belief that non-government forums, involving individuals operating autonomously, can generate ideas and specific proposals on key policy challenges.
Track 2 dialogue
‘Citizens could take some action rather than simply being bystanders while the grown-up governments act like jerks’.
Joseph V. Montville
Regional dialogues: Griffith’s experience
• Seen as a way of engaging strategic research partners.
• Has a distinctive and coherent policy focus.
• Aims to build links with industry and government partners, in Australia and in the region.
• Generates new knowledge in relation to applied policy areas (e.g. outcomes papers).
• Includes a range of individuals with diverse perspectives.
Australia-China Dialogue: 2009—2013
Australia-Japan Dialogue: 2010—
Australia-Indonesia Dialogue: 2013—
Australia-Korea Dialogue: 2013—
How can universities engage?
• Universities are uniquely placed to take the initiative in co-sponsoring track 2 dialogue with regional partners. Consider the following:
! Universities have well-established existing partnerships with Asian institutions, many of which are based on deep personal networks among academics.
! Universities can bring sustained intellectual rigour to bear on major policy challenges of the day.
! By their very nature, universities have wide global networks through staff, students, and alumni.
Why should universities engage?
• Provides opportunities for the establishment of long term relationships beyond the dialogues themselves—helps to open doors.
• Provides a window into best practice in the region in tackling difficult policy challenges.
• Raises cultural awareness while promoting new knowledge and strategic partnerships.
• Showcases international partnerships.
What are the key challenges?
• Funding—who pays?
• Ensuring partners remain engaged and interested.
• Freshness and relevance of themes.
• Fostering substantive outcomes and measuring their impact.
• Logistical focus daunting, particularly for large dialogues.
What are the key challenges?
• Language barriers.
• Profile and dissemination in busy marketplace.
• Ensuring expertise and representation among participants.
• Which part of the university should coordinate?
• Bilateral or multilateral focus?
Summary
• Dialogues can inject profile into a university’s global engagement activities.
• Can yield fresh perspectives on enduring policy challenges.
• Potential to open doors to longer term strategic partnerships.
• Challenge of quantifying outcomes and results.