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.