Beyond Competition: China’s Education Policy Adjustments in a Techno-Cultural Divide

• In Event: When Beings Encounter: The Multiplicities of Peace

Proposal

This study investigates how the Techno-Cultural Cold War has reshaped China’s education policies, tracing a strategic shift from an emphasis on " open integration "to " a balance between autonomy and openness ". Against the backdrop of escalating Sino-US strategic competition, characterized by technological blockades, ideological frictions, and heightened concerns over cultural security, China’s education system has undergone significant recalibration. The research seeks to illuminate not only the reactive adjustments within China’s education sector but also the proactive strategies devised to balance global engagement with national sovereignty in knowledge production and talent development.
Three interrelated research questions guide the inquiry. First, how do specific external pressures within the cultural Cold War exert influence on the trajectory of China’s education policy reforms? Second, what mechanisms underpin the delicate balance between "autonomy" and "openness" in policy adaptation? Third, what are the defining features and underlying rationales of policy adjustments in key domains, including STEM education curricula, talent cultivation programs, and the construction of independent knowledge systems in humanities and social sciences?
The theoretical framework integrates two complementary strands. Drawing on Kingdon’s (1984) Multiple Streams Framework, the study analyzes how "problem streams" (e.g., disruptions in chip technology education, declining retention of overseas talent), "policy streams" (e.g., proposals for a new nationwide system of innovation collaboration), and "political streams" (e.g., top-level mandates for "technological self-reliance") converge to open policy windows for transformative reforms. This is supplemented by insights from Foucault’s (1991) concept of governmentality, which helps unpack how discourses of "knowledge security" and "strategic talent development" function as mechanisms of governance, reshaping power relations between the state, educational institutions, and knowledge producers. Additionally, the framework engages with Marginson’s (2021) theories on global higher education competition to contextualize China’s policy shifts within broader dynamics of geopolitical rivalry over educational and technological leadership.
Methodologically, a mixed-methods approach is employed to ensure depth and rigor. Document analysis forms the cornerstone, involving systematic coding of over 37 policy texts, including guidelines for " Double First-Class Initiative " university construction, STEM education reform blueprints, and regulations on international educational exchanges. This textual analysis is complemented by in-depth case studies of flagship programs, such as the "基础学科拔尖学生培养计划 2.0" (Top Talents Cultivation Program 2.0) and initiatives to establish domestic alternatives to foreign educational resources in critical technologies. These cases illuminate the dynamic interplay between central policy directives and local implementation, revealing how adaptation occurs at multiple levels of the education system.
The significance of this research is threefold. Theoretically, it advances policy change theory by demonstrating how international conflicts reshape domestic education governance, offering a nuanced model of "external pressure-internal response" that bridges international relations and education policy studies. Empirically, it provides a comprehensive mapping of China’s education policy adaptations to the cultural Cold War, identifying pivotal shifts from reactive defense to proactive leadership.

Author

• Xiaowen wen GAO, Northeast Normal University