Reimagining Peak China narrative

China's Harbin Institute of Technology has recently allowed its doctoral candidates to graduate with a product or design instead of a dissertation. According to the South China Morning Post, the purpose of this policy change is to practically handle bottleneck engineering problems in the backdrop of tech race with the United States. The new approach acknowledges the superiority of practical knowledge in engineering education and is a point of departure from traditional thesis writing as a prerequisite for the award of PhD degrees. Although the leading universities of the world have long been focusing on case study methodology as a research strategy to explore specialised practical knowledge, its approach in engineering education still needs more relevance with the practical challenges of everyday life. Clearly, the Chinese approach is to produce more designs or products to strengthen innovation momentum for aggrandising its economic growth rate and global influence.

The approach is a kind of strategic response to the castigating assumptions behind the Peak China Theory (PCT) conditioning China's economic growth rate with its external and internal challenges. The theory suggests that China's economic growth and global influence may reach a zenith point which, according to the US economist Nicholas Lardy, has already reached. However, China's aggressive focus on the product-based engineering education has created counter narratives against the PCT suggesting the possibility of a long run innovation-led economic growth rate. Many countries in Global South, including Pakistan, may learn policy lessons from the Chinese strategy on engineering education. There is a directly proportional relationship between technological advancements and variations in product demands in local and international business markets. That means the demand and supply matrices will keep changing forever when humans are influenced by innovations and new technological interventions paving the way for innovation-led sustainable economic growth for countries like China. In this context, the Chinese approach on product-based engineering education reflects that China is strategically following Aristotelian philosophy in which practical knowledge is treated superior to technology and epistemology. Most of the assumptions behind the PCT are based on technological and epistemological advancements in China. However, China's focus on acquiring innovative practical knowledge is not only challenging the PCT assumptions but also drastically pushing the boundaries of technological and epistemological knowledge. Per media reports, there are six main myths related to the PCT narrative: 1) Chinese economy may not be able to surpass the US economy; 2) China's real estate plight may undermine its economic growth potential; 3) Diminishing foreign investment; 4) Rising unemployment rate will create social unrest; 5) Aging population as a threat to economic growth; and 6) Lack of confidence in Chinese people in future. However, China's focus on product-led growth is acting as a strategic rebuttal to the PCT. Philosophically, Practical Wisdom remains a Master Virtue when compared with technology or epistemology. This is exactly what China is religiously following.

All six myths primarily rely on epistemological and technological trends completely forgetting that China is inherently following ancient economic philosophy in which production of a new product is treated as a symbol of success as against the Western economies focusing more on the theoretical aspects of technology and epistemology. Therefore, in recent years, the widening gap between the GDPs of China and the United States may soon be offset by China's de novo determinism on product or design-based innovations as an economic strategy. This strategy may enable China to continue with its impressive growth rate for next several decades which clearly means bypassing the American economy within a decade or so. Therefore, the first PCT myth loses its conceptual traction. The second myth assumes that China's real estate sector may act as a resource curse discouraging China's local industry and innovation-led growth. In this regard, China's recent sluggish growth in the real estate sector is cited as an indication proving the PCT. However, this myth is again a misunderstanding of the Chinese economy. As a matter of fact, slower real estate growth has been offset by new products and designs in the electric vehicles, batteries and solar power sectors enabling China to maintain its economic growth trend for an indefinite period. The third myth is also misleading because it focused merely on the labour-intensive industries experiencing slight decline in investments. However, the high-tech industries involving new products and designs recently saw a massive hike in investment. The initiative of USD138 billion government-backed fund for emerging technologies in 2025 also reflects how China is strategically preferring product or design-based advancements rather than producing theoretical reports. The fourth assumption regarding rising unemployment is also unfounded because China's unemployment rate is not that high that could create unrest in the country. China's remolded policy on product based doctoral degrees reflects how its follow-up with a pragmatic, variable, context dependent and practical business methodology is creating a sustainable model for economic growth with minimum unemployment rate. The Western economists again overlook the economic potential of innovation-led growth when they treat aging Chinese population as a threat to its economic growth. China's population is growing old amidst unprecedented advancements in the high-tech industries transforming them into critical human capital rather than a burden on economy. Therefore, the sixth myth also loses its relevance because the fundamental rationality of the Chinese economic business model is to maintain a higher level of confidence in introducing new products and designs through high-tech innovations. Pakistan, being a close ally of China, needs to introduce a similar policy in engineering education in the country. The policy could initially be introduced in selected disciplines in top engineering universities of the country. The policy of producing a high-tech product or design will not only produce practically relevant PhDs but also kickstart new vistas of innovation-led economic growth in the country.