This paper seeks to understand the changing situation of independent colleges in China, under the influence of policies designed to promote their development. The findings can be summarized as follows.
First, based on the review of the two most important policies in this field, published in 2003 and 2008, it was found that from the perspective of the central government, when promoting independent colleges, it is important that they are not only seen as a general private university, but can function as a fully independent university within the independent colleges system. However, it seems that the central government is still looking at how these independent colleges will be sustained in the future.
Looking at the changes of the past 10 years, the effects of the development of independent colleges are unclear. However, it can be said that there is a gap between policy intentions and the current situation, indicating the limitations of recent policy. The reason for this appears to be that the mechanisms of the policy are too rigid to be applied to the diverse types of independent colleges, which can be classified in five patterns according to differential relationship between the three main stakeholders (local government, parent university, investment side): "parent university driven type," "parent university attached type," "relatively independent-public benefit type," "public benefit type,” and "revenue-oriented investment type".
Above all, the paper tried to construct a triangle model that can describe the relationship between three main stakeholders that influence the efficacy of policy regulation in any single case, based on the theory of The Triangle of Co-ordination by Clark (1983). Based on the distribution of profit to the three main stakeholders, the five patterns can be classified in four groups as follows: "investor-led initiatives group," "local government regulation group," "parent university regulation group," and "public interest rule group". After examining the influence of the three main stakeholders in each group, it is possible to predict their development trajectories. For example, it is likely that "investor-led initiatives" will seek to transfer to a general private university, and the other three groups may develop into full independent colleges in the future.
However, regardless of the pattern of the independent colleges considered, to achieve full autonomy requires not only supportive policies from the central government, but also the cooperation of the three main stakeholders. Finally, promoting independent colleges’ competitiveness through quality assurance and differentiation remains an important and necessary lever that warrants further consideration.