Skip to main content
For certain Indicators, the time period to which Indicator Evidence can correspond is restricted. The below section explains this system:

​
Indicator Evidence Period Classifications

The evidence acceptable for China Index Indicators falls into three classifications: “Case Evidence,” “System Evidence,” and “Diplomatic Position Evidence.” Each Indicator accepts one of these forms of evidence. Under each of these classifications, the time period for which the local expert’s documentary evidence can apply is different. The submission platform shows the classification of evidence each Indicator accepts. The purpose of this system is to account for the fact that influence from the PRC can be exerted long-term in the form of systems, while other influence is only expressed in single instances as cases. Meanwhile, the effect of PRC influence often manifests in the settled diplomatic positions of states. The China Index strives to provide a current picture of PRC influence in Index countries. Therefore the methodology must restrict cases to the evidence period of the edition. Evidence regarding cases of PRC influence must fall within the 18 months before the response is written, whereas the evidence accepted for system and diplomatic position influence phenomena can apply to a longer time-frame. The below sections explains in more detail the distinctions between these evidence types.

​
Case Evidence Indicators

Concerning influence phenomena that occur at a particular moment of time and do not need to persist over an extended period.
  • E.g. visa denials, self-censorship, one-time donations, criminal charges, economic espionage, cyber attacks etc.
Example Case Evidence Indicator:
  • In my country, there are journalists who have had pressure exerted on them by the PRC or PRC-connected individuals or entities after reporting or making public statements that are critical of the PRC, including (but not limited to) public denunciation, denial or cancellation of press credentials or visas, lawsuits or legal threats… [Media Domain]
Case Evidence Indicator time period:
  • Case Indicators use the past 18 months, counted back from the day the response is written. A case from that period is required to answer the Indicator in the affirmative; earlier cases cannot be considered.
  • For the 2026 edition, no case from before 1 January 2025 can be considered.

​
System Evidence Indicators

Concerning influence phenomena that necessarily persists over an extended period of time and can be proven to exist with a written document:
  • E.g. contracts, trade deals, multi-year exchange programs, content-sharing agreements, sanctions, legislation etc.
Example System Evidence Indicator:
  • In my country, there are journalists or media organizations that are members of, or officially affiliated with, media networks created, organized, or coordinated by PRC-connected entities. [Media Domain]
System Evidence Indicators time period:
  • System Indicators assess a state that remains in place. A system that existed in the past does not count unless it is still in place, or the Indicator explicitly asks about the past.
  • Evidence of the system from before data collection is admissible, as long as the partner does not find evidence to suggest that the system has since ended or been altered.
    • Therefore, if you identify a system of influence that was initiated at some time in the past, it is important to verify that this system has not been terminated since then.
N.B. There are times where documentary evidence for a System Evidence Indicator does not specify when this system will end.E.g. A news article from 2015 may discuss the initiation of an exchange program between reporters from the Index country and China, but does not specify when this program will end.E.g. A 2017 press release shows a $100,000 USD investment from a PRC-affiliated entity in a technology firm in the Index country, but does not specify in what timeframe the money will be spent.In these cases, the regional partner must use their judgment to conclude whether or not this influence is likely to persist to the present day. For example, if the evidence appears long before the present day, or the monetary value of an investment is too small to be sustained from the date of announcement to the present day, the regional partner could conclude that the system is no longer in place. We encourage you to use your sound judgment and accept that there cannot be 100% certainty in specific cases.

​
Diplomatic Position Evidence Indicators

Concerning only Indicators 8–11 of the Foreign Policy Domain.
  • Diplomatic positions regarding PRC South China Sea claims, Uyghur, Tibet, and Hong Kong repression
Example Diplomatic Position Evidence Indicator:
  • My government has supported, remained silent about, or opposed the PRC’s treatment, governance, or policy towards the Uyghur population in Xinjiang. [Foreign Policy Domain]
Diplomatic Position Evidence Indicators time period:
  • Evidence regarding a diplomatic position can only be drawn from the time period that the current ruling administration (the “executive,” i.e. president, prime minister, military chief) has been in power. For example, if an administration has been in power for five years, the respondent can draw evidence on diplomatic positions from any time during those five years, as long as the diplomatic position has not changed. A position stated earlier in that tenure remains usable if it has not changed, including when it is older than the past 18 months.
    • Therefore, if a new administration takes power (either through elections or some kind of coup/revolution), the respondent can only draw evidence on diplomatic positions from the time period belonging to the new administration.