Abstract
Expert advice is gaining importance in advanced-knowledge societies. The demand for scientific knowledge increases as political decision-makers look for answers to cope with the ever more complex challenges of a globalised world. At the same time, scientific evidence has become a strategic resource capable of justifying world-views and political positions. Against this background, the ‘global spread’ of think tanks seems to respond to this growing demand for scientific expertise. Defining what a think tank is, let alone what they do and if they are able to effectively shape political ideas, is still a controversial issue. This contribution outlines a conceptual framework for analysing the strategies of different types of think tanks in distinct institutional environments. Starting with classical typologies to distinguish between organisations, those which adhere to standards of scientific inquiry at one end of a continuum and ideologically biased institutes at the other, the analytical model takes into account distinct ‘points of intervention’ and systematically considers the respective institutional and ideological environment. The first dimension allows for distinguishing between distinct effects of political ideas: They can influence decision-making as concepts in the foreground or as underlying assumptions in the background of policy debates. At the cognitive level, they can function either as programmes (foreground), serving as policy prescriptions for the political elite necessary to formulate actual agendas, or as paradigms (background). Considering different ‘knowledge regimes’ permits to test the influence of respective institutional and normative settings and simultaneously assess the assumptions and convictions underlying these models and typologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A good example is the field of international politics and security policy. Not least because of the significant successes of ‘big science’ projects and ‘operations research’ units during World War II (cf. Fortun and Schweber 1993), scientific knowledge was and is in high demand in security politics. However, the production of applicable knowledge and the giving of expert advice have not been a priority of universities in many Western European and North American countries. This opened a niche for some of the most renowned think tanks, like the RAND Corporation or the Brooking Institution in the USA, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in Sweden, Chatham House in the UK or the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP).
References
Abelson, D. E. (2009). Do think tanks matter? Assessing the impact of public policy institutes. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.
Böhme, G., & Stehr, N. (1986). The knowledge society: the growing impact of scientific knowledge on social relations. Dordrecht: D.Reidel.
Braml, J. (2006). U.S. and German think tanks in comparative perspective. German Policy Studies, 3(2), 222–267.
Campbell, J. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27, 377–409.
Campbell, J. L., & Pedersen, O. K. (2011). Knowledge regimes and comparative political economy. In D. Béland & R. Cox (Eds.), Ideas and politics in social science research (pp. 167–190). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Campbell, J. L., & Pedersen, O. K. (2014). The national origins of policy ideas: knowledge regimes in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Cockett, R. (1994). Thinking the unthinkable: think tanks and the economic counter-revolution, 1931–1983. London: HarperCollins.
Dixon, K. (1998). Les évangélistes du marché: Les intellectuelles britannique et le néo-libéralisme. Paris: Raison d’agir.
Dunlap, R. E., & Jaques, P. J. (2013). Climate change denial books and conservative think tanks: exploring the connection. Am Behav Sci, 57(6), 699–731.
Falk, S., Reheld, D., Römmele, A., & Thunert, M. (2006). Handbuch Politikberatung. VS-Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften: Wiesbaden.
Fortun, M. A., & Schweber, S. (1993). Scientists and the legacy of World War II: the case of operations research (OR). Soc Stud Sci, 23, 595–642.
Gosling, F. G. (1999). The Manhattan Project. Making the atomic bomb. Washington D.C.: United States Department of Energy.
Grundmann, R., & Stehr, N. (2005) Knowledge. Critical Concepts. London, New York: Routledge.
Grundmann, R., & Stehr, N. (2012) The Power of Scientfic Knowldge. From Research to Public Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: the institutional foundation of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hames, T., & Feasey, R. (1994). Anglo-American think tanks under Reagan and Thatcher. In A. Adonis & T. Hames (Eds.), A conservative revolution? The Thatcher-Reagan decade in perspective. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Hird, J. A. (2005). Power, knowledge and politics. Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press.
Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch. Science advisers as policymakers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Katzenstein, P. J. (1978). Between power and plenty: foreign economic policies of advanced industrial states. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Kern, T., & Ruser, A. (2010). The role of think tanks in the South Korean discourse on East Asia. In R. Frank, J. E. Hoare, P. Köllner, & S. Pares (Eds.), Korea 2010. Politics, economy and society (pp. 113–134). Leiden: Brill.
Luhmann, N. (1992). Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2003). Defeating Kyoto: the conservative movement’s impact on U.S. climate change policy. Soc Probl, 5(3), 348–373.
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2010). Anti-reflexivity: the American conservative movement’s success in undermining climate science and policy. Theory, Culture, and Society, 27(2–3), 100–133.
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2011). Cool dudes: the denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States. Glob Environ Chang, 21, 1163–1172.
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2015). Challenging climate change: the denial countermovement. In R. E. Dunlap & R. Brulle (Eds.), Climate change and society: sociological perspectives (pp. 300–332). New York: Oxford University Press.
McGann, J. G. (2010). The global go-to think tanks. Pennsylvania University: The Think Tans & Civil Society Program.
McGann, J.G. (2016). 2015 global go-to think tanks report. TTSCP Global Go To Think Tanks Index Reports, 10.
McGann, J. G., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Comparative think tanks, politics and public policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
McGann, J. G., & Sabatini, R. (2011). Global think tanks: policy networks and governance. London: Routledge.
McGann, J. G., & Weaver, R. K. (2000). Think tanks and civil societies. Catalysts for ideas and action. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Mirowski, P. (2013). Never let a serious crisis go to waste: how neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown. London: Verso.
Misztal, B. A. (2012). Public intellectuals and think tanks: a free market of ideas? International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 25, 127–141.
Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001) Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Polity Press, Oxford.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury.
Osborne, T. (2004). On mediators: intellectuals and the ideas trade in the knowledge society. Econ Soc, 33(4), 430–447.
Pielke, R. (2007). The honest broker. Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Popper, K. ([1935] 1992). The logic of scientific discovery. London and New York: Routledge.
Proctor, R. N. (2008). Agnotology: a missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its study). In R. N. Proctor & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Agnotology: the making and unmaking of ignorance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Proctor, R. N., & Schiebinger, L. (2008) Agnotology. The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ricci, D. (1993). The transformation of American politics: the new Washington and the rise of think tanks. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ruser, A. (2013) Environmental Think Tanks in Japan and South Korea. Trailblazers of Vicarious Agents? In M. Carmen (Eds.) Nature, Environment and Culture in East Asia. The Challenge of Climate Change. Climate and Culture Series. (pp. 319–351). Leiden: Brill.
Ruser, A. (2015) Perspectives of and Challenges for a social philosophy of Science. Epistemologyand Philosophy of Science, 45(3), 54–64.
Sheingate, A. (2016). Building a business of politics: the rise of political consultancies and the transformation of American democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stehr, N. (2004). Introduction: a world made of knowledge. In N. Stehr (Ed.), The governance of knowledge (pp. ix–xxvi). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Stehr, N., & Meja, V. (2005). Society and knowledge: contemporary perspectives in the sociology of knowledge and science. London: Transaction Publishers.
Stehr, N., Ruser, A. (2017)‚ Social scientists as technicians, advisors and meaning producers. Innovation: the European Journal of Social Science Research, 30(1), 24–35.
Stone, D. (1996). Capturing the political imagination. Think tanks and public policy. London: Frank Cass.
Stone, D. (2004). Introduction. In D. Stone & A. Denham (Eds.), Think tank traditions: policy research and the politics of ideas. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Stone, D., & Denham, A. (2004) Think Tank Traditions: Policy Analysis across Nations. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Thunert, M. (1999). Think Tanks als Ressourcen der Politikberatung: Bundesdeutsche Rahmenbedingungen und Perspektiven. Forschungsjournal Neue Soziale Bewegungen, 12(3), 10–19.
Thunert, M. (2004). Think tanks in Germany. In D. Stone & A. Denham (Eds.), Think tank traditions: policy research and the politics of ideas. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Weaver, K. (1989). The changing world of think tanks. Political Science and Politics, 22(3), 563–578.
Weidenbaum, M. (2010). Measuring the influence of think tanks. Social Science And Public Policy, 47, 134–137.
Wildavsky, A. ([1979] 2007) Speaking truth to power. The art and craft of policy analysis. London: Transaction Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ruser, A. What to Think About Think Tanks: Towards a Conceptual Framework of Strategic Think Tank Behaviour. Int J Polit Cult Soc 31, 179–192 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-018-9278-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-018-9278-x