Revisiting the think-tank phenomenon

Pautz, Hartwig

doi:10.1177/0952076710378328

Cited by 66 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, the argument is that one should move from understanding think tanks as organisations with distinct and unchangeable features towards looking at what an organisation does in order to label it a 'think tank' in the context of the policy process of interest to the researcher (Pautz, 2011). Indeed, some have argued that the boundaries between university institutes, think tanks and consultancies and their forms of knowledge production and dissemination have become increasingly blurred (Kipping & Engwall, 2002;Weingart, 2005) and that the export of think tanks as an organisational type has led to the emergence of hybrid forms which resist the traditional conflation of function with a specific organisational format (Stone, 2013).…”

Section: Analysing Think Tank Power and Influence: A Difficult Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Think tanks in ‘hard times’ – the Global Financial Crisis and economic advice

Hernando¹,

Pautz

Stone

2018

Policy and Society

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Global Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Great Recession that ensued had reverberations that were not only social, political and economic. The crises also led to increased doubt in the value and usefulness of policy expertise and in its producers. This ‘epistemic crisis’ is the starting point of this thematic issue dedicated to think tanks in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis and Great Recession. The Introduction to the issue has four objectives. First, it gives a high-level overview of the challenges and opportunities think tanks have faced in the wake of these crises, given the paradox of growing demand for policy expertise precisely at the moment when such expertise and its makers became suspect for many. Second, the Introduction gives an overview of the research literature on think tanks and their role in the policy-making process and the public debate. Third, the articles comprising this thematic issue are introduced, and connections between them established. Fourth, the introduction gauges the effects of Global Financial Crisis and Great Recession, but also crises more generally, on think tanks and the environment they operate in, and speculates about the future of the think tank industry.

show abstract

Section: Analysing Think Tank Power and Influence: A Difficult Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Think tanks in ‘hard times’ – the Global Financial Crisis and economic advice

Hernando¹,

Pautz

Stone

2018

Policy and Society

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Taking these findings into account, a typology can be developed that revisits previous categorizations of think tanks (e.g. Weaver 1989; Stone 1991; for recent discussions, see 't Hart and Vromen 2008;Pautz 2011Pautz , 2014), yet considers research capacity and organizational autonomy as the prime dimensions. Those groups with both high autonomy and research capacity are referred to as strategic think tanks on the basis that they are particularly well equipped to make a substantial contribution to strategic policy-making.…”

Section: Synthesis: Organizational Features and Policy Advicementioning

confidence: 99%

Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems

Fraussen

Halpin

2016

Policy Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Think tanks have proliferated in most Western democracies over the past three decades and are often considered to be increasingly important actors in public policy. Still, their precise contribution to public policy remains contested. This paper takes the existing literature in a new direction by focusing on the capacity of think tanks to contribute to strategic policy-making and assessing their particular role within policy advisory systems. We propose that strategic policy-making capacity requires three critical features: high levels of research capacity, substantial organizational autonomy and a long-term policy horizon. Subsequently, we assess the potential of think tanks to play this particular role in policy-making, using empirical evidence from structured interviews with a set of prominent Australian think tanks.

show abstract

“…We embrace an emerging critical tradition that seeks to move beyond categorizing and describing think tanks in this way and acknowledges that what passes under the heading 'think tank' is best understood as a device for gathering and assembling forms of authority (Pautz 2011;Shaw et al 2014). This tradition builds on the work of writers such as Murray Edelman (1988) Frank Fischer (2003 and Dvora Yanow (1996Yanow ( , 2000 who examine not 'what' but 'how' a policy or organization means.…”

Section: How Is a Think Tank?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such growth has been explained in terms of an increase in business interests, a decline in traditional party politics, a blurring of the research-policy interface, increasing globalization and circulation of neoliberal values and increased demand for political commentary from the mass media (Fischer and Forester 1993;Stone 1996Stone , 2007Medvetz 2007Medvetz , 2012McGann and Sabatini 2011;Lakoff 2011). The result has been increased opportunities for a range of public and private actors -including think tanks -to contribute to the business of government (Fischer and Forester 1993;Cockett 1995;Mirowski and Plehwe 2009;Hajer and Wagenaar 2003;Pautz 2011Pautz , 2012 and in new spaces and networks allied to health policy and planning (Degeling 1996;Stone 1996).…”

Section: A Brief History Of Think Tanksmentioning

confidence: 99%

The view from nowhere? How think tanks work to shape health policy

Shaw

Russell

Parsons

et al. 2014

Critical Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Think tanks seek to shape the business of government by offering policy expertise in a number of areas, including health care. This expertise tends to be presented as 'the view from nowhere' -independent, value-neutral expertise that can inform policy. We challenge this view by examining what 'independence' means and how it is performed. We present an interpretive policy analysis of data collected from four UK-based think tanks that have sought to influence health policy. Our analysis demonstrates how a sample of healthcare think tanks publicly positioned themselves as 'independent' organizations. They drew on technocratic health planning discourse to emphasize a range of knowledge-related activities, artifacts and instrumental language that, informants suggested, allowed them to feed emerging evidence into policy and improve health services. Such positioning seemed to provide them with legitimacy in the eyes of decision makers. A parallel set of think tank activities (e.g., meetings with parliamentarians) took place 'back-stage' and focused on influencing health policy and, in the context of recent proposals to reform the English National Health Service, lending broad though not unqualified support to government proposals to extend market principles in health care. Informants appeared to seek to neutralize their presentation of such 'back-stage' influencing through a range of discursive strategies.

show abstract

Revisiting the think-tank phenomenon

Cited by 66 publications

References 41 publications

Think tanks in ‘hard times’ – the Global Financial Crisis and economic advice

Think tanks in ‘hard times’ – the Global Financial Crisis and economic advice

Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems

The view from nowhere? How think tanks work to shape health policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About