The nature and impact of think tanks in contemporary Britain

Denham, Andrew; Garnett, Mark

doi:10.1080/13619469608581367

Cited by 21 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, there is a rich, empirically informed literature that discusses the systemic form and activities of these bodies. Denham and Garnett (1996) have studied the nature and impact of think tanks in Britain. Baumgartner and Leech (2001) have examined patterns of interest group involvement in US politics and Baumgartner et al (2009) have traced the relationship between lobbying and policy change.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who meets whom: Access and lobbying during the coalition years

Dommett

Hindmoor

Wood

2017

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2010, the incoming Coalition government announced that it would publish details of meetings between ministers and outside interests. We have collated and coded these data and, in this article, describe patterns of access between 2010 and 2015. In some respects, access is notably fragmented. No single organisation attends more than 2.5% of the 6292 meetings held by ministers. On the contrary, business, collectively, attends fully 45% of all meetings: more than twice the share of any other category of organisation. We also find evidence of distinctive policy communities characterised by high levels of access between particular interests and ministers within specific departments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who meets whom: Access and lobbying during the coalition years

Dommett

Hindmoor

Wood

2017

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…133 Others, such as Denham and Garnett, have taken a more sceptical view, casting doubt on its specific policy impact, while recognising their [think-tanks] role in providing 'intellectual legitimacy' and 'help[ing] to sustain the radical momentum of Thatcherism by reinforcing the sense of a collective crusade'. 134 But to concede that is to concede a great deal. For a while, as one commentator has argued, terms such as 'climate of opinion' need more precise definition than it has yet had, 135 there can be little doubt that, however that concept is defined, think-tanks such as the IEA and the Adam Smith Institute and the ideas and analysis they purveyed did establish an ideological context within which politicians of all major parties practised, and will continue to practise, the art of the possible.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hollowing Out the State: Public Choice Theory and the Critique of Keynesian Social Democracy

Thompson¹

2008

Contemporary British History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers public choice theory as a component of the New Right critique of Keynesian social democracy in the 1960s and early 1970s. More specifically, it details the nature of the challenge it posed to the conception of public bureaucrats, public bureaucracies and the ethos of public service that informed the Keynesian social democratic agenda and discusses its dissemination through think-tanks and other media. It also assesses its consequent impact and legacy, arguing that public choice theory struck at the heart of Keynesian social democracy and left a legacy more profoundly destructive in this regard than either monetarism or Austrian economics.

show abstract

“…Clearly, this was not the first time that the appeal to logos was used to provide intellectual legitimacy for political ideologies. Margaret Thatcher (Conservative Prime Minister 1979–1990) founded and made extensive use of ‘think tanks’ to ‘sustain the radical momentum of Thatcherism by reinforcing the sense of a collective crusade’ (Denham and Garnett, 1996: 52). Since then, the rhetorical appeal to evidence base has been a key contributor to making the neoliberalisation of planning not only stick, but also move forward.…”

Section: What Makes An Ideology Stick?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinventing planning and planners: Ideological decontestations and rhetorical appeals

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the debate about ideologically motivated planning reforms. It aims to advance the debate by exploring how change is legitimised through forms of rhetorical persuasion. It shows how political ideologies become embedded in planning policies and practices through strategies of legitimation aimed at justifying specific ideas, beliefs and values as self-evident and inevitable. These legitimation strategies rely on distinctive rhetorical appeals to steer planning discourses, policies and institutions. By using short illustrative examples of ‘ideology in action’ from Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands, the article shows that various combinations of rhetorical appeals to logos, ethos, pathos and doxa (logic, character, emotion and identity) are often simultaneously at work to naturalise contested planning reforms.

show abstract

The nature and impact of think tanks in contemporary Britain

Cited by 21 publications

References 12 publications

Who meets whom: Access and lobbying during the coalition years

Who meets whom: Access and lobbying during the coalition years

Hollowing Out the State: Public Choice Theory and the Critique of Keynesian Social Democracy

Reinventing planning and planners: Ideological decontestations and rhetorical appeals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About