THINK TANKS(1): CONTRASTING ROLE AND INFLUENCE ACROSS THE WORLD’S REGIONS

0
2434

By: Abdel Aziz Akram, Ph.D.

Researcher, alTaraqi Center

Abstract

During the strong trend of globalization, the explosion of the digital and data management capabilities, and the diverse challenges facing the world populations and governments along the past two or three decades, the developed world was forced to ferociously and aggressively innovate to compete and to survive. Their Think Tanks had to change their strategies, morph their culture(s) and experience paradigm shifts to continue their policy guiding endeavor and justify their “raison d’être”. In the meantime, think tanks in the rest of the world and more specifically in the MENA region could not impose their footprints nor could they effectively participate in the policy making and/or enriching within their respective countries mainly because of their lack of maturity and experience. More objectively, and despite some very timid attempts in Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia and/or Palestine, Egypt or Tunisia, the MENA region demonstrates a flagrant and embarrassing drag and lingering effects to surmount in its route to catch up with the aforementioned leading countries. In addition to their political quagmires, ideological and cultural hurdles, colonial and post-colonial ball-stock chains and shackles, other economical and societal conundrums have all been blamed for the disappointing inertia and/or reluctance of the MENA countries.

This series of papers is a humble attempt to shed some light on the think tanks phenomenon in the world and contrasting the development, success and contributions of these organizations or the lack thereof between the developed world and the MENA region. Occasionally, activists, academicians, entrepreneurs, leaders and social associations interested in launching their own think tanks in the Middle-East and North Africa could find herein valuable information inputs that will be instructive and beneficial for the launching or the development and growth of their projects.

Introduction

According to Plato:

“There will be no end to the troubles of states, or of humanity itself, till philosophers become kings in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers, and political power and philosophy thus come into the same hands.”

Over the past few centuries, human societies have mutated from predominantly agricultural populations to a more technological and industrial nations that naturally have witnessed their organic and strategic needs and challenges grow exponentially given the tremendous wealth generation, the booming infrastructures and the noticeable public health improvements. More particularly, in the post-World War II relative prosperity, the world started facing constantly growing and ever pressing demands for energy resources and basic commodities needed to sate the industrial increasing hunger.

As a response, several developed and industrialized nations managed to crystallize their efforts to find new innovative ways to manage the massive data collections, to accelerate effective communications, and taking advising, consulting and strategizing mechanisms to a sophisticated realm by the creation of what became to be famously known as Think Tanks. Since their first conceptualization in the early 16th century as alleged, the total number of these institutions, in their modern form, has only started increasing since the 1950’s, and their profiles and fields of focus have, since then, witnessed a great diversification driven by the continuously evolving and growing societal and governmental needs and ambitions, dreams and failures, challenges and conflicts [1] [2].

Definition/Historical Overview

Think tanks” referred historically to rooms where American strategists discussed planning and strategies in times of conflicts and wars. Later the term “think tank” was used to refer to organizations that offered military advice, such as the RAND Corporation, which was founded in 1946 as a “spinoff” from Douglas Aircraft and became an independent corporation two years later [3].

For most of the 20th century, independent public-policy groups that performed research and provided advice to governments and private institutions were founded primarily in the United States in increasing numbers, followed distantly by Canada, the UK and Western Europe. The few think tanks that existed in Japan generally lacked independence, being closely associated with government ministries or corporations.

There has been a veritable proliferation of “think tanks” around the world that began as a result of the end of the Cold War and the subsequent globalization, and the emergence of new transnational concerns and causes, such as international trade, security, environment protection and civil rights and individual liberties (see Fig. 1). Two-thirds of all the think tanks that exist today were established after 1970 and more than half were established since 1980[1][4].

img7

Fig. 1: World annual growth of the number of Think Tanks [1]

Although more than 55% of the world think tanks are North American or      European [4], recent surveys underscore the significance of the globalization effect in the regions of Eastern Europe, Latin America, Central and Southeastern Asia and Africa. Most of the think tanks in the latter regions started to burgeon only during the last 15-20 years, focusing mainly on international affairs, security studies, and foreign policy [5].

The Western think tanks will be the focus of the first part of this paper and emphasis will be on the basic concepts defining such institutions, their structures and their visions. Later on, the interest will shift to the think tanks in the MENA region, their merits and of course their tremendous issues.

So, what is a think tank???

Think Tanks, aka Think Institutions, Consulting Organizations or as casually called “Brain boxes”, are public-policy organizations using analysis and engagement research to generate policy-oriented data, advising and recommendations on domestic and international issues in fields as diverse as social policy, political strategy, economics, trade, military, technology, culture, environment, public health, education, civil rights and feminism (to name a few), thereby enabling policymakers and other public or private institutions to take informed and responsible decisions pertaining to the public life. Think tanks may be affiliated or independent institutions that are structured as permanent bodies, not ad hoc commissions. These institutions often act as a bridge or an enabling channel between the academic and policymaking communities and between states and civil society, serving in the public interest as independent voices that translate applied and basic research into a language that is understandable, reliable, and accessible for policymakers and the public. [2]

Put more explicitly and with a slightly more direct terminology, the leader of one of most famous and influential think tanks based in Washington DC, Chris DeMuth, president of the American Enterprise Institute, affirmed on a PBS show: “A think tank is like a university, but without students, where the scholars engage in fulltime research. At a think tank, we think. We read, we write, we argue, we debate, and we produce all manner of publications on government policy issues… We are different from a university in one other respect. We are not just doing the research for its own sake. We are reformers, earnest reformers. We want to improve the world. We want to have influence, as much as we can, in the political process, where there are many other considerations, and we try to write things that are interesting, accessible, and we promote our work….We try to get in the newspaper op-ed pages, and we hawk our books and magazines much more aggressively than a university would feel comfortable with.”[ 6]

We will return to the emphasized part of Mr. DeMuth later, but it is particularly interesting to notice that the intended motivation behind the existence of think tanks is to influence, reform and control, or simply lead to the control of public affairs, either for the advantage of public welfare or for private stakeholders or lobbyists with specific interests and sought after benefits. More specifically, we will address in the future parts, the arguments recently debated between experts with respect to the effectiveness of think tanks in enriching the democratic space by conducting policy research and facilitating public dialogue and debate, as opposed to being proxies used to undermine democracy by pushing policies favored by powerful corporate interests.

As already affirmed, think tanks that are already active and running in or on behalf of North America (about 1995 in the USA, Canada and Mexico) and Europe (1830, including Russia) represent the major bulk of such dominant organizations with respect to their number, productivity and influence [7]. Examples of such organizations are recollected hereunder to give the reader a starting point for their investigative research. No special criteria have been considered to name the following institutions besides their citing frequencies in the major media organs:

  • AEI, CSIS, RAND, Heritage, Brookings, Wilson Center, NBER, CAP in the USA;
  • The Center for European Policy, EAT, GCFR, LEPAC, Club de l’Horloge, Oxford RG, IJPR, TLC, Institute for Zionist Strategies, Mitvim in Europe and Israel;
  • Tokyo Foundation, II Monetary affairs and IAF in Japan;
  • CCG, SCRO, TCF, CSTEP, CEPI in China and South Asia.

Fewer think tanks are acting in South America and Sub-Sahara Africa despite the efforts and the so-called North-South development cooperation initiatives. Moreover, almost no significant think tank, in the MENA region, stands up to the developed world standards in matter of productivity and influence, despite some very timid attempts in Turkey (32), Iraq (31), Egypt (35), Palestine (28) and Tunisia (18), let alone Morocco (15) and Algeria (9).[4] [8]

Structure/Mission/Goals

Taking into consideration the relative differences in political systems and civil societies, think tanks can be presented in a number of categories. Over the last decades, several distinct organizational forms of think tanks have emerged to differentiate these groups according to their operating dynamics, patterns of recruitment, and aspirations to academic standards of objectivity and completeness in research. Those factors should be considered when deciding to launch a new think tank. According to McGann, in the global context, most think tanks tend to fall into the broad categories outlined below (Table 1) [4]:

CATEGORY DEFINITION
 

AUTONOMOUS AND INDEPENDENT

Significant independence from any one interest group or donor and autonomous in its operation and funding from government.
 

 

QUASI INDEPENDENT

Autonomous from government but controlled by an interest group, donor, or contracting agency that provides a majority of the funding and has significant influence over operations of the think tank.
GOVERNMENT AFFILIATED A part of the formal structure of government.
 

QUASI GOVERNMENTAL

Funded exclusively by government grants and contracts but not a part of the formal structure of government
UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED A policy research center at a university.
POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATED Formally affiliated with a political part
 

CORPORATE (FOR PROFIT)

A for-profit public policy research organization, affiliated with a corporation or merely operating on a for-profit basis


Table 1:
Categories of Think Tank Affiliations

Alternatively, other criteria can be used to classify think tanks, such as:

  • Size and focus:g., large and diversified, large and specialized, small and specialized;
  • Evolution of development:g., small, small to large but more complex projects, and larger and policy influence stages; and
  • Strategy, including:
    • Funding sources: e.g., individuals, corporations, foundations, donors, governments, endowments, sales, events;
    • business model: e.g., independent research, contract work, advocacy;the balance between research, consultancy, and advocacy;
    • Ideology, cultural values or financial interests and influence;
    • Applied/empirical or synthesis research, or theoretical/academic research;
    • Methodology of the research agenda: e.g., by senior members of the think tank, by individual researchers, or by the think tank of their funders;
    • Influencing approaches and tactics: e.g., many researchers with one leading personality or a research conductor;
    • Timeline for strategies: e.g., long term and short term mobilization;
    • Audiences and prospective consumers: e.g., private consumers or public; and
    • Affiliation, e.g., independence (or autonomy), formal and informal links to political parties, interest groups and other political players.

Despite, such a diverse categorization in structure, ideology and funding, think tanks do share similar broad functionalities and mechanics in their missions, and their main goals/vision remain quite comparable in serving public or private interests, achieving welfare and prosperity or enhancing security and safety thereof.

In achieving those goals, think tanks, across the spectrum of their sizes and influences, rely on relatively differently staffed armies of qualified researchers and personnel, and a wide span of financial and technological resources. Tasks such as data collection, data testing and analysis, and results dissemination through communication/conferences/publications constitute the main mission of such influential systems.

Think tanks thrive to perform and finalize their mission with three main responsibilities and procedural dynamics:

  • To strive to inform the public or the customers about current conditions and future and expected ones, ex. alongside political or economic reform and/or change;
  • To participate in convening political, cultural and social actors, should they be of diverging ideologies within a society, on the critical reforms or needs taking place therein; and
  • To initiate an advocacy-based engagement to achieve political impact.

In the following papers, the author will analyze think tanks worldwide and more particularly in the MENA regions, in view of the outcomes of the above-mentioned tasks, responsibilities and procedural mechanics.

Conclusion

Think Tanks have become a force to reckon with in the public-policy making circles across the whole world. Their bridging role between government and/or its institutions, lobbyists and circles of influence, and the public has grown exponentially during the last fifty years. Although, their profiles and their missions might differ from region to region, depending on resources and priorities, think tanks still share similar academic structures and comparable responsibilities. Understanding such similarities and discrepancies allow us to understand how to build such institutions, how to efficiently manage them to finally allow to take full advantage of their guiding research and managerial advising work.

References:

[1] Study around Think Tanks in Latin America and Brazil (2005): http://cpdoc.fgv.br/sites/default/files/BrazilHandout.pdf

[2] Think Tanks and Policy Advice in the US, Routledge 2007 and in The Fifth Estate: The Role of Think Tanks in Domestic and Foreign Policy in the US forthcoming University of Pennsylvania Press.

[3] https://www.rand.org/about/history.html

[4] “2015 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report”, James McGann (2016).

[5] “Think Tanks and the Transnationalization of Foreign Policy”, McGann, James, Foreign Policy Research Institute.

[6] http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript1209.html.

[7] “2016 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report”, James McGann (2017).

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Think_tanks_by_country.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here