Academic Pursuits and Involvement in Decision-Making: Study on the Formation of U.S. University Think Tanks
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Overview of Think Tanks
“…A think tank can be profit or nonprofit; A think tank must, however, be a permanent entity as opposed to a study commission or special group with a temporary assignment.
…The primary function of a think tank as the term is used here is to act as a bridge between knowledge and power and between science/technology and policy-making in areas of broad interest. A currently popular term for this role is “policy research” or research that produces ideas, analysis, and alternatives relevant to people who make policy.
…A think tank has several general characteristics. It is oriented to scientific methodologies, such as operations research, but is by no means limited to scientific issues. Because of the nature of the problems it faces and the techniques it employs, a think tank is invariably multidisciplinary—that is, it is seldom limited to professionals from one field while working on any given project and will almost always use a team of experts from a number of fields on large long-range projects.”
2.2. Characteristics of Think Tanks
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Object
3.2. Variable Selection
4. Findings
4.1. How Do University Think Tanks Maintain the Academic, Intellectual, and Professional Nature of Their Research?
4.1.1. To Propose the Development Idea of Using Knowledge for Decision-Making and Serving the Public
4.1.2. To Establish a Compound Research Team Composed of Outstanding Talents
4.2. How Do University Think Tanks Maintain Objectivity, Autonomy and Independence?
4.2.1. To Form a Board of Directors with Diverse Backgrounds
4.2.2. To Seek Diversified and Transparent Sources of Financing
4.3. How Do University Think Tanks Disseminate Ideas and Policy Research Products?
4.3.1. To Disseminate Ideas and Products through Multiple Channels
4.3.2. To Participate in Decision-Making through Alumni Networks
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Aditi Kumar. 2020. “Q&A: Aditi Kumar” Fall/Winter 2019–2020. Available online: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/qa-aditi-kumar/ (accessed on 24 April 2020).
- CASS. 2017. The AMI Research Report on Comprehensive Evaluation of Chinese Think Tanks. Available online: http://zqb.cyol.com/html/2017-11/20/nw.D110000zgqnb_20171120_3-02.htm (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- CCTTSE. 2016. CTTI Source Think Tank MRPA Evaluation Report. Available online: https://cttrec.nju.edu.cn/DFS//file/2019/09/12/201909121053006671ib5ha.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Chance, Alek. 2016. Think Tanks in the United States: Activities, Agendas, and Influence. ICAS Reports 2016. Available online: https://onthinktanks.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ICAS-Report-2016-Think-Tanks-in-the-US-2.pdf (accessed on 29 April 2020).
- Chu, Ming. 2013. Comparative Study of US and European Think Tanks. Beijing: China Social Science Press, p. 10. [Google Scholar]
- Dickson, Paul. 1971. Think Tanks. New York: Atheneum, pp. 5–28. [Google Scholar]
- Haass, Richard N. 2002. Think Tanks and U.S. Foreign Policy: A Policy-Maker’s Perspective. Available online: https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/p/rem/15506.htm (accessed on 30 April 2021).
- Hu, Wei, Tian Wu, and Yanchao Wang. 2018. Analysis and evaluation of the Global Think Tank Report. China Social Science Evaluation 3: 116–24, 28. [Google Scholar]
- Leeson, Peter T., Matt E. Ryan, and Claudia R. Williamson. 2012. Think tanks. Journal of Comparative Economics 40: 62–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lipton, Eric, Nicholas Confessore, and Brooke Williams. 2016. Think Tank Scholar or Corporate Consultant? It Depends on the Day. Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/think-tank-scholars-corporate-consultants.html (accessed on 25 February 2022).
- Liu, Xiwen. 2018. Starting a new journey of building a new type of think tank with Chinese characteristics. Think Tank: Theory and Practice 1: 1. [Google Scholar]
- Lyu, Qing. 2016. From think tank research theory to science and technology think tank construction—Interview with Pan Jiefeng, President of Institute of Science and Technology Strategic Consulting, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Think Tank: Theory and Practice 6: 2–5. [Google Scholar]
- Lyu, Qing. 2022. Participants and practitioners in the construction of national high-end think tanks: The transformation, development and future vision of the Institute of Science and Technology Strategic Consulting, Chinese Academy of Sciences—Interview with Dean Pan Jiaofeng. Think Tank Theory and Practice 5: 150–53. [Google Scholar]
- Lyu, Qing, and Ruiying Luan. 2017. Implications of the U.S. Think Tank Development Experience for the Construction of a New Type of Think Tank with Chinese Characteristics—Interview with Dr. Raymond J. Struyck, Senior Fellow, Institute for Development Performance, Washington. Think Tank: Theory and Practice 1: 84–91. [Google Scholar]
- McGann, James. 2007. Think Tanks and Policy Advice in the US: Academics, Advisors and Advocates. New York: Routledge, p. 3. [Google Scholar]
- Mcgann, James. 2019. Think Tanks, Foreign Policy and the Emerging Powers. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 22–38. [Google Scholar]
- McGann, James. 2020. The 2019 Global Go to Think Tank Index Report. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, pp. 13–56. [Google Scholar]
- McGann, James, and Richard Sabbatini. 2010. Global Think Tanks: Policy Networks and Governance. Translated by Xue Han, and Xiaowen Wang. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press, p. 8. [Google Scholar]
- McGann, James, Anna Viden, and Jillian Rafferty. 2014. How Think Tanks Shape Social Development Policies. Translated by Xiaoyi Wang, Qian Zhang, Yanbo Li, and Shaoxiong Zheng. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, pp. 19–40. [Google Scholar]
- Medvetz, Tom. 2014. The Myth of Think Tank Independence. Available online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/09/09/the-myth-of-think-tank-independence/ (accessed on 25 February 2022).
- Medvetz, Tomas. 2012. Think tanks in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
- Moncada, Andrea, and Enrique Mendizabal. 2013. Think Tank Boards: Composition and Practices. Available online: https://onthinktanks.org/articles/think-tank-boards-composition-and-practices/ (accessed on 8 October 2022).
- Pautz, Hartwig. 2012. Think-Tanks, Social Democracy and Social Policy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 15. [Google Scholar]
- Rich, Adrew. 2005. Think Tanks, Public Policy, and the Politics of Expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 80–110. [Google Scholar]
- Ruser, Alexander. 2018. What to think about think tanks: Towards a conceptual framework of strategic think tank behaviour. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 31: 179–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shambaugh, David. 2002. China’s international relations think tanks: Evolving structure and process. The China Quarterly 171: 575–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stone, Diane. 2000. Think tank transnationalisation and non-profit analysis, advice and advocacy. Global Society 14: 153–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volmar, Eric, and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. 2020. Case Study Research: A State-of-the-Art Perspective. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Huiyao, and Lyu Miao. 2014. Think Tank of the Great Nation. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, p. 226. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Lili. 2013. Gradually Forming a Think Tank Market of Chinese Characteristics. Available online: https://paper.cntheory.com/html/2013-12/16/nw.D110000xxsb_20131216_1-A6.htm (accessed on 17 May 2020).
- Wang, Lili. 2017. Analysis on the Core Competitiveness of American Think Tank. Think Tank Theory and Practice 2: 10–15, 32. [Google Scholar]
- Weaver, R. Kent. 1989. The Changing World of Think Tanks. PS Political Sci. Politics 22: 563–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weidenbaum, Murray. 2010. Measuring the influence of think tanks. Society 47: 134–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, Lan, and Xufeng Zhu. 2006. “Chinese Thought Bank”: Meaning, Classification and Research Prospects. Scientific Research 3: 321–27. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, Robert K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. New York: Sage, vol. 5. [Google Scholar]
Scholars | Perspectives on Think Tanks |
---|---|
Paul Dickson (1971) | The primary function of a think tank as the term is used here is to act as a bridge between knowledge and power and between science/technology and policy making in areas of broad interest. A currently popular term for this role is “policy research” or research that produces ideas, analysis, and alternatives relevant to people who make policy. |
Paul Dickson (McGann 2019) | From a global perspective, a think tank can be for-profit or non-profit; supported by the government, part of the government, completely free of the government, or supported by a number of institutions, such as a company or university; and, finally, must practice relative academic freedom. |
Harold Orans (McGann 2019) | Think tanks are independent, usually separate non-awarding organizations that focus most of their annual spending on the development of new technologies and research in natural and social sciences, engineering, humanities, and expertise. |
R. Kent Weaver (1989) | The think tank industry in the United States is a non-profit public policy research industry. |
Diane Stone (2000) | Think tanks usually engage in policy-oriented, time-sensitive research, seek to contact with policy groups, inject new ideas into policy debate, and try to influence policy through intellectual debate and analysis rather than direct lobbying, and think tanks try to create academic theories and scientific paradigms related to policy. |
Richard N. Haass (2002) | Think tanks as organizing independent institutions that conduct research and generate independent knowledge related to policy. |
Andrew Rich (2005) | Think tanks mainly rely on their expertise and ideas to influence the decision-making process. Think tanks are independent and non-profit organizations. In order to gain credibility, think tanks seek maximum independence. They try to make the public believe that they are independent of interest groups. |
Xue and Zhu (2006) | Think tanks are relatively stable and independently operating policy research and consulting institutions. |
Lili Wang (2013) | A new type of think tank with Chinese characteristics is a research institution that adheres to an independent, objective and factual research attitude in the political, economic and cultural soil of China, takes policy research and strategic research as its mission, is oriented to serve the national interest and public interest, and is not profit-oriented. |
Ruser (2018) | In societies with complex levels of knowledge, expert advice and scientific information are increasingly important, especially when political decision-makers are faced with increasingly complex global issues. |
James McGann (2019) | Think tanks are public-policy research analysis and engagement organizations that generate policy-oriented research, analysis, and advice on domestic and international issues, thereby enabling policy makers and the public to make informed decisions about public policy. These institutions often act as a bridge between the academic and policymaking communities and between states and civil society, serving in the public interest as an independent voice that translates applied and basic research into a language that is understandable, reliable, and accessible for policy makers and the public. |
Essential Features of Think Tanks | Representative Scholars that Faced Them |
---|---|
1. Based on academic research. | Think tanks need to form policy-making recommendations in in-depth academic research and identify academic issues in specialized policy-making advice and services. |
--Xiwen Liu (2018) | |
2. Operate with relative independence. | The government could not demand changes to policy recommendations in final reports. The second key term was the contractor has right to publish the final report. |
--Raymond J. Struyk (Lyu and Luan 2017) | |
3. Aim to influence decision-making. | Provide original ideas and alternatives for policy; Provide the Government with a ready pool of experts for employment; Provide a venue for high-level discussion; Educate American citizens by providing information about the world at large; Help authorities mediate and resolve conflicts. |
--Richard N. Haass (2002) | |
Carry out research on major issues and put forward advisory reports on issues of concern to the government; Consult and comment on reform programs and policy measures and to conduct third-party evaluations before the introduction of policy measures; Evaluate the implementation of major decision-making programs and policy measures; Do forward-looking and reserve research. | |
--Jiaofeng Pan (Lyu 2016) |
Think Tank Titles | Schools and Faculty | Mission/Goals/Strategy | Year Founded | Area of Focus | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Think tanks in Harvard University (Cambridge, MA) | |||||
1 | Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation | Harvard Kennedy school (HKS) | To advances excellence and innovation in governance and public policy through research, education, and public discussion. | 2003 | Politics and economy Issues of governance |
2 | Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs | HKS | To provide leadership in advancing policy-relevant knowledge about the most important challenges of international security and other critical issues where science, technology, environmental policy, and international affairs intersect; to prepare future generations of leaders for these arenas. | 1973 | International relations and security International security and diplomacy, environmental and resource issues, science, and technology policy |
3 | Carr Center for Human Rights Policy | HKS | Educate students and the next generation of leaders from around the world in human rights policy and practice; convene and provide policy-relevant knowledge to international organizations, governments, policymakers, and businesses. | 1999 | Politics and economy Human rights policy |
4 | Center for International Development | HKS | Works across Harvard University and a global network of researchers and practitioners to build, convene, and deploy talent to address the world’s most pressing challenges. Through our faculty affiliates, programs, fellows, students, and staff, we invest in growing development thinkers and doers in three ways: Build a Global Pool of Talent, Convene Academic and Practitioner Networks, Deploy Breakthrough Research. | 1999 | Politics and economy Problems of global poverty |
5 | Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government | HKS | To advance the state of knowledge and policy analysis concerning some of society’s most challenging problems at the interface of the public and private sectors. | late 1970s | Politics and economy Society’s most challenging problems |
6 | Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies | Faculty of Arts and Sciences | By fostering opportunities for innovative scholarship, creative teaching, and broad learning within a research university, we educate future leaders who make enduring contributions and bring deep knowledge to bear on contemporary problems. | 1948 | International relations and security Problems of the Eurasian region |
7 | Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies | Faculty of Arts and Sciences | To brings together a global community of world-leading academics and practitioners to advance scholarship in all fields of China Studies. | 1955 | International relations and security China Studies |
8 | Weatherhead Center for International Affairs | Faculty of Arts and Sciences | To facilitate the production of pathbreaking social science research on international, comparative, transnational, and global issues by faculty and students at Harvard. | 1958 | International relations and security International issues, domestic social, economic, and political problems |
Think tanks in Columbia University (New York, NY) | |||||
9 | Center On Global Energy Policy | School of International and Public Affairs | Producing best-in-class research, providing a global platform to communicate, and training tomorrow’s leaders and communicators. | 2013 | Environment, science, and technology Energy issues |
10 | Earth Institute | - | To develop and inspire knowledge-based solutions and educate future leaders for just and prosperous societies on a healthy planet. The School will encompass the Earth Institute’s research centers and programs, build on Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory’s decades of research, and involve schools and departments from across the University. | 1995 | Environment, science, and technology Geology, oceans, freshwater systems, climate, and atmosphere |
11 | Weatherhead East Asian Institute | - | To advance knowledge of East, Inner, and Southeast Asia, both across the university and among the public; to bring together faculty, research scholars, and students in an integrated program of teaching and research on East, Inner, and Southeast Asia; to train students to understand the countries, peoples, and cultures of East, Inner, and Southeast Asia, preparing them for a wide range of careers. | 1949 | International relations and security East, Southeast Asian |
Think tanks in the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, PA) | |||||
12 | Center for the Advanced Study of India | School of Arts and Sciences | It is the first research institution in the United States dedicated to the study of contemporary India. A national resource, it fills an urgent need for objective knowledge of India’s politics and society, rapidly changing economy, and transformation as both an ancient civilization and major contemporary power. The key goals are to nurture a new generation of scholars across disciplines and to provide a forum for dialogue among the academic, business, and foreign policy communities. Through its collaborative research initiatives, seminars, conferences, publications, and outreach, the Center provides in-depth, policy-relevant analysis of the most pressing issues facing India and the Indo-US relationship today. | 1992 | International relations and security South Asian studies and scholarship on India |
13 | Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics | A cooperative venture | Research to improve the nation’s health system. Data driven. Policy focused. | 1967 | Politics and economy The medical, economic, and social issues |
14 | Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program | Lauder Institute | To conduct research on the relationship between think tanks, politics, and public policy, produce the annual Global Go To Think Tank Index, develop capacity-building resources and programs, support a global network of close to 7000 think tanks, and train future think tank scholars and executives. | 1989 | Politics and economy. The role policy institutes play in governments and civil societies around the world |
Think tanks in Brown University (Providence, RI) | |||||
15 | Thomas J. Watson Institute | Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs | To promote a just and peaceful world through research, teaching, and public engagement | 1981 | International relations and security Poverty and inequality Natural disasters and ethnic conflict. Rapid urbanization and climate change. Globalized labor standards and cyber threats |
Think tanks in Princeton University (Princeton, NJ) | |||||
16 | Program on Science and Global Security | Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs | Science, technology, and policy for a safer and more peaceful world. | 1974 | International relations and security Nuclear, biosecurity |
Think tanks in Yale University (New Haven, CT) | |||||
17 | Yale Center for the Study of Globalization | - | Devoted to examining the impact of our increasingly integrated world on individuals, communities, and nations. The Center draws on the rich intellectual resources of the Yale community, scholars from other universities, and experts from around the world. | 2001 | International relations and security Global development, financial globalization, multilateral trade, and the provision of key global public goods |
Think Tank | Governance Form (Main Role) | Members of Board |
---|---|---|
Belfer Center, HKS | International Council (financial support) | 90% of the 57 members come from corporate sector |
Center Board of Directors (guidance) | 75% of 45 members are professors | |
CID, HKS | Global Development Council (financial support) | All the 4 members are from corporate sector |
Faculty Advisory Council (guidance) | The 9 members are mostly professors | |
M-RCBG, HKS | Advisory Council (guidance and financial support) | Almost all the 42 people come from corporate sector |
WCFIA, Harvard | Advisory Board (financial support) | About half of the 12 members are from the corporate sector |
Executive Committee (guidance) | About 80% of the 21 members are professors | |
Steering Committee (“kitchen cabinet” for Faculty Director) | All 6 members are professors | |
CGEP, Columbia | Advisory Board (support) | About 80% of the 32 members come from corporate sector |
Academic Steering Committee (guidance) | 17 members, almost all professors |
Think Tank | Fund/Foundation | Corp./Co. | Government | Individual | Others * |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Harvard Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation | 17 | 26 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
2. Harvard Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs | 9 | 1 | 1 | - | 1 |
3. Harvard Center for International Development | 2 | 9 | 1 | - | 2 |
4. Harvard Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government | 5 | 1 | - | - | 2 |
5. Columbia: Weatherhead East Asian Institute | 18 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 5 |
6. Columbia: Center on Global Energy Policy | 12 | 21 | - | 19 | 2 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lyu, Q.; Bielefield, A.; Liu, Y.Q. Academic Pursuits and Involvement in Decision-Making: Study on the Formation of U.S. University Think Tanks. Adm. Sci. 2023, 13, 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13030093
Lyu Q, Bielefield A, Liu YQ. Academic Pursuits and Involvement in Decision-Making: Study on the Formation of U.S. University Think Tanks. Administrative Sciences. 2023; 13(3):93. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13030093
Chicago/Turabian StyleLyu, Qing, Arlene Bielefield, and Yan Quan Liu. 2023. "Academic Pursuits and Involvement in Decision-Making: Study on the Formation of U.S. University Think Tanks" Administrative Sciences 13, no. 3: 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13030093