Think Tank - Types

Types

Think tanks vary by ideological perspectives, sources of funding, issue focus and prospective audience. Some think tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation, which promotes conservative principles, and the Center for American Progress on the progressive front, are more partisan in purpose. Others, including the Tellus Institute, which focuses on social and environmental topics, are more issue-oriented groups. Still others, such as the Cato Institute, promote libertarian social and economic theories based on Friedrich von Hayek's idea of free markets and individual liberty.

Funding sources and the targeted audiences also define the workings of think tanks. Some receive direct government support, while others rely on private individual or corporate donors. This will invariably affect the levels of academic freedom within each think tank and to whom or what the institution feels beholden. Funding may also reflect who or what the institution wants to influence; in the United States, for example, "Some donors want to influence votes in Congress or shape public opinion, others want to position themselves or the experts they fund for future government jobs, while others want to push specific areas of research or education."

A new trend, resulting from globalization, is collaboration between think tanks across continents. For instance, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace operates offices in Washington, D.C., Beijing, Beirut, Brussels and Moscow.

The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program (TTCSP) at the University of Pennsylvania annually rates think tanks worldwide in a number of categories and presents its findings in the "Global Go-To Think Tanks" rating index. However, this approach to the study and assessment of think tanks has been criticised by think tank researchers such as Enrique Mendizabal and Goran Buldioski, Director of the Think Tank Fund, supported by the Open Society Institute.

Several authors have outlined a number of different ways of describing think tanks in a way that takes into account regional and national variations. For example from Diane Stone Diane Stone (2005):

• Independent civil society think tanks established as non-profit organisations –ideologically identifiable or not
• Policy research institutes located in or affiliated with a university
• Governmentally created or state sponsored think tank
• Corporate created or business affiliated think tank
• Political party think tanks and legacy or personal think tanks
• Global (or regional) think tanks (with some of the above)

Alternatively, one could use some of the following criteria:

• Size and focus: e.g. large and diversified, large and specialised, small and specialised
• Evolution of stage of development: e.g. first (small), second (small to large but more complex projects), and third (larger and policy influence) stages
• Strategy, including: Funding sources (individuals, corporations, foundations, donors/governments, endowments, sales/events) and business model (independent research, contract work, advocacy); The balance between research, consultancy, and advocacy; The source of their arguments: Ideology, values or interests; applied, empirical or synthesis research; or theoretical or academic research (Stephen Yeo); The manner in which the research agenda is developed—by senior members of the think tank or by individual researchers, or by the think tank of their funders; Their influencing approaches and tactics (many researchers but an interesting one comes from Abelson) and the time horizon for their strategies: long term and short term mobilisation; Their various audiences of the think tanks (audiences as consumers and public -this merits another blog; soon) (again, many authors, but Zufeng provides a good framework for China); and Affiliation, which refers to the issue of independence (or autonomy) but also includes think tanks with formal and informal links to political parties, interest groups and other political players.