{"id":1472,"date":"2013-06-14T13:58:48","date_gmt":"2013-06-14T18:58:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/\/"},"modified":"2016-01-21T14:01:00","modified_gmt":"2016-01-21T19:01:00","slug":"report-review-democracy-think-tanks-in-action","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/report-review-democracy-think-tanks-in-action\/","title":{"rendered":"Report Review: Democracy Think Tanks in Action"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Network of Democracy Research Institutes (NDRI) has just launched its latest report, \u201cDemocracy Think Tanks in Action: Translating Research into Policy in Young and Emerging Democracies<\/a>\u201d with a\u00a0panel<\/a>\u00a0that brought together thinktankers from several countries. The report compiles nine country studies written by think tankers themselves.<\/p>\n

At the onset of the report, democracy think tanks are described as those<\/p>\n

that conduct research and analysis on democracy, democratization, and related topics in comparative government and international affairs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is the overarching characteristic of all the organizations that are part of the study but, in practice, they function in very different ways \u00a0depending on their context.\u00a0 Although many cases touch on the usual issues (lack of funding, difficulty to recruit staff, and the apparent challenge of making policy makers \u201clisten\u201d to think tanks) there are interesting takeaways from the cases.<\/p>\n

One important aspect in trying to understand the work of think tanks is their context. These cases touch on two important aspects of those contexts: the international space and the relationships among different non-governmental actors. There are also some clues on the relevance of ideas and narratives in the work think tanks carry out.<\/p>\n

Watch the video of the event:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.vimeo.com\/67594529<\/p>\n

International influences and local contexts<\/h2>\n

The cases of Romania and Turkey portray the relevance of the external pressures to change the internal governance for the countries to participate in NATO and the European Union respectively, and how this can become a favorable factor for think tanks to influence policy.<\/p>\n

The challenge for think tanks in those settings is to maintain also its independence from those international bodies that exert pressure on governments. These are two cases where the external pressure is more direct and related to particular goals of external policy.<\/p>\n

However, this external pressure might come in more indirect ways.\u00a0 The case of Georgia explores how the western conception of democracy has become an ideal in the country, which has translated into greater leverage power for ideas that come directly from those countries. In this case, the external influence shifts influencing power from internal think tanks to other international agents:<\/p>\n

\u2026the grand idea that inspires the country\u2019s policies today is that Geor\u00adgia should be like the West, and this is especially so in the realm of democracy. Therefore, the West serves as a kind of collective think tank. It is a reservoir of models that should be implemented in Georgia and an ultimate source of pub\u00adlic-policy wisdom.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

From a different angle, the Korean case explores how the international context became a niche for EAI, an independent think tank that faced an entrenched knowledge system were the main policy-research relationships were between government agencies and think tanks they founded. They describe their work as \u201cfocused on operat\u00ading outside of the country and drawing international attention to South Korea\u201d.<\/p>\n

Throughout the cases we also see very clearly the relevance of think tanks’ ability to understand the context of the third sector, or the non-governmental actors broadly. It is apparent that the ability to link with others is a key aspect of success. In Slovakia, there has been a process of association among these actors that allowed the authors of the case to see themselves as \u201cpart of a broader community of analytical cen\u00adters, think tanks, watchdogs, human rights NGOs, and action-oriented civil-society organizations participating in the democratic modernization of the coun\u00adtry.\u201d As a result, improving the democracy in the country is believed to be not the direct outcome of a single organization’s work but of a vibrant network of actors:<\/p>\n

The fruits of association have raised the quality of life in Slovakia. NGOs have created, disseminated, and reproduced three specific kinds of wealth in society: cognitive wealth, a wealth of practical experience, and wealth of prosocial pat\u00adterns of behavior.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A different take on this is that proposed in the Lebanese case were the author argues for the need to work together but with distinctive roles instead of trying to do out everything within one institution.\u00a0 It is interesting to see a case where a think tank has been part of shaping the third sector. This could also be a\u00a0function for think tanks<\/a>, which without certain spaces to act and to comment on policies, can have very little influence.<\/p>\n

The role of narratives and ideas<\/h2>\n

In the Ecuadorian case we tried to\u00a0argue for the need for narratives<\/a>\u00a0in order to help the evidence come alive. The Argentinean case, which reported the opinions from legislators revealed the difficulty of conveying those results without a broader narrative that takes into account a clear context of\u00a0political polarization<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But narratives, it seems, are not only important for the work think tanks convey but for their own spirit, too. Do think tanks see change through a technocratic path or do they follow a more critical attitude toward the way change happens and their role in it? From the Slovakian case:<\/p>\n

The prevailing preoccupation with economic agendas, indicators, numbers, and \u201chard facts\u201d indirectly nurtures a mentality that is less sensitive to con\u00adcepts like solidarity, social cohesion, social bonds, and social capital, which could become worthy thematic orientations for democracy resource centers in Slovakia and beyond.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

From the Lebanese case:<\/p>\n

[Our think tank] was born of a conviction that the minds and methods usually found in academia should be brought to bear on issues of public affairs and the public good.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As these two quotes reveal, think tanks see their role not only as one of bringing evidence to the table but also as being able to construct narratives that allow others to find common ground, space for collaboration, and also develop their own critical thinking.<\/p>\n

Overview of the cases<\/h2>\n
    \n
  1. Gabriel Salvia of the\u00a0Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (Argentina)<\/a>\u00a0shares the experience of the Legislative Barometer, including the challenges of counting with significant participation of all parties in highly polarized settings.<\/li>\n
  2. Orazio Bellettini Cede\u00f1o and myself on behalf of\u00a0Grupo FARO (Ecuador)<\/a>, present two cases: one where the think tank was directly involved in a campaign against clientelism and another where a\u00a0coalition of scientists and activities conveyed an original idea to conserve the rainforest<\/a>.<\/li>\n
  3. Ghia Nodia of the\u00a0Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy, and Development (Georgia)<\/a>\u00a0explores the context where the broader non-profit sector works, and suggests for a wider perspective of what is influence in complex settings.<\/li>\n
  4. Emmanuel Gyimah-Boadi, Regina Amanfo Tetteh, and Kojo Asante of the\u00a0Ghana Center for Democratic Development<\/a>\u00a0report on two cases from the think tanks: one where they advocated for the Disability Act, and another where they enhanced transparency in electoral processes.<\/li>\n
  5. Sami Atallah of the\u00a0Lebanese Center for Policy Studies<\/a>\u00a0shares a reflection of the need to separate research from activism based on the think tank\u2019s experience promoting local elections.<\/li>\n
  6. Simona Popescu and Adriana Iorche of the\u00a0Romanian Academic Society<\/a>\u00a0reflect on the institution\u2019s accomplishments including the support to pass a freedom of information and transparency bill.<\/li>\n
  7. Martin Butora of the\u00a0Institute for Public Affairs (Slovakia)<\/a>\u00a0portrays, through the Institute\u2019s experience, the benefits of a vivid and connected third-sector including civil society organizations, think tanks, advocacy groups and even individual researchers.<\/li>\n
  8. Sook Jong-Lee of the\u00a0East Asia Institute (South Korea),<\/a>\u00a0explores the think tank scene in the country and shares the Institute\u2019s strategy to find a niche in a complex and vivid scene. They propose the concept of unofficial diplomacy as part of their role.<\/li>\n
  9. \u00d6zge Gen\u00e7 of the\u00a0Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation<\/a>, delineates the Foundation\u2019s work on judicial and constitutional reforms in the context of Turkey\u2019s process towards being a member of the European Union.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The Network of Democracy Research Institutes (NDRI) has just launched its latest report, \u201cDemocracy Think Tanks in Action: Translating Research into Policy in Young and Emerging Democracies\u201d with a\u00a0panel\u00a0that brought together thinktankers from several countries. The report compiles nine country studies written by think tankers themselves. At the onset of the report, democracy think tanks […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[217,401,400,204],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1472"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1472"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1472\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1472"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1472"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}