The Idea Brokers: The Impact of Think Tanks on British Government

Abstract

Although there are few think tanks in Britain they have been credited with considerable influence on government policies since the late 1970s. This article charts their recent history, distinguishing between larger, ‘establishment’ bodies like the Policy Studies Institute and smaller, more politically partisan bodies such as the Centre for Policy Studies; generally the latter have enjoyed greater influence. It identifies the distinctive characteristics of these bodies–their ideological orientation, their concentration on élite opinion formers, their short to medium‐term horizons, their emphasis on originality and publicity. Think tanks face tactical dilemmas when pressing their views on Britain's comparatively closed system of government, in particular their choice between insider and outsider forms of persuasion; the tension between proximity to ministers and intellectual autonomy; and their advantages to politicians as deniable sources that can float new ideas, which can be counter‐balanced by politicians’ fluctuating appetite for radical ideas. As a case study the article examines the relations enjoyed by the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Policy Studies with Mrs Thatcher's government, and particularly the evolution of a potent network of influence embracing ministers, special advisers and backbenchers. Finally it considers the dangers of an overemphasis on novelty at the expense of feasibility, and the danger of burnout in the smaller think tanks dangers mitigated by the continuous turnover that operates in the world of think tanks.

Knowledge Regimes and Comparative Political Economy*

“…This also encourages dependency on outsiders for intelligence, analysis, and policy advice (Abelson 1998;Coleman 1991;Gellner 1995;James 1993). Indeed, the initial growth of research units in civil society after the Second World War was driven in part by a demand among policy makers for policy expertise, particularly in foreign policy.…”

“…128-29). But compared to the United States, British advocacy research units are relatively rare, have smaller staffs, and have less funding Garrnet 1998, 1996;James 1993). Over all, there is a dearth of research units in British civil society.…”

“…First, most British research units in civil society are established under law as charities and, thus, are required to be educational and non-partisan, which also prevents them from lobbying and engaging in similar political activities. And because the tax system is less accommodating for charitable giving than it is in the United States-perhaps because the British state has greater capacity for providing services that might otherwise be provided by charitiesthere are fewer foundations to support these research units in Britain in the first place (James 1993;Stone 1996b;1996a, chap 3). That said, as in other liberal market economies, corporations are another source of financial support for advocacy and scholarly research units (Fieschi and Gaffney 1998).…”

“…Many are publicly funded. Notably, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the National Institute of Economic and Social Research were established for these purposes and produce a variety of scholarly documents and reports on a wide range of policy-relevant topics (Day 2000;Denham and Garnett 1998;James 1993).…”

“…And there are public advisory bodies, such as the Social Security Advisory Committee, set up by government but acting and advising independently. Many of these are formed on an ad hoc basis (James 1993).…”