'What Works'? British Think Tanks and the 'End of Ideology'

Denham, Andrew; Garnett, Mark

doi:10.1111/j.1467-923x.2006.00758.x

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, scholars have generally sought to understand the work of think tanks by undertaking descriptive case studies (for example, Cockett , Denham and Garnett , Todd ), exploring the historical conditions in which they have emerged, and developing typologies (for example, Hart and Vromen, ). Such work tends to draw on interviews and existing literature (much of which has been published by think tanks or the individuals allied to them).…”

Section: Challenging Existing Academic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about think tanks in health care: a call for a new research agenda

Shaw

Russell

Greenhalgh

et al. 2013

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little sociological attention has been given to the role of think tanks in health policy and planning. Existing work in political science and public administration tends to define and categorise think tanks and situate them as a disinterested source of policy expertise. Despite the increasingly visible presence of think tanks in the world of health care, such work has done little to reveal how they operate, by whom and to what ends. Our article seeks to redress this firstly by examining why they have remained relatively hidden in academic analyses and secondly by advocating an interpretive approach that incorporates think tanks within the wider landscape of health policy and planning. In contrast to most existing literature, an interpretive approach acknowledges that much of the messy business of healthcare policy and planning remains hidden from view and that much can be gleaned by examining the range of organisations, actors, coalitions, everyday activities, artefacts and interactions that make up the think tank stage and that work together to shape health policy and planning. Given the paucity of research in this area, we urge the medical sociology community to open the field to further academic scrutiny.

show abstract

Section: Challenging Existing Academic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about think tanks in health care: a call for a new research agenda

Shaw

Russell

Greenhalgh

et al. 2013

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Earlier conceptualizations of think tanks and research‐based advocacy organizations suggested they were the “bridge” between the policymaker and the academic, often merely translating “research into easy‐to‐read form for policymakers to absorb” (McGann & Johnson, , p. 12). Yet, recent scholarship suggests that the bridge metaphor ought to be replaced by an analytical focus on the competition of ideas and for influence , as the magnitude and sophistication of non‐university–derived research and policy advice continues to grow (Denham & Garnett, ; Stone, ; Weingart, ; Wells, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whom Do Bureaucrats Believe? A Randomized Controlled Experiment Testing Perceptions of Credibility of Policy Research

Doberstein¹

2016

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

More than ever before, analysts in government have access to policy-relevant research and advocacy, which they consume and apply in their role in the policy process. Academics have historically occupied a privileged position of authority and legitimacy, but some argue this is changing with the rapid growth of think tanks and research-based advocacy organizations. This article documents the findings from a randomized controlled survey experiment using policy analysts from the British Columbia provincial government in Canada to systematically test the source effects of policy research in two subject areas: minimum wage and income-splitting tax policy. Subjects were asked to read research summaries of these topics and then assess the credibility of each article, but for half of the survey respondents the affiliation/ authorship of the content was randomly reassigned. The experimental findings lend evidence to the hypothesis that academic research is perceived to be substantially more credible than think tank or advocacy organization research, regardless of its content. That increasingly externalized policy advice systems are not a pluralistic arena of policy research and advice, but instead subject to powerful heuristics that bureaucrats use to sift through policy-relevant information and advice, demands added nuance to both location and content-based policy advisory system models.KEY WORDS: expert credibility, policy advisory systems, social science experimentation 384 0190-292X V C 2016 Policy Studies Organization

show abstract

“…The United Kingdom has a plethora of think tanks whose variations go beyond simple party political relationships. They also include differing models of funding (from project funding, fundraising to membership income), histories, missions and flows of staff to and from the public and private sectors as well as political parties and government (Denham and Garnett 2006). Table 1 provides summary information on the four thinks considered in more detail in this paper.…”

Section: Think Tanks In Regional Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The following issues are considered in turn. Firstly, recent literature on think tanks is reviewed, and in particular the contributions of Stone (1996, 2007), Ladi (2005) and McGann and Johnson (2005), Denham and Garnett (2006)Sherrington (2000) and Schlesinger (2009). Interwoven with this work is the conceptualization of the processes which may be at play in understanding the governance role of think tanks, and in particular the extent to which ideas and policies are transferred, copied and implemented (Dolowitz and Marsh 2000; James and Lodge 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prescriptions for Regional Economic Dilemmas: Understanding the Role of Think Tanks in the Governance of Regional Policy

Wells

2011

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the role of think tanks in the governance of regional policy. The paper critically reviews a series of reports by United Kingdom (UK) based think tanks, published between 2002 and 2008, a period of interest on the part of national government in the most appropriate configuration of subnational governance. Policy transfer and the role of ideas in regional policy provide the framework for analysis. The interpretation of the findings suggests that the think tanks considered are largely products of national policy debate and party politics in the United Kingdom, despite efforts to devolve power. This is surprising given debates about the influence of European Union regional funding on UK regional policy, seen as a prime example of multi‐level governance.

show abstract

'What Works'? British Think Tanks and the 'End of Ideology'

Cited by 15 publications

References 3 publications

Thinking about think tanks in health care: a call for a new research agenda

Thinking about think tanks in health care: a call for a new research agenda

Whom Do Bureaucrats Believe? A Randomized Controlled Experiment Testing Perceptions of Credibility of Policy Research

Prescriptions for Regional Economic Dilemmas: Understanding the Role of Think Tanks in the Governance of Regional Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About