Globalisation and the Transnationalisation of Think Tanks

It is clear that think tanks have been affected by globalisation. For one thing, the process has transformed their research agendas. Institutes have been pushed to look beyond primarily national matters to address global issues and trans-border policy problems concerning the environment, security, trade, refugees and human rights. In tandem with the globalization of research agendas has been the global dissemination of think tank research via the Internet. Many think tank researchers have been important commentators on globalization. As noted by one Vice President of the World Bank, think tanks play an important role in interpreting legal, financial and administrative codes of the international governance architecture. He states:

WTO rules and regulations are, of course, complex. So the first thing is to understand the rules and the regulations; As I have seen, the government and think-tanks in Viet Nam have put a lot of efforts into understanding these. But you need to understand how they impact the Viet Namese economy too: what sector will benefit, what sector will be opened to competitions (Ian Goldin, Saigon Times, 19th November 2003)¹⁸

For Viet Nam, this means scaling up capacity in key ministries of trade and finance not only in economic policy analysis but also in international law. Regionalisation could be a stronger dynamic than globalisation.

In regional fora, think tanks target regional groupings such as Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) or Mercosur. The European Union (EU) clearly acts as a policy magnet for think tanks (Ullrich, 2004). The policy challenges of transition have prompted a proliferation of institutes in Central and Eastern Europe necessitating formation of regional networks by UNDP and the Open Society Institute. A more recent dynamic relates to global cities and the manner in which rapid industrialisation and urbanisation has created ‘micro-regional’ demand for policy research. Think tanks cluster in high concentration in global cities such as Shanghai, Singapore, New York and Sydney.

The creation of ASEAN in 1967 has generated a regional source of demand for policy analysis. Of relevance here, the ASEAN secretariat lacks sufficient strength and staff to conduct policy research and advisory functions. In short, there is a policy analysis vacuum in the formal structures. The influential role of think tanks in Southeast Asian security and economic co-operation has long been recognized in the work of ASEAN-ISIS (Morrison & Evans, 1995). Viet Nam has been involved with ASEAN-ISIS since 1995 via the Institute for International Relations. The Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace¹⁹ is also an member.

A second feature of the transnationalisation of think tanks is the use of these organizations as an unofficial means for states to project their interests abroad. American foundations and USAID (as well as other development agencies like the World Bank) have ‘exported’ the American think tank model to Central Europe, Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. The ‘think tank’ model has become an object of development policy and an organizational tool both to build capacity in policy making and to promote civil society in an American or western likeness. Transplantation does not always work.

On a more prosaic level, think tanks regularly provide a public platform for visiting dignitaries and other international events. Somewhat behind the scenes, think tanks have become venues for informal diplomacy. The ASEAN-ISIS institutes have been particularly effective with their ‘summitry’ in the security domain, and notwithstanding the dent to regional economic co-operation in the wake of the Asian financial crisis, the institutes have been important actors in keeping regional policy discussions alive and informed.

Third, independent think tanks are global in the sense of being one group of actors in global civil society. Think tanks interact with social movements and NGOs in coalitions of policy advocates to provide expertise on various policy questions. More importantly, think tanks have established their own transnational networks. PASOS – the Open Society Foundation network of policy institutes in Central and Eastern Europe – is a regional network. Global ThinkNet, convened by the Japan Center for International Exchange²⁰, hosts meetings of think tank directors and senior scholars. Through the 1990s, the Tokyo Club²¹, which is convened by Nomura Research Institute (NRI) in Japan, drew together analysts from Brookings, Chatham House, Institut for Wirtschaftsforchung, NRI and the Institut Francais des Relations Internationales. The Global Development Network is an extensive federal network primarily of economic research institutes.²² These are at the elite, mainstream and conservative end of global civil society. These networks provide an infrastructure for global dialogue and research collaboration, but institutes remain committed to the nation-state where they are legally constituted.

Fourth, think tanks are also involved in cross-national processes of policy transfer, where they go beyond detached policy analysis to advocate and spread certain policy ideas and practices (Ladi, 2005). For instance, think tanks have been vehicles for the spread of policies as diverse as privatization, anti-corruption strategies and constitutional reform. That is, the transfer of ideas as well as programs. On the first score, the ideas and concepts of the ‘new public administration’ have been transmitted to developing and transition countries by international organisations like the EU, OECD and regional Banks in partnership with think tanks and professional associations. Local think tanks play a role of interpretation, synthesis and adaptation of ‘international lessons’ to fit the national context and legal requirements. On the second score, an increasingly important development is the inclusion of think tank expertise in semi-official global policy partnerships collectively convened by business, NGOs, international organizations and governments as partnerships to deliver global public goods (Reinicke, 1999-2000).

What does the transnationalisation of think tanks mean for Viet Nam? While there are many pressing policy problems of local and national concern, Vietnamese think tanks cannot afford to ignore the regional and global domains of policy debate. National sovereignty is being eroded and new modes of policy authority are emerging with regional and global governance. In other parts of world, think tanks find it necessary – indeed are compelled – to address new arenas of decision making beyond the nation-state and to become involved in transnational networks and public-private global partnerships. A global ‘marketplace of ideas’ is taking shape but it is one where North American and European think tanks dominate.

The advantages of global and regional interactions is the considerable scope for building policy analytic capacity that comes with international experience and the opportunities to become well-versed with ‘best practice’ in policy analysis. The reason think tanks in other countries invest in participation in global policy debates – sending staff to conferences and meetings, becoming partners in international research projects – is because it is an indirect means to resources: funding, data, expertise and patronage. The global domain is where policy institutes are seen and recognised by donors whether those donors are international organisations, governments or iNGOs. The disadvantage is that international networking is expensive, time-consuming and detracts from other organisational activities. Nevertheless, the ability of Vietnamese think tanks to actively participate within global and regional policy forums – to be ‘plugged in’ – signifies the degree to which they have built capacity for policy dialogue and have met international standards. As such, international recognition – such as invitations to present at conferences, research grants, etc – can be considered as one criteria to evaluate how well Viet Namese think tanks are performing.

Download this Discussion Paper [ PDF 567.2KB| 30 pages ].

Comment(s)

There are [0] comment(s) for this entry. Post a comment.