Applying Western criteria of think tanks efficiency to the case of Russia: pro et contra
https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2020-2-108-120
Abstract
For many years, experts considered think tanks to be an exclusively American phenomenon. However, since the 1920s, countries across the world, including Russia, have been using the American experience to design their model of organizing analytical resources. People have been spending millions of dollars on the development of think tanks all over the world. A lot of work has been done to understand why governments, businesses, and taxpayers are investing resources in these institutions and the key factors that affect their efficiency. This article explores variables that correlate with the effectiveness of think tanks within the Anglo-American tradition, suggested by scholars. It looks at three think tanks based in Russia included in the top positions of the “Global Go to Think Tanks” by the University of Pennsylvania – IMEMO, MGIMO, and Carnegie Moscow Center through the lens of these variables. It also addresses specific characteristics of their work, which can be practical in assessing think tanks outside of the United States.
About the Author
I. V. ShchetinskaiaRussian Federation
Iana V. Shchetinskaia
bld. 6, Miusskaya Square, Moscow, Russia, 6125993
References
1. Asmus, R. (2002), “Think Tanks and NATO Enlargement Debate”, The U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, vol. 7, no. 3, Nov., pp. 29-32.
2. Abelson, D.E. (2018), Do think tanks matter? Assessing the impact of public policy institutes, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, Canada.
3. Denham, A. and Garnett, M. (1998), “Think Tanks, British Politics and the ‘Climate of Opinion’ ”, Think Tanks across Nations, Manchester University Press, Manchester; New York, pp. 21-41.
4. Grose, P. (2006), Continuing the Inquiry: The Council on Foreign Relations from 1921 to 1996, Council on Foreign Relations Press, New York, NY.
5. Haass, R.N. (2002), “Think Tanks and Foreign Policy: A Policymaker’s Perspective on the U.S. Foreign Policy”, The U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, vol. 7, no. 3, Nov., pp. 5-9.
6. Heinemann R., Bluhm, W., Peterson S. and Kearny, E. (2001), The World of the Policy Analyst. Chatham House Publishers, Chatham, NJ.
7. McGann, J.G. (2019), 2018 Global Go to Think Tank Index Report, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
8. McGann, J.G. (2007), Think Tanks and Policy Advice in the U.S.: Academics, Advisors and Advocates, Routledge, Abbington, UK.
9. McGann, J.G. and Weaver, R.K. (2000), Think Tanks & Civil Societies: Catalysts for Ideas and Action, Transaction Pub., Piscataway, NJ.
10. Medvetz, T. (2012), Think Tanks in America, University of Chicago Press,
11. Chicago, IL. Rich, A. (2004), Think Tanks, Public Policy, and the Politics of Expertise. Cambridge University Press, UK.
12. Selee, A.D. (2013), What Should Think Tanks Do? A Strategic Guide to Policy Impact, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
13. Spring, B. (2002), “The Heritage Foundation: Influencing the Debate on the Missile Defense”, The U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, vol. 7, no. 3, Nov., pp. 32-34.
14. Stone, D. (2001), Think Tanks, Global Lesson-Drawing and Networking Social Policy Ideas, Global Social Policy, vol. 1, issue 3, pp. 338-360.
15. Stone, D. and Denham, A. (2004), Think Tank Traditions: Policy Research and the Politics of Ideas, Manchester University Press, UK.
16. Talbott, S. (2002), “How a Think Tank Works”, The U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, vol. 7, no. 3, Nov., pp. 19-21.
17. Weaver, R.K. (1989), “The Changing World of Think Tanks”, PS: Political Science &Politics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 563-578.
18. Wiarda, H.J. (2010), Think Tanks and Foreign Policy: The Foreign Policy Research Institute and Presidential Politics, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.
Review
For citations:
Shchetinskaia I.V. Applying Western criteria of think tanks efficiency to the case of Russia: pro et contra. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations". 2020;(2):108-120. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2020-2-108-120