Diane Stone

Transfer agents and global networks in the ‘transnationalization’ of policy

This paper focuses on the role of international actors in policy/ knowledge transfer processes to suggest a dynamic for the transnationalization of policy results. The paper seeks to redress the tendency towards methodological nationalism in much of the early policy transfer literature by bringing to the fore the role of international organizations and non-state actors in transnational transfer networks. Secondly, attention is drawn to ‘soft’ forms of transfer – such as the spread of norms – as a necessary complement to the hard transfer of policy tools, structures and practices and in which non-state actors play a more prominent role. Thirdly, transnational networks are identified as an important vehicle for the spread of policy and practice not only cross-nationally but in emergent venues of global governance.

Learning Lessons and Transferring Policy across Time, Space and Disciplines

An area of recent interest in the International Relations and Comparative Politics literature concerns ‘policy transfer’. This is a dynamic whereby knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements or institutions is used across time or space in the development of policies, administrative arrangements and institutions elsewhere. Policy transfer is deemed to be on the increase in an era of globalisation. Indeed, some governments and international organisations are proactive in promoting harmonisation and convergence or exporting policy lessons. This paper surveys the state of the burgeoning literature, identifies some methodological issues in studying policy transfer, and outlines some additional routes of research.

Non‐Governmental Policy Transfer: The Strategies of Independent Policy Institutes

Discussions of policy transfer have primarily focused on official actors and networks. The non-governmental mode of policy transfer via foundations, think tanks and non-governmental organizations is a relatively neglected dimension. Accordingly, this paper addresses the role of think tanks in promoting the spread of policy ideas about privatization. The importance of think tanks to policy transfer is their ability to diffuse ideas by (1) acting as a clearing-house for information; (2) their involvement in the advocacy of ideas; (3) their involvement in domestic and transnational policy networks; and (4) their intellectual and scholarly base providing expertise on specialized policy issues. Concepts from comparative public policy and international relations such as “social learning” and “epistemic communities” are used to outline the way think tanks advocate innovative policy ideas. However, not only have think tanks been effective in promoting the transfer of policy ideas, the international spread of think tanks also exhibits organizationaltransfer.

Transfer and translation of policy

The past two decades have seen a wealth of papers on policy diffusion and policy transfer. In the first half, this paper reviews some of the trends in the literature by looking backwards to the political science diffusion literature, and forwards to the expanding multi-disciplinary social science literatures on policy ‘learning’, ‘mobilities’ and ‘translation’ which qualify many of the rationalist assumptions of the early diffusion/transfer literatures. These studies stress the complexity of context that modifies exports of policy and the need for interpretation or experimentalism in the assemblage of policy. The second half of the paper focuses on role of international organisations and non-state actors in transnational transfer in the spread of norms, standard setting and development of professional communities or networks that promote harmonisation and policy coordination. The ‘soft’ transfer of ideas and information via networks whether they be personal, professional or electronic is rapid and frequent. It is rather more infrequent to see such ideas structure governance and become institutionalised. Knowledge transfer is more extensive than policy transfer.

Introduction: global knowledge and advocacy networks

As global and regional networks proliferate, one important aspect of their operations has been the exchange of knowledge, information and expertise. ‘Global knowledge networks’ have become important components of the global political economy. Within these networks key knowledge institutions and actors can be development agencies, foundations, think-tanks, universities, consultancy firms as well as individual experts and academics. A primary mechanism for the spread of their knowledge has been through global and regional networks. The article evaluates first, concepts of networks, especially the epistemic community and transnational issue network frameworks; second, theories about international diffusion of ideas; and third, some of the literature on the links between ideas and politics. Control over knowledge and information is important to policy making. Additionally, the status and prestige associated with scholarly expertise and professional training is politically empowering for individual experts consulted or co-opted into policy making. Yet, norms and values cannot be divorced from ‘scientific advice’ especially when knowledge gains greater impact through advocacy and alliance with societal forces.

Think Tanks, Global Lesson-Drawing and Networking Social Policy Ideas

Think tanks have been active in social policy research for over a century. In the last few decades, however, there has been a massive worldwide proliferation of these organizations. At the same time, many of these bodies have come to research dimensions of global social policy and have become increasingly globalized in their own activity. Increased numbers do not determine influence over policy, but the international networking and transnational collaborative arrangements of these institutes in research, policy advice and implementation have contributed to the creation of coalitions; that is, global policy networks that enhance the potential impact of these organizations. One facet of think tank impact on the global order is the propensity for lesson-drawing that aids cross-national policy transfers of ideas, practices and policy programmes. The international spread of ideas can contribute to an ‘atmospheric’ form of influence on the climate of policy thinking whereas policy transfer usually involves more concrete forms of agenda-setting and political decision-making.

Private philanthropy or policy transfer? The transnational norms of the Open Society Institute

The Open Society Institute (OSI) is a private operating and grant-making foundation that serves as the hub of the Soros Foundations Network, a group of autonomous national foundations around the world. OSI is a mechanism for the international diffusion of expertise and ‘best practices’ to post-communist countries and other democratising nations. Focusing on the ‘soft’ ideational and normative policy transfer, the article highlights the engagement in governance that comes with OSI transnational policy partnerships.

Think Tank Transnationalisation and Non-profit Analysis, Advice and Advocacy

Think tanks are independent, or private, policy research organisations present in increasing numbers around the world. More often than not, think tanks are established as non-pro® t organisations. When they operate internationally, they are usually categorised as non-state actors in global and regional politics. Within the nation-state, they are often described as third sector organisations emerging from civil society. From both perspectives, these organisations are often viewed as vehicles for material interests and as ideational forces that are skilled in the arts of persuasion, agenda setting and advocacy. The intention here is to address whether or not the non-pro® t form is advantageous to think tanks when competing at transnational levels in a battle of ideas to in ̄ uence states and international organisations. Accordingly, this paper will address the transnationalisation of think tank activity and the manner in which these organisations respond to emerging sources of demand in global and regional arenas. Why are so many think tanks interacting at regional and global levels? The transnational boom in think tank development has been prompted by foundations, corporations and other non-state actors such as NGOs demanding highquality research, policy analysis and ideological argumentation on the one hand, but also by grants and other funding from governments and international organisations seeking to extend policy analytic capacities, aid civil society development or promote human capital development. Accordingly, the main focus of this paper is to address the supply and demand forces that propel these institutes into the global order. However, it is ® rst necessary to specify what think tanks are, who they target, and to track trends in their development. This is covered in the ® rst section of the paper. The second section investigates the supply side of think tank transnationalisation whilst the third section assesses the sources of demand for think tank services. The discussion of the fourth section concentrates on the role of think tanks in the World Bank’s new a Global Development Networko (GDN) initiative. Accordingly, the questions addressed in this paper are less focused on the issue of think tank in ̄ uence, relevance or political impact in global or regional policy-making, and more concerned with the prior question as to why these organisations become established and spread to become a part of global society. As such, the paper establishes its conceptual foundations on economic and political theories of non-pro® t organisation.

Old guard versus new partisans: Think tanks in transition

Over the past two decades there has been considerable growth of think tanks not only in the United States, but also in Britain and Australia. The new breed operates in a markedly different style from the older institutions which were more inclined toward disinterested policy research. Today, policy institutes are more likely to be engaged in the ideologically partisan marketing of ideas. This paper classifies independent public policy institutes in order to assess their differing features across political systems and over time. It also proposes a number of avenues for further analysis of what is an underdeveloped field of study.

The limits of influence: foreign policy think tanks in Britain and the USA

International non–governmental organizations and their influence over policy in international relations have become subjects of scholarly attention in recent years. One sector of the international policy-cum-analytic community that has received little attention, however, is that group of nationally based non-profit independent policy research institutes—popularly known as ‘think tanks’. This is a strange omission. Foreign policy think tanks and institutes of international affairs are of interest to the wider debates in international relations for two reasons. On the one hand, they aspire to be participants—if mostly marginal ones—in the foreign policy making process. On the other hand, notwithstanding the tension between these two roles, some contribute directly to international relations as a field of study . Yet a common theme prevails. All foreign policy institutes are founded upon a conviction that ideas are important . Researchers and executives of institutes, as well as their corporate, government and foundation supporters, often believe that their intellectual input into policy debates makes a difference. While this can be the case, we suggest that it is less so than many advocates often assume.