Institutionalization of Foreign Policy Think Tanks in Italy and in the UK: An Explanatory Framework

Open access


This article explores the phenomenon of foreign policy think tanks in Europe in a comparative perspective and offers a framework of analysis for this topic. Assuming that think tanks were largely imported from the US after World Wars I and II, the article argues that European think tanks have been influenced by the different national political contexts in which they have undergone a process of institutionalization. First, the article hypothesizes that such contexts have contributed to determining different incentives for cooperation between think tanks and national policymakers. Such cooperation is based on the willingness of policymakers to turn to think tanks for expertise, advice or validation of policy decisions. Secondly, different political contexts are expected to influence the strategies of action that think tanks have developed towards policymakers and their audience. In this respect, the article identifies three strategies: the generalist, the advocate and the lobbyist. Empirically, the article is based on a survey of eleven organizations conducted in two countries, Italy and the United Kingdom, in 2013-14. Given that very few data are available on this type of organization, their activities, funding, policy audience and goals are investigated. These indicators are used to investigate the main commonalities and differences between the two cases and to compare them with the hypotheses. The results first show that there is comparatively more funding available for think tanks in the UK system than in the Italian one. Secondly, there is apparently more willingness from policymakers to turn to think tanks for expertise in the former case, considering that the UK think tanks hold a higher number of closed-door events and parliamentary hearings. On the contrary, where policymakers tend, instead, to more scarcely rely on external expertise - as it seems more evident in the Italian case - the core audience of think tanks tends to shift to other, more accessible targets (the public opinion, the academia or even businesses). The case study makes it more evident how advocacy becomes a far less important activity for an Italian think tank than a UK one.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abelson D. E. (2013). Think Tanks and U.S. Military and Diplomatic Affairs in The Oxford Encyclopedia of American Military and Diplomatic History Oxford University Press Online version available at: (accessed 30 January 2015)

  • Abelson D. E. (2002). Think tanks and U.S. foreign policy: an historical view US Foreign Policy Agenda: An Electronic Journal of the U.S. Department of State 7 (3).

  • Abelson D. E. (2006). Capitol Idea: Think Tanks and U.S. Foreign Policy McGill-Queen’s University Press.

  • Abelson D. E. (2007).Any Ideas? Think Tanks and Policy Analysis in Canada in Dobuzinskis L. Laycock D. H. Howlett M. (ed.) Policy Analysis in Canada: The State of the Art Toronto: University of Toronto Press 551-573.

  • Abelson D. E. (2014). Old world new world: the evolution and influence of foreign affairs think tanks. International Affairs 90 (1) 125-142.

  • Béland D. (2009). Ideas institutions and policy change. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (5) 701-718.

  • Béland D. & Cox R.H. (eds. 2011). Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research Oxford University Press.

  • Bertelli M. & Wenger J. B. (2009). Demanding Information: Think Tanks and the US Congress. British Journal of Political Science 39 (2) 225-242.

  • Bevir M. Daddow O. & Hall I. (2013). Introduction: Interpreting British Foreign Policy The British Journal of Politics & International Relations 15 (2) 163-174.

  • Boucher S. (2004). Europe and its think tanks: A promise to be fulfilled. An analysis of think tanks specialised in European policy issues in the enlarged European Union. Notre Europe Studies and Research n. 35.

  • Capano G. (2009). Understanding Policy Change as an Epistemological and Theoretical Problem Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 11 7-31.

  • Denham A. (1998).British Think-Tanks And The Climate Of Opinion London: Routledge.

  • Diletti M. (2009). I think tank. Le fabbriche delle idee in America e in Europa Bologna: Il Mulino.

  • Diletti M. (2011). I think tank al confine tra conoscenza valori e interessi. Il caso italiano Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche 2 pp. 345-376.

  • Gaskarth J. (2013). British Foreign Policy: Crises Conflicts and Future Challenges Polity Press.

  • Gerring J. (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices Cambridge University Press.

  • Gilroy P. (2012). Have Think Tanks in Washington D.C. Become Politicized? The Hertie School Student Paper Series 1.

  • Héritier A. (2002).New Modes of Governance in Europe: Policy Making without Legislating? in Héritier A. (eds.) Common Goods: Reinventing European Integration Governance Rowman & Littlefield Publishers 185-206.

  • Higgott R. & Stone D. The limits of influence: foreign policy think tanks in Britain and the USA. Review of International Studies 20 (1) 1994.

  • Hofmeister H. & Breitenstein A. P. (2008). Contemporary Processes of Transnationalization and Globalization International Sociology 23 480-487.

  • Ioannides I. & Missiroli A.(2012). European Think Tanks and The Eu. Berlaymont Paper - Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) European Commision Issue 2.

  • Jacobs L. R. & Page B. I. (2005). Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy?. American Political Science Review 99 (1) 107-123.

  • Kriesi H. Adam S. & Jochum M. (2006). Comparative analysis of policy networks in Western Europe. Journal of European Public Policy 13 (3) 341-361.

  • Longhini A (2015). Foreign policy think tanks in the Italian political context: evolutions and perspectives International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy 70 (4).

  • Lentner H. H. (2006). Public Policy and Foreign Policy: Divergences Intersections Exchange Review of Policy Research 23 (1) 169-181.

  • Lindblom C. E. & Cohen D. (1979). Usable Knowledge New Haven Conn.: Yale University Press.

  • Lindquist E. (2000). Think tanks and the ecology of policy inquiry in Stone D. Banking on Knowledge: The Genesis of the Global Development Network London: Routledge 223-239.

  • Lipset S. M. (1996). American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword New York:W.W. Norton&Co. Inc.

  • Mapendere J.(2005). Track One and a Half Diplomacy and the Complementarity of Tracks Culture of Peace Online Journal 2:1 66-81.

  • Medina I. & Guttormsen D. (2013). “Visibility and Activity: Foreign Affairs Think Tanks in the United Kingdom” Political Perspectives 2013 7:1 46-74.

  • Medvetz T. (2012). Think tanks in America Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • McGann J. G. (2012). “The Global Go-To Think Tanks Report 2011. The Leading Public Policy Research Organizations in the World” The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program web paper.

  • Montville J. (2006). Track Two Diplomacy: The Work of Healing History. The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 15-25.

  • Nownes A. (2007). Total Lobbying. What Lobbyists Want And How They Try Get It Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Nowotny H. (1990). In Search of Usable Knowledge: Utilization Contexts and the Application of Knowledge Frankfurt-Boulder Westview Press-Campus Verlag.

  • Nowotny T. (2011). Diplomacy and global governance: The diplomatic service in an age of worldwide interdependence. New Brunswick NJ: Transaction.

  • Putnam R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization 42 (3) 427-460.

  • Radaelli C. and Lucarelli S.(2004). Italy: Think Tanks and the Political System in D. Stone A. Denham and M.

  • Radin B. A. (2014). Knowledge Actors and Transnational Governance: The Private-Public Policy Nexus in the Global Agora. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 16 (1) 113-115.

  • Sabatier P. A. & Jenkins-Smith H. C. (1993). Policy Change and Learning. An Advocacy Coalition Approach Boulder: Westview Press.

  • Sanders K. (2008). Communicating politics in the twenty-first century Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Schmitter P. C. (2008). The Design of Social & Political Research in della Porta D. & Keating M. Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective 263-295.

  • Stone D. & Denham A. (1996). Capturing the Political Imagination. Think Tank and the Policy Process London: Frank Cass.

  • Stone D. & Denham A. (2004). (eds.) Think Tank Traditions: Policy Research and the Politics of Ideas Manchester: Manchester University Press.

  • Tilly C. & Tarrow S. (2007). Contentious politics. Boulder Colo.: Paradigm.

  • VV. AA. (2014). Ottant’anni di politica internazionale a Milano e in Italia (1934-2014) Archivio ISPI.

  • Walston J. (2007). Italian Foreign Policy in the ‘Second Republic’. Changes of Form and Substance Modern Italy 12 (1) 91-104

  • Wallace W. (1994). Between two worlds. Think-tanks and foreign policy in Hill C. et al. Two Worlds of International Relations: Academics Practitioners and the Trade in Ideas London: Routledge.

  • Weaver R. K. (1989). The changing world of think tanks PS: Political Science and Politics 22 (2) 563-578.

  • Weiss C. H. (1982). Policy Research in the Context of Diffuse Decision Making. The Journal of Higher Education 53 (6).

  • Wiarda H. J. (2010). Think Tanks and Foreign Policy: The Foreign Policy Research Institute and Presidential Politics Lexington Books.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.50

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.156
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.430

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 450 215 4
PDF Downloads 150 84 3