Abstract
US think tanks are key players in the global media space. They are playing an important role in shaping strategies and influencing global public opinion. The aim of the work is to highlight the strategic directions of activity of US think tanks and their trends. The basis of the methodology was the use of a system of general scientific methods and techniques of empirical knowledge: induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis, system and functional approaches, classification and systematization, observation and description, explanation and generalization. In the course of the conducted research, it was determined that the tendency to increase the number of analytical centers in the USA leads to an increase in competition for financial resources, and also leads to a change in the primary specialization: it becomes more and more narrow, leaving only a small number of analytical institutions multidisciplinary. It was also established that the demand for research by analytical centers is growing, so opportunities for cooperation in solving problems are constantly expanding. This is because information requests are becoming more complex and globalized. It was noted that, despite the official statement regarding impartiality and objectivity in matters of political consulting, today there is a noticeable trend of increasing political influence on the activities of think tanks. However, many think tanks, in addition to addressing socio-economic issues, have a relentless desire to engage in policy advocacy, which can lead to certain negative trends: the focus of their activities can change from professional analytics to the conductor of existing party policies. The practical value of the work lies in its use during the educational process by students of higher education who gain knowledge in the specialties of “Information Analytics”, “Political Science”, “International Relations”, etc., as well as those who are interested in the place of the United States in the globalized world and its influence
Keywords
social and political influence; think tank; analytical center; United States of America; policy advocacy
References
1. Abelson, D. (2018). Do think tanks matter?: Assessing the impact of public policy institutes. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
2. Ball, M. (2023). The most interesting think tank in American politics. Retrieved from https://time.com/6258610/ niskanen-center-bipartisanship-think-tank-politics/.
3. Bohdanova, T. (2018). Latin American policy of the D. Trump administration (2017-2018). Eminak: Scientific Quarterly, 2(22), 91-96.
4. Brookings’s analysis and recommendations on the Great Depression of the 1930s. (2016). Retrieved from https:// www.brookings.edu/articles/brookings-great-depression/.
5. Godlyuk, A. (2011). Analytical institutes (think tanks) in US foreign policy. Problems of International Relations, 2, 78-88.
6. Haas, P.M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1-35. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300001442.
7. Hernando, M.G., Pautz, H., & Stone, D. (2018). Think tanks in ‘hard times’ – the Global Financial Crisis and economic advice. Policy and Society, 37(2), 125-139. doi: 10.1080/14494035.2018.1487181.
8. Jacobs, L.R., & Page, B.I. (2005). Who influences U.S. foreign policy? The American Political Science Review, 99(1), 107-123.
9. Keudel, O., & Carbou, O. (2021). Think tanks in a limited access order: The case of Ukraine. East European Politics and Societies, 35(3), 790-811. doi: 10.1177/0888325420937810.
10. Kingdon, J.W., & Thurber, J.A. (2011). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Longman.
11. Korotkov, D. (2023). Think tanks as modern actors of world politics: Struggle in the space of international competition. International Relations, Public Communications and Regional Studies, 1(15), 17-30.
12. Koval, N., Kulyk, V., Riabchuk, M., Zarembo, K., & Fakhurdinova, M. (2022). Morphological analysis of narratives of the russian-Ukrainian conflict in western academia and think-tank community. Problems of Post-Communism, 69(2), 166-178. doi: 10.1080/10758216.2021.2009348.
13. Ladi, S. (n.d.). Think tank. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/think-tank.
14. Lalueza, F., & Girona, R. (2016). The impact of think tanks on mass media discourse regarding the economic crisis in Spain. Public Relations Review, 42(2), 271-278. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.09.006.
15. Longhini, A. (2015). Institutionalization of foreign policy think tanks in Italy and in the UK: An explanatory framework. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 9(2), 96-108. doi: 10.1515/cejpp-2016-0014.
16. Matviychuk, A.V., & Khilko, M.I. (2023). Peculiarities of interaction between the state and non-governmental organizations: The experience of Poland and the USA. Political Life, 4(2023), 52-59. doi: 10.31558/25192949.2023.4.7.
17. McGann, J. (2015). Global go to think tank index report. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/server/api/ core/bitstreams/c7ce4a8b-cf30-4039-a4c2-a847f025965b/content.
18. McGann, J. (2017). Global go to think tank index report. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/server/api/ core/bitstreams/27b2bdfd-2f16-4cb6-a0b8-80e7c23e4b7b/content.
19. McGann, J. (2020). Global go to think tank index report. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/ publication/9f1730fa-da55-40bd-a1f4-1c2b2346b753
20. Medvetz, T. (2012). Think tanks in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Misztal, B.A. (2012). Public intellectuals and think tanks: A free market in ideas? International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 25, 127-141. doi: 10.1007/s10767-012-9126-3.
22. Niskanen Center. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.niskanencenter.org/about/.
23. Pan, J. (2021). DIIS theory and methodology in think tanks. Berlin: Springer.
24. Petrenko, I. (2018). “Thought factories” in the USA as a functional prototype of modern analytical centers. Studia Politologica Ucraino-Polona, 8, 205-213.
25. Planells-Artigot, E., Ortigosa-Blanch, A., & Martí-Sánchez, M. (2021). Bridging fields: A comparative study of the presence of think tanks. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, article number 120377. doi: 10.1016/j. techfore.2020.120377.
26. Plehwe, D. (2015). The politics of policy think tanks: Organizing expertise, legitimacy and counter-expertise in policy networks. In Handbook of critical policy studies (pp. 358-379). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
27. Providing solutions to the most daunting challenges. Annual Report. (2023). Retrieved from https://www. niskanencenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/annual-report.pdf.
28. Rich, A., & Weaver, R.K. (2000). Think tanks in the U.S. media. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 5(4), 81-103. doi: 10.1177/1081180X00005004006.
29. Rudder, A., & Main, К. (2023). 501(c)(3) Vs. 501(c)(4): Differences, pros and cons. Retrieved from https://www. forbes.com/advisor/business/501c3-vs-501c4/.
30. Ruser, A. (2018). What to think about think tanks: Towards a conceptual framework of strategic think tank behaviour. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 31, 179-192. doi: 10.1007/s10767-018-9278-x.
31. Salas-Porras, A., & Giordano, V. (2022). Think tanks as agents of social change. In The palgrave handbook of global social change (pp. 1-17). London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-87624-1_216-1.
32. Salas-Porras, A., & Murray, G. (2017). Think Tanks and global politics: Key spaces in the structure of power. In Think tanks and global politics (pp. 1-23). London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/978-1-137-56756-7_1.
33. Senchenko, M. (2021a). Information and analytical activities of “think tanks”. Bulletin of the Book Chamber, 4, 24-31.
34. Senchenko, M. (2021b). The network of American foundations and “brain trusts”. Bulletin of the Book Chamber, 5, 26-32.
35. Social Welfare Organizations. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/ social-welfare-organizations.
36. Wallace, W. (1994). Between two worlds: Think-tanks and foreign policy. In Two worlds of international relations: Academics, practitioners and the trade in ideas. London: Routledge. London: Routledge.
