Dhruva Jaishankar http://www.huffingtonpost.in/dhruva-jaishankar/can-indias-think-tanks-be_b_9688434.html?utm_hp_ref=india
Posted: 15/04/2016
I have worked for much of the past decade in, or with, think tanks in both the US and in India, and am regularly confronted with misperceptions and misapprehensions about the sector. What is the purpose of think tanks? Who sets their agenda? What do they do on a day-to-day basis? The answers are, unfortunately, not so simple.
These questions are particularly important today because significant changes are afoot among New Delhi's think tanks. The opening of Carnegie India means that one of the world's leading think tanks on international affairs will now have a permanent presence in India. Carnegie joins its Washington neighbour The Brookings Institution, in many ways the archetypal think tank, which established Brookings India in New Delhi a few years ago, and recently moved its offices in the diplomatic enclave of Chanakyapuri.
[T]he research produced by think tanks is meant to inform and influence public policy. Their target audience is therefore either policymakers in government or the broader public.
Meanwhile, in March, the Observer Research Foundation concluded the Raisina Dialogue, giving India a major international policy conference. And the appointments last year of former Ambassador to Nepal and Afghanistan Jayant Prasad as Director General of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) and Nalin Surie, ex-envoy to China and the UK, as head of the Indian Council on World Affairs (ICWA) means that accomplished diplomats now head the two premier government-funded foreign policy think tanks. Taken together, these developments offer a good opportunity to revisit think tanks' role in the Indian policy establishment.
How think tanks work
The primary purpose of think tanks is to generate ideas and debate on matters of public policy. In that sense, they are both research institutions and conveners, bringing together different viewpoints and facilitating an exchange of views. In terms of research, what think tanks do is not dissimilar to business consulting, intelligence analysis, investigative journalism, or academic research in the social sciences. The difference, however, is that the research produced by think tanks is meant to inform and influence public policy. Their target audience is therefore either policymakers in government or the broader public. Think tanks also serve as a venue for political leaders, bureaucrats and military officers to exchange views and interact with other actors: foreign counterparts, the media, academics, corporate representatives and the wider public. Having neutral venues for these kinds of interactions is particularly important given the changing roles and growing clout of some of these stakeholders in public policy formulation and implementation.
If there is one big challenge that all think tanks face it is measuring their effectiveness.
Despite these broad shared characteristics, there is considerable diversity among think tanks in terms of their mandates, priorities, and structures. Some focus narrowly on specific aspects of public policy, such as foreign relations and defence, domestic politics and governance, economic and trade policy, or education, migration, and environmental issues. Others are broad, covering a range of topics. Some, such as ICWA and IDSA, are government-affiliated while others are entirely autonomous and privately managed. While some Indian think tanks function almost exclusively as research institutes, such as the Centre for Policy Research, others prioritize convening, such as the Observer Research Foundation.
Think tanks such as IDSA and the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) have been active in India since the mid-20th century. But the last 25 years have witnessed a tremendous growth and proliferation of Indian institutions, including privately-funded entities and military service-specific think tanks (the Centre for Land and Warfare Studies, the Centre for Air Power Studies, and the National Maritime Foundation). Location matters, given the need to be proximate to policy makers. There is a reason that global think tanks have congregated in major capital cities such as Washington and London, Brussels and Beijing. So it is only natural that the majority of Indian institutes have been established in Delhi. However, newer initiatives like Gateway House in Mumbai, the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, and the Hindu Centre for Politics and Public Policy in Chennai now provide platforms beyond the capital.
[Think tanks] can play a big role in advising governments on sound policy, enabling dialogue with a variety of stakeholders, and interpreting obscure policy issues for the broader public.
Glorified talk shops?
If there is one big challenge that all think tanks face it is measuring their effectiveness. Ideas coming out of think tanks, even when adopted as government policy, are rarely credited as such. Some of the most effective work done by think tanks--in the form of private briefings and inputs to government policy makers--is often, by necessity, not publicly acknowledged. It becomes easy, then, to dismiss think tanks as ineffective talk shops. But at their best, they can play a big role in advising governments on sound policy, enabling increasingly important dialogue with a variety of stakeholders, and interpreting obscure policy issues for the broader public. They can also help build expertise, and perform in-depth or specialised research that government do not have the time or capacity to do. Despite its healthy growth in recent years, the Indian think tank sector today suffers from certain shortcomings. These have prevented them from competing for talent with academia, the private sector, and competitors abroad. They have also been inhibited from being fully effective.
Making Indian think tanks more effective
A few measures, if taken, could rapidly revitalize the Indian think tank industry, to the benefit of these institutions, government policy and public discourse.
1. Research needs to be given priority over convening
There is today no shortage in India of policy conferences, panel discussions, and Track II dialogues (which involve non-official participants from different countries).
On almost any given evening in Delhi, there are book launches or speeches by visiting dignitaries... But there remains a paucity of authoritative, in-depth, ground-breaking research.
On almost any given evening in Delhi, there are book launches or speeches by visiting dignitaries hosted by one or another Indian think tank. But there remains a paucity of authoritative, in-depth, ground-breaking research. Book-length studies on such topics as the evolution of India-Southeast Asia relations, Pakistan's contemporary political dynamics, India's trade policy, defence acquisitions, the 1965 war, or India during the Narasimha Rao years--to list just a few topics--would be immensely useful. Op-eds and policy papers remain useful vehicles to disseminate ideas, but think tanks provide the luxury of time for truly detailed and path-breaking work.
2. Quality needs to be given priority over quantity
Think tank scholars ought to be among the most knowledgeable experts in their fields, and that means that institutions must be able to compete for talent with the private sector, universities and foreign organizations. At present, India's think tanks often function as homes for retired civil servants and military officers. These former officials can--and do--offer a wealth of experience, enabling them to document issues on which they have had first-hand experience and reflect on lessons learned. But generating new ideas and fresh perspectives will require tapping a wider pool of talent. This means investing in regional and topical expertise, a variety of disciplines (history, economics, and area studies, in addition to political science), and a mastery of languages.
At present, India's think tanks often function as homes for retired civil servants and military officers.
We currently lack the requisite expertise on our neighbours: China, Myanmar, Iran, and even Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan. Economic expertise, in particular, is missing at many Indian institutes. Establishing an external peer review process for publications will also help improve the quality of output across the board.
3. More autonomy and transparency
Institutions affiliated with the government are in constant danger of becoming extensions of ministries: rigidly hierarchical, risk-averse, bureaucratic, status conscious, and driven by patronage. The entire raison d'être of think tanks is to overcome these constraints. Meanwhile, privately funded think tanks have to show they are not beholden to their benefactors if they are to retain their credibility. Transparency about sources of funding allows people to draw their own conclusions about the nature of any research.
4. Think tank scholars need more interactions with government
This can be mutually beneficial. Unlike in countries where a revolving door enables experts to migrate between think tanks and government positions, in India, a career bureaucracy inhibits such career paths. Quite often, the lack of interactions with officials means that think tank experts in India are badly misinformed. Many of their recommendations--while well-intentioned--are simply impossible to implement, failing to take into account bureaucratic processes, political realities or resource constraints. By taking on more government advisory work, think tanks would increase the expertise available to officials while becoming better-informed about government priorities and processes.
[V]erbosity is too often equated with erudition. Presenting information in a manner that is easily digestible remains a challenge.
5. Research needs to be usable
Finally, one big difference between policy research and other fields is that it cannot simply dwell on the past, but must have implications for the present and future. Far too much work being done by think tanks - and not just in India - tends to be descriptive, rather than analytical.
Additionally, for policymakers pressed for time, only certain kinds of information are useful. New conceptual frameworks that function as shorthand for policies (such as "Look East" or "Digital India") can enrich public discourse, while specific domain knowledge (such as language or area studies) and data compilation are useful contributions for babus pressed for time or requiring specialized expertise. Policy research must also be easily accessible if it is to inform officials pressed for time or shape the public debate, a particular challenge in an era of information overload. Rethinking outputs, both their form and their very medium, is a necessity for all think tanks today. Many are branching out into online content and multimedia presentations, such as podcasts, videos and interactive information platforms. Even with traditional written outputs, verbosity is too often equated with erudition. Presenting information in a manner that is easily digestible remains a challenge.
We are witnessing a period of increasingly acrimonious and often ill-informed public discourse. Now is the perfect time for India's think tanks to come into their own.
If it were to take some of these considerations into account--more research, higher quality standards, greater autonomy and transparency, more interactions with government, and higher-impact outputs--there is no reason that the Indian think tank sector cannot flourish. We are witnessing a period of increasingly acrimonious and often ill-informed public discourse. Now is the perfect time for India's think tanks to come into their own.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Note on Think Tank
By
Gautam Sen
Definition
There is no available universally accepted definition of Think Tank.
However, suffice to say that public policy related research institutes are
basically a 20th century phenomenon and are heavily rooted in a very
particular way to the United States culture of research and dissemination of
information. Historically, such research centers are social science based and
supported by foundations, organizations, private individuals and by the
government. The think tanks of today can well be traced to the universities
supported at one time by the church. However, chronologically, think tanks
first appeared around 1900 A.D. in the modern era and were mainly directed
towards an effort to get the scholars, professionals, and corporate managers to
bring their expertise to bear on the economic and social problems of the period
(Smith 1991).
Perhaps, a somewhat quizzical way of defining what think tanks ought
to do appeared in a press report suggesting that a think tank could be defined
as “an arrangement by which million of dollars are removed from willing
corporation, government and eccentric wealthy, and given to researchers who
spend much of their time competing to get their names in print” (Kelly, 1988). Basically, the concept of think tank grew out
of the mind fix in the United States that there has been a decline of American
competitiveness in traditional industries such as steel, automobiles and
textiles and hence worried that the US economy would become subservient to
service industries. Despite such thinking, one service industry that is
thriving despite adverse economic situation and has become a role model to be
followed in many of the developing countries is the non-profit public policy
related research institute, commonly dubbed as a think tank.
In the past decade think tank consortiums
have become much more diverse and reflect new entrants in the market place of
ideas and the changes in such organization’s atmospherics. There are three main
models of think tanks:
1. University without students
2. Contract researchers
3. Advocacy tanks
However, it must be mentioned that all
attempts to mix and match the models was found to be difficult and impractical
as some of the think tank managers found over the years. Recently, if one
reviews the think tank organization, the Washington directory Capital Source
lists 69 organizations under the heading “Think Tank”. Interestingly, some of
the newer think tanks are extremely small having a staff of one to six and
reflect some time the personal agenda of individual entrepreneurs. Many of such
organization would not exist formally at all but for the preference of
foundations to fund a non-profit organization rather than individual
researchers. Such preference to fund a non-profit organization could also be
related to researchers, which could revolve around personalities of political
and social nature or of political and social ideologies.
Think Tanks in India
In India, research institute developed in
different hues and shapes. They were dependent on the type of funding and the
source of funding that they have attracted. It almost appears that research
institutes of autonomous nature, which conducted research, related to public
policy to politico-military analysis considered themselves as a think tank.
This also included some of the institutes of such type funded directly or some
times indirectly by the government itself at the Centre or even by the State.
It is only in the last decade that the corporate sector and the private sector
have taken initiatives to fund research institutes obstensively to study those
areas, which have a bearing on their business. e.g. the Reliance Group of
Industries initiated the formation of Observer Research Foundation (ORF)
primarily to study the energy aspect of development and its policy implication.
Similarly, TERI has been funded extensively by the TATAs to study the aspect of
environment & energy. There is a whole range of institutes which study and
involve themselves in areas from science, technology to social mobilization
problems, public policy related issue areas including critically examining some
of the well formed ideological doctrines i.e. non-alignment etc.
In the absence of an well articulated notion of “National Interest”
and the perennial absence of “Strategic Culture”, India is standing at the
cross roads of the winds of change that is sweeping the very psyche of the
Indian nation state. Most of the Government supported think tanks are merely
the extension of “Government advocacy” and are more or less being used as event
management centers rather than contributing to deeper intellectual
introspections required to articulate views to enrich to further the cause of
national interest. They also have a major problem of being staffed by area
specialists, retired Government servants and academic entrepreneurs which when
combined appears to have taken on the role to invest their individual venture
capital in strategic affairs. Hence they are motivated and pushed to produce outputs,
which lacks the application of stringent norms of research methodologies and
rely on strong opinions backed by advocacy. Hardly any scholars of repute or
even those belonging to the younger generations are willing to join the Government
think tanks in particular or those, which are even privately funded.
The latest bankruptcy in providing policy options on the part of
think tanks in general and particular in India can be seen as per a news report
in World News by Tunku Vardhrajan on 3 Aug 2014, where he has articulated that
“India has
little or nothing to contribute to American efforts to tackle the crises
in Gaza, Ukraine, Syria, and Iraq and further that India offers America
nothing of concrete strategic value that Washington cannot, currently, live
without. Not only does it balk at an alliance of any kind, its political and
intellectual elites are wedded still to nonalignment, that antediluvian credo
from the years of the Cold War. Intellectual worthies in New Delhi have cooked
up something called “Non-alignment 2.0,” by which “India must remain true to
its aspiration of creating a new and alternative universality.” For those
masochists who want to acquaint themselves better with this Cold
War mummy
come to life, I suggest a visit to this
website. It will swiftly become clear that there is no room in this
starry-eyed arrangement for a compact
with Washington” (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/03/john-kerry-just-visited-but-should-we-just-forget-about-india.html
)
THE ABOVE EXAMPLE OR OBSERVATION SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED
AS BEING AN AMERICAN OR WESTERN CAMP FOLLOWER.
Recommendations
If Indian think tanks in general and in particular wish to
contribute to provide a vibrant thinking base intellectually, politically, culturally
and more so in the form of policy imperatives, then they have to weed out the
old fossils of outdated manpower, bring in younger generation of professionals
belonging to management, technology and social sciences to augment their ideas
to think afresh about India’s national interest, strategic rationale and core
values. Even the leadership of think tanks have to be thought in terms of
addressing the new complexities of the 21st Century where multi
culturalism, pluralism and international inclusiveness has to be
operationalized to provide the Indian nation state the required intellectual
and strategic stature to lead not only regionally but also tilt the balance of
power globally in due course of time.
A very quick look will be indicative as to how the Government TOOK
MORE THAN A YEAR AND A HALF to fill up the vacated position of the
DIRECTOR GENERAL of its most prominent think tank in India. Needless to say
that it will call for a combined effort in which the constitutional decision
making organ which governs the think tank must also think out of the box to
bring about an organic change. Similarly, the Non Governmental think tanks that
are appended below must also start thinking in the manner of cultivated habit
to bring about a change in leadership, recruitment and goal orientation by
taking in the complexities of the 21st Century. Opaqueness must be
replaced by transparency, immobility requires to be replaced by porousness to
allow the free movement of human resources from one organization to the other
and pseudo notions of secrecy must give way to the information age to
incorporate the culture of exchange of ideas, values and notions. The outputs
of the think tanks in India must never permit to be hostage to or be dictated
by the directives from any top on “What to Think” but be based on the intellect
and discernment of the mind on “How to Think”. Think tanks do need patronage
but the patronage must not be in a position to dictate. These are tall orders
and will require utmost integrity of introspections by the highest of decision
makers. There can be no compromise for the cause of national interest or the
role of the think tanks in India.
Appended below are two
important representative lists of think tanks of Indian origin. This does not
tabulate all the institutions, which fall under the category of think tanks in
India. The list is neither in alphabetic order nor by any ranking order
LIST I
- Centre
for South and South East Asian Studies,
University of Madras, Chennai
- Vivekananda
International Foundation
- Delhi
Policy Group, New Delhi
- Indian
Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi
- Centre
for Policy Research
- Indira
Gandhi Institute of Development Research,
Mumbai
- Institute
of Asian Studies, Chennai
- Institute
of Defence Studies and Analysis, New Delhi
- Institute
of Economic Growth, University of Delhi, New
Delhi
- Institute
of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi
- Kashmir
Bachao Andolan, Mumbai
- National
Council of Applied Economic Research, New
Delhi
- National
Foundation for India, New Delhi
- National
Institute for Advanced Studies, Bangalore
- Observer
Research Foundation, New Delhi/Mumbai/Chennai/Ahmedabad
- SAPRA
India Foundation, New Delhi
- Strategic
Foresight Group, Mumbai
- South
Asia Analysis Group, Noida, UP
- United
Services Institution of India, New Delhi
- Centre
for Land Warfare Studies
- Centre for Air Power Studies
- National Maritime Foundation
LIST II
Other Important Research Institutions
in India
·
All India Disaster
Mitigation Institute
(AIDMI), Ahemedbad.
·
Alternative Law Forum, Based in Bangalore, started in March
·
Centre for the Study of
Culture and Society
(CSCS), Bangalore. Established in
·
Centre for
Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development (CISED), Formed in the year 2001
·
Centre for Postcolonial
Education,
Varanasi.
·
Integrated Research and
Action for Development
(IRADe), based at New Delhi
·
Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), New Delhi
·
Centre for Studies in
Social Sciences (CSSS),
Patuli, Kolkata. Founded in February 1973.
·
Centre for the Study of
Culture and Society,
Bangalore. Established 1996
·
Centre for Study of
Society and Secularism,
Mumbai. Centre founded in 1993
·
CUTS (Consumer Unity
& Trust Society) Centre for International Trade, Economics &
Environment,
CUTS CITEE, based in Jaipur
·
G.B. Pant Institute of
Himalayan Environment & Development, Uttaranchal.
·
Henry Martyn Institute – International
Centre for Research, Interfaith Relations and Reconciliation (HMI), Hyderabad. Established in 1930.
·
National Institute of
Science, Technology & Development Studies, NISTADS, New Delhi.
· IDPEM
- International Diploma in Preventive Environmental Management
·
Indian Council of
Social Science Research
(ICSSR). Established in 1969
The National Social Science Documentation Centre (NASSDOC), a Division of ICSSR
established in 1969.
ICSSR
also heads 27 major Research Institutes all over India as given below:
- Institute for Social &
Economic Change, Bangalore
- Centre for
Development Studies, Thiruva-nanthapuram
- Centre for Studies in
Social Sciences, Kolkata
- Centre for Studies in
Social Sciences, Kolkata
- Centre for Studies in
Social Sciences, Kolkata
- Institute of Public
Enterprise, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad
- Institute of Economic
Growth, University Enclave, Delhi
- Centre for the Study
of Developing Societies, Delhi
- Centre for Social
Studies, South Gujarat University Campus, Surat
- Madras Institute of
Development Studies, Adyar, Chennai
- Indian Institute of
Education, Pune
- Giri Institute of
Development Studies, Lucknow
- Centre for Policy
Research, New Delhi
- Sardar Patel
Institute of Economic and Social Research, Ahmedabad
- G.B.Pant Social
Science Institute, Allahabad
- Council for Social
Development Southern Regional Office, Hyderabad
- Institute of
Development Studies, Jaipur
- Centre for Research
in Rural and Industrial Development, Chandigarh
- Centre for Women's
Development Studies, New Delhi
- Centre for Economic
& Social Studies, Begumpet, Hyderabad
- NKC Centre for
Development Studies, Bhubaneswar
- Gujarat Institute of
Development Research, Ahmedabad
- Institute of Studies
in Industrial Development,
New Delhi - Omeo Kumar Das
(O.K.D.) Institute of Social Change & Development, Guwahati
- Centre for
Multi-Disciplinary Development Research, Dharwad
- Dr. Baba Sahibe
Ambedkar National Institute of Social Sciences, Mhow Cantonment, Madhya
Pradesh
27. Madhya Pradesh Institute of
Social Science Research, Ujjain
CONCLUSION
The academic world of think
tanks can be populated by anyone who is competent and intends to do so. It is
obvious that the former government employees including those who held sensitive
appointments do not stand excluded. What needs to be stressed is that there
should be no conflict of interest between the sanctity of sensitive information
gathered in the course of official duties, which must not be compromised for
the sake of participation in the academic domain. It is more easily said than
done.
Since all the think tanks in the US are powered by money
from various sources and some are truly benevolent as the money is in the form
of endowment, the government cannot influence the views of think tanks. But
this is not always the case. There is always the possibility that money power
will cloud the views and expressions of the think tanks. This is a real danger,
which needs to be guarded against. So money power whether indigenous or of
foreign origin, although indispensible for think tanks must not be allowed to
influence.
It is interesting to note how
Brookings and Carnage have opened shops in the Capital city of Delhi and are
well on the way to open their branches in other cities in India. Perhaps not in
too distant a future RAND, WILSON CENTRE and their likes will also open shops.
Since a few of them have been able to enlist the services of former diplomats
and other Indians from various think tanks of India plus induct the diaspora
Indians working abroad, it will be interesting to see how in India what Marx
called “finance aristocracy” as a “lumpen element” will evolve. They will
become a pressure group to influence policy makers if not at least be heard by
policy makers. The first silver lining is that the unaccounted and
unorganized sector of think tanks in India whose personnel were mostly living
on a daily wage basis as venders of information and gossips gathered from the
corridors of government buildings, cocktail gatherings supported by the
functional relations amongst their organization will at last gain some
respectability at an individual levels for acquiring the status of personal
financial self sufficiency.
It is important to note that
the American model of proliferating idea industry based on their idea of
proliferating food culture of franchising MacDonald is not something the Europe
in general or UK in particular will ever follow. Some time back, there was a
great scramble for Indian State Universities to manufacture Joint Degree
Programs with some of the European Universities and the US Higher Educational
Campuses. While there has been some amount of success in the American case
related to professional degrees, the European case has been basically a
nonstarter. This became apparently clear when the Vice Chancellor of the most
prestigious University in the UK told his counterpart in an Indian University a
few years back that he and his University was not interested in franchising
McDonalds in education in India.
The second silver lining is that the clamor for
running for a post retirement position of respectability and creating a
falsified notion of relevancy based on their experience and judgment will now
be channelized in a much more constructive way without becoming an impediment
for the Government in its functional modalities to pursue much needed reforms
in public policy making. In this process India is on the threshold of creating
the FIRST VIRTICLE by default comprising of
intelligent manpower that fulfill the criterion of “ finance aristocracy”.
Therefore the SECOND VIRTICLE, already evolved by default, will
now remain ensconced within the Government, unseen, unheard and professional to
the core. These group of men and women will be as qualified as those in the FIRST VIRTICLE academically and
professionally with commitment to serve the country more than serving for their
personal material fulfillments – and all below the age of 60 years. It is my
assessment that India under the present political leadership supported by the
professionals in charge of National Security affairs will not become hostage to
the FIRST VIRTICLE. Interesting time ahead!!
Pune
17 April 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment