Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article conceptualizes a “politically embedded knowledge regime” in which political power is deeply embedded in administrative and personal networks between bureaucratic decision-makers and their professional consultants. To demonstrate the features of the politically embedded knowledge regime, I evaluate the effects of the revolving door on Chinese think tanks. I empirically find that the revolving door has a negligible contribution to the influence and revenue of think tanks in China. Moreover, the revolving door has significantly negatively effects on the personal social network building of think-tankers. Heterogeneous analysis and propensity score matching are conducted to present the robustness of regression results.

Points for practitioners

The “revolving door” has always been regarded as an essential factor for the prosperity of American think tanks. It has now become the prevailing recruitment strategy for global think tanks. In particular, the Chinese government and academia are embracing the revolving door mechanism for the development of Chinese think tanks. Nevertheless, no systematic empirical research has been conducted to evaluate the exact effects of the revolving door on Chinese think tanks. My empirical findings reveal that the developmental experiences of American think tanks may not be as effective when applied to other countries with different knowledge regimes.

Keywords

politically embedded knowledge regime revolving door social networks think tanks

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abb

(2015) China’s foreign policy think tanks: Institutional evolution and changing roles. Journal of Contemporary China 24(93): 531–553.

Abelson

(2009) Do Think Tanks Matter? Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes (2nd edn). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Abelson

(2014) Old world, new world: The evolution and influence of foreign affairs think-tanks. International Affairs 90(1): 125–142.

Bertrand

Bombardini

, and Trebbi

(2014) Is it whom you know or what you know? An empirical assessment of the lobbying process. American Economic Review 104(12): 3885–3920.

Burger

(2006) The lobbying game: Why the revolving door won’t close. Time Magazine, February 16.

Campbell

Pedersen

(2010) Knowledge regimes and comparative political economy. In: Daniel

Cox

(eds) Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 167–190.

Campbell

Pedersen

(2014) The National Origins of Policy Ideas: Knowledge Regimes in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark. Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

Denham A and Garnett M (1998) British Think-Tanks and the Climate of Opinion. London: UCL Press.

Diermeier

Keane

Merlo

(2005) A political economy model of congressional careers. American Economic Review 95(1): 347–373.

10.

Drezner

(2017) The Ideas Industry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

11.

Esterling

(2004) The Political Economy of Expertise: Information and Efficiency in American National Politics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

12.

Fligstein

(1990) The Transformation of Corporate Control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

13.

Heckman

Ichimura

Todd

(1998) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies 65: 261–294.

14.

Huang

Economy

(2015) Where China can’t compete: Beijing’s think tank trouble. Foreign Affairs, September 21.

15.

Keyser

(2003) Professionalizing Research in Post-Mao China: The System Reform Institute and Policy Making. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

16.

Köllner

Zhu

Abb

(2018) Understanding the development of think tanks in Mainland China, Taiwan and Japan. Pacific Affairs 91(1): 5–26.

17.

(2009) China’s new think tanks: Where officials, entrepreneurs, and scholars interact. China Leadership Monitor 29: 1–29.

18.

(2017) The Power of Ideas: The Rising Influence of Thinkers and Think Tanks in China. Singapore: World Scientific.

19.

Cheng

JYS

(2012) Cadre performance appraisal and fabrication of economic achievement in Chinese officialdom. In: Cheng J

(ed.) China: A New Stage of Development for an Emerging Superpower. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press, pp. 117–148.

20.

McGann

(2010) Democratization and Market Reform in Developing and Transitional Countries. London: Routledge.

21.

McGann

Johnson

(2005) Comparative Think Tanks, Politics and Public Policy. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

22.

McGann

Sabatini

(2011) Global Think Tanks: Policy Networks and Governance. London: Routledge.

23.

Maslow

(2018) Knowledge regimes in post-developmental states: Assessing the role of think tanks in Japan’s policymaking process. Pacific Affairs 91(1): 95–117.

24.

Medvetz

(2012) Think Tanks in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

25.

Menegazzi

(2017) Rethinking Think Tanks in Contemporary China. Rome, Italy: Palgrave Macmillan.

26.

Michelson

(2007) Lawyers, political embeddedness, and institutional continuity in China’s transition from socialism. American Journal of Sociology 113(2): 352–414.

27.

Nachiappan

(2013) Think tanks and the knowledge–policy nexus in China. Policy and Society 32: 255–265.

28.

Noakes

(2014) The role of political science in China: Intellectuals and authoritarian resilience. Political Science Quarterly 129(2): 239–260.

29.

Revolving Door Working Group (2005) A matter of trust: How the revolving door undermines public confidence in government—and what to do about it. Available at: http://www.cleanupwashington.org/documents/RevovDoor.pdf (accessed 31 December 2015).

30.

Rosenbaum

(2002) Observational Studies. New York, NY: Springer.

31.

Salisbury

Johnson

Heinz

, et al. (1989) Who you know versus what you know: The uses of government experience for Washington lobbyists. American Journal of Political Science 33(1): 175–195.

32.

Smith

Todd

(2005) Does matching overcome Lalonde’s critique of nonexperimental estimators? Journal of Econometrics 125(1/2): 305–353.

33.

Smith JA (1991) Idea Brokers: Think Tanks and the Rise of the New Policy Elite. New York: The Free Press.

34.

Stone

(1996) Capturing the Political Imagination: Think Tanks and the Policy Process. London: Frank Cass.

35.

Stone

(2007) Recycling bins, garbage cans or think tanks? Three myths regarding policy analysis institutes. Public Administration 85(2): 259–278.

36.

Stone

(2013) Knowledge Actors and Transnational Governance: The Private–Public Policy Nexus in the Global Agora. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

37.

Stone

(2015) The Group of 20 transnational policy community: Governance networks, policy analysis and think tanks. International Review of Administrative Sciences 81(4): 793–811.

38.

Stone

Denham

Garnett

(eds) (1998) Think Tanks across Nations: A Comparative Approach. Manchester and New York, NY: Manchester University Press.

39.

Stuart

(2010) Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science 25(1): 1–21.

40.

Tanner

(2002) Changing windows on a changing China: The evolving “think tank” system and the case of the public security sector. China Quarterly 171: 559–574.

41.

Vidal

Draca

Fons-Rosen

(2012) Revolving door lobbyists. American Economic Review 102(7): 3731–3748.

42.

Wang

(2011) Revolving Door: Research on American Think Tanks. Beijing: National School of Administration Press (in Chinese).

43.

Wang

(2008) Changing models of China’s policy agenda setting. Modern China 34(1): 56–87.

44.

Wong

C-S

Wong

Y-T

Hui

,, et al. (1979) The significant role of Chinese employees’ organizational commitment: Implications for managing employees in Chinese societies. Journal of World Business 36: 326–340.

45.

Zhu

(2009) The influence of think tanks in the Chinese policy process: Different ways and mechanisms. Asian Survey 49(2): 333–357.

46.

Zhu

(2011) Government advisors or public advocates? Roles of think tanks in China from the perspective of regional variations. China Quarterly 207: 668–686.

47.

Zhu

(2013) The Rise of Think Tanks in China. London and New York, NY: Routledge.

48.

Zhu

(2016) In the name of “citizens”: Civic activism and policy entrepreneurship of Chinese public intellectuals in the Hu–Wen era. Journal of Contemporary China 25: 745–759.

49.

Zhu

Xue

(2007) Think tanks in transitional China. Public Administration and Development 27(5): 452–464.

50.

Zukin

DiMaggio

(eds) (1990) Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.29 MB

Think tanks in politically embedded knowledge regimes: does the “revolving door” matter in China?

Abstract

Points for practitioners

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material