Independent think tanks and government: partners in promoting reforms or two parallel worlds? by Міжнародний фонд "Відродження"

REPORT WAS PREPARED BY: Iryna BEKESHKINA

Ruslan KERMACH

Orysia LUTSEVYCH

Iryna Filipchuk

Anatolii Kotov

RESEARCH TEAM: Iurii Gorban

Andriy Sukharyna

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation would like to express its gratitude to Mrs.Orysia Lutsevych, the Chatham House researcher, for cooperation in the study, helping prepare research methodology tools and conducting in-depth interviews with representatives of government, business and donor organizations, and preparing the final report.

Table of contents: Independent think tanks and government: partners in promoting reforms or two parallel worlds? .....................................................................4 Reforms as a challenge and a chance to renovate the country ......................................................8 Survey methodology..............................................................................................................................................9 Key findings from the survey of government authorities and non-governmental think tanks ...........................................................................................................12 ~ Government views of non-governmental think tanks. Are government authorities aware of non-governmental think tanks? Do they use their research and information? ......................12 ~ Think tank influence on policy making ...................................................................................................13 ~ Who are key end users of think tank products? ...................................................................................16 ~ What are the channels think tanks rely on to influence policy and decision making? ...............18 ~ Policy influence: key elements for success .............................................................................................19 ~ DIXI Group Case ............................................................................................................................................21 ~ Mechanisms of cooperation between think tanks and central and local governments ............ 23 ~ Partner selection criteria: what government agencies consider when choosing an independent think tank to work with? ............................................................................................ 25 ~ What are main barriers to effective cooperation between government and independent think tanks? ..................................................................................................................27 ~ Who will pay for research: financial side of the partnership ............................................................ 30 ~ Most relevant research topics according to think tanks and policymakers .................................. 30 ~ Most reputable non-governmental think tanks .................................................................................. 33 ~ Media perception of non-governmental think tanks .........................................................................34 Key recommendations on strengthening policy influence and cooperation between government and think tanks .................................................................................................. 36 Survey findings .................................................................................................................................................40 Annex 1. Non-governmental think tanks and government: partnership opportunities ...................40 Annex 2. Survey of non-governmental organizations and think tanks. Non-governmental think tanks and government: partnership opportunities .....................................51 Annex 3. Survey of think tanks and mass media: best partnership models ......................................... 58

Independent think tanks and government: partners in promoting reforms or two parallel worlds?

Ukraine is going through the most difficult and yet crucial time of its history. Implementing urgent reforms can become a real breakthrough that would take the country to the forefront of economic and social development while failure to pass reforms would challenge the very existence of the state.

Given the scale and complexity of the task, local governments of Ukraine and civil society must join efforts to give quality intellectual justification to reforms. Therefore, building effective cooperation between the government, on the one hand, and independent think tanks (ITT), on the other hand, gets extremely important today as never before. Is the government â&#x20AC;&#x201C; both central executive and legislative authorities as well as local administrations â&#x20AC;&#x201C; willing to cooperate with think tanks? What hinders such cooperation and how a final product should look like? What determines the role and influence of think tanks on the policy-making process? These questions are the main focus of the study conducted by the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation. The study was initiated by the International Renaissance Foundation and held within the Think Tank Development Initiative, implemented by the International Renaissance Foundation in cooperation with the Think Tank Foundation (TTF) supported by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). The interim results were presented at the International Conference

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Role of Think Tanks in Ukraine Key Reformsâ&#x20AC;? in Kyiv on December 7th, 2015. The data was collected between November 20 and December 3, 2015 by email questionnaires. The total

NUMBER OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS INTERVIEWED

158

number of government officials interviewed was 158. Among them there were 75 representatives of local governments who responded to the survey. Besides Kyiv, the survey was conducted among local councillors and mayors of Dnipropetrovsk, Lviv, Odessa, Kharkiv, Severodonetsk and Kramatorsk. We also interviewed 53 representatives of national and regional media in Ukraine. Lastly, 82

OF THEM:

75 REPRESENTATIVES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

respondents come from national NGOs and independent think tanks from the center and regions of Ukraine. On top of that, there were 23 in-depth interviews with representatives of central government, local governments, media, international donor agencies and international business community. For a better understanding of the factors that affect think tank performance, we had nine

53 EPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL MEDIA IN UKRAINE

think tanks that are illustrative examples of successful policy influence both in Kyiv and in regions complete email surveys.

82 EPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL NGOs AND INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

in-depth interviews with representatives of central government, local governments, media, international donor agencies and international business community.

Key survey findings include as follows: •

All government representatives – national, local,

legislative

and

executive

–

•

It is mainly think tanks that initiate cooperation,

have

not the government; although there is a small

expressed willingness to cooperate with non-

group of policymakers and MPs who seek ways

governmental think tanks. However, the level

to work with think tanks on making policies

of claimed awareness about independent

and holding public debates.

think tanks was rated as average and this awareness has not increased since 2014. Only

•

Influence of think tanks on policy making is

a third of government respondents know well

mainly indirect and exercised primarily through

the work of independent think tanks, 22%

media and building public opinion. Effective

regularly read research and studies and 13%

cooperation often depends on an individual

cooperate with independent think tanks on a

contact in the government since the political

regular basis. However, 95% of respondents

system is overall poor and the institutions are

declared that it is important to cooperate

weak, which hinders any direct attempt to

regularly.

influence public policy openly.

Added value of independent think tanks,

•

Successful independent think tanks believe

according to government representatives,

that main factors affecting the performance

is providing neutral, proper and unbiased

are quality research, policy relevance and

environment to discuss reforms and raise

reputation of experts. DiXi Group case study of

public awareness and understanding of

the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative

reforms. When selecting a think tank to

showed that it is highly important to build

partner with, government officials consider

strong information campaign, hold an ongoing

mainly the quality of published materials,

dialogue with respective ministries, appeal to

reputation, overall performance of a think

international obligations, work with reform

tank (fairness, political impartiality) and

champions, build a multi-stakeholder group,

relevant experts on staff.

create a regional coalition and have a strong expertise in energy sector (applicable to the

•

The high demand among new reformers

case).

for good research and analytical products that could be used for enacting reforms

•

The study confirmed that the following

and building a quality policy creates, on

factors

hinder

developing

cooperation

the one hand, new opportunities for non-

between government and independent think

governmental think tanks while, on the

tanks: underfunding, poor awareness, weak

other hand, instigates competition with

institutions, low political culture and lack of

international consulting firms, as government

effective mechanisms of cooperation.

respondents think. International technical assistance provides funding to employ such consulting services.

•

At the same time, end users of analytical services believe that there are also problems within the

All government representatives – national, local, legislative and executive – have expressed willingness to cooperate with non-governmental think tanks. However, the level of claimed awareness about independent think tanks was rated as average and this awareness has not increased since 2014.

ONLY A THIRD OF GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS KNOW WELL THE WORK OF INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

22% GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS REGULARLY READ RESEARCH AND STUDIES

13% COOPERATE WITH INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS ON A REGULAR BASIS

95% Governmen respondents DECLARED THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO COOPERATE REGULARLY WITH INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

independent think tanks sector, including a

policymakers, but also among public activists

lack of high-quality applied analysis, political

and the general public. It is necessary to

bias, suspicion about political servicing, and

strengthen two-way communication between

low efficiency.

government and non-governmental think tanks.

•

To get to a new level of cooperation between government and independent think tanks,

•

It is significant to strengthen the synergy

it is recommended to strengthen existing

between donor support, think tank proposals

cooperation mechanisms, such as working

and research needs of the state. International

with the Secretariat of the National Council

donors should pay attention to the shortage of

of Reform (NCR) and ministry project offices,

funding for independent think tanks necessary

developing new mechanisms for engaging

to strengthen their analytical capacity on

independent think tanks into policy making.

the institutional basis. One should consider

Independent think tanks should improve the

new programs to fund projects oriented on

quality of their research products, observe

the development of regional think tanks and

the principle of impartiality and applied

promotion of their cooperation with local

nature of their work. To promote reforms,

governments. Working with governmental

independent think tanks should create more

open data should be among new areas of

platforms for professional policy debate and

funding and new focus for independent think

carry out advocacy campaigns not only among

tanks.

Reforms as a challenge and a chance to renovate the country

The situation in which Ukraine has ended up due to the tragic events of the past two years has put up on the agenda the urgent need for reform. Today, Ukraine is in fact on the most important stage of development, when urgent reforms would mean European prospects while failure of change would threaten Ukraine’s very existence as an independent state.

The country’s crisis - financial and economic turmoil, a sharp drop in well-being, and ongoing hostilities in the Donbas region – sure enough opens the door for necessary reforms backed by pretty much unanimous public consensus that “we can’t live like this anymore”. Ukraine’s high aid dependency on Western partners and international donors expands the window of opportunity for adopting and implementing these long-awaited reforms in a whole range of industries and areas of social and political life of the Ukrainian citizens. However, despite the common understanding of the need for change and constant pressure from international institutions and partners of Ukraine, the overall pace and quality of reforms often come under strong criticism from both the Western partners of Ukraine and experts as well as civil society representatives inside the country. According to the sociological data, the pace and depth of reforms implemented in Ukraine are viewed as negative by the public. Complex structural changes in key areas of public life – economic, social, military, education or cultural – must be supported primarily by an in-depth expert analysis of problems. However, it turns out that neither the Parliament nor political parties nor ministries have their own think tanks that would provide a proper analytical study necessary to justify and to carry out necessary reforms. Our public research organizations, including institutes, academies of sciences and government affiliated agencies focus primarily on scientific research and are not very effective in addressing urgent tasks.

Public Opinion Survey – Residents of Ukraine // International Republican Institute (IRI), July 16-30, 2015 – http://www.iri.org/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/2015-08-24_survey_of_residents_of_ukraine_july_16-30_2015.pdf See Reforms in Ukraine: Public Opinion of Citizens // The Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, 9.09.2015 – http://www.dif.org.ua/ua/polls/2015a/reformi-v-elennja-.htm

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

a total of

The data provided in this report was collected from the four basic groups of

cooperate with non-governmental think tanks, research interests (topics and

316

format) and to identify factors that hinder constructive cooperation between

EXPERTS WERE POLLED

respondents: government, business, public and media. The main component of the study was polling government officials to learn their willingness to

government and independent think tanks. A total of 316 experts were polled. The survey was conducted in the period between November 20 and December 3, 2015 through the direct e-mail distribution of questionnaires, through the social networks or personal distribution of specific questionnaires among experts. Total of 158 government respondents were polled. 83 respondents represent executive and legislative branches of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s government:

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CENTRAL EXECUTIVE BRANCH

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION

MPS AND THEIR ASSISTANTS

REPRESENTATIVES OF LOCAL STATE ADMINISTRATIONS

14 7 10

Along with that, 75 local governors participated in the survey. In addition to Kyiv, where 20 representatives of local authorities were polled, the data was collected from local councillors and mayors of Dnipropetrovsk (10), Lviv (10), Odessa (9), Kharkiv (14), Severodonetsk (7) and Kramatorsk (5). Selection of respondents was held purposefully - mainly from the administrative agencies

75 LOCAL GOVERNORS PARTICIPATED IN THE SURVEY

whose activities are based on research and analysis.

82 EXPERTS FROM NGOS AND THINK TANKS WERE POLLED

53 REPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL NGOS AND THINK TANKS

29 EXPERTS FROM REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

In addition to central and local governments of Ukraine, between November 20 and December 3, 2015 the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation also polled experts from NGOs and think tanks. Total of 82 respondents of this group were polled, including 53 representatives of national NGOs and think tanks, and 29 experts from regional organizations (in particular, in Odessa, Lviv, Kharkiv, Chernivtsi, Sumy, Lutsk, Chernihiv, Izmail, Kramatorsk, Severodonetsk and Mariupol). The most well-known and respected public organizations and non-governmental think tanks of Ukraine were selected for the study. The views of the latter were necessary to provide a complete understanding of the problems and fundamental differences arising from bilateral cooperation between government and non-governmental think tanks (NTTs).

Media representatives constitute an important group of survey respondents within the study. Between November 20 and December 3, 2015, total of 53 representatives of national and regional media, including employees of print

53 REPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL MEDIA

(newspapers, magazines, television, radio) and online media were polled. Media representatives were included in the study because they play the role of both end users of think tank products and key mediators, the bridge between independent think tanks, government and the general public.

For a more thorough understanding of the role that

think tanks play in collaboration with central and local governments, the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation included in-depth interviews as a separate component of research methodology. Total of 23 in-depth

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS WERE CONDUCTED

interviews were conducted, included with representatives of central government (5 interviews), local government (5 interviews), media (5 interviews), international donor agencies (5 interviews) and international business (3 interviews).

WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF MEDIA

WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF INTERNATIONAL DONOR AGENCIES

WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

The study also includes online surveys of 15 think tanks that are successful in promoting change and influencing policy. The data was collected from nine organizations. These think tanks work in various areas, including foreign policy, energy, local development and education. The

15 THINK TANKS WERE SURVEYED ONLINE

independent think tanks interviewed include two regional think tanks, while the rest of the organizations are national.

Criteria to measure think tank performance are based on the following aspects:

Did a think tank develop an analytical product independently or in coalition (that is a policy document including recommendations about amendments to a policy)?

Did the research influence policy decisions? Is there a positive outcome (new decision)?

Does a think tank actively cooperate with government authorities (on an institutional or personal level director / experts)?

In addition, the report provides a case study of successful performance of non-governmental think tank DiXi Group.

Key findings from the survey of government authorities and non-governmental think tanks Government views of non-governmental think tanks. Are government authorities aware of non-governmental think tanks? Do they use their research and information? The representatives of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s present government have a relatively medium level of awareness of think tanks.

This was indicated by at least 35% of respondents. Although, this is somewhat lower compared with the data from 2014, when half of government respondents indicated good awareness of think tank activities. According to the data from 2015, 44% of government representatives reported that they know something about think tanks, while only 16% of respondents indicated that

35% OF GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS HAVE A RELATIVELY MEDIUM LEVEL OF AWARENESS OF THINK TANKS

they know little about their activities, and 5% of respondents did not actually know anything. At the same time, a survey from 2014 showed that only 3% of respondents did not know anything about the activities of non-governmental think tanks. MPs of the new convocation, especially those who came to the Parliament from a private sector, know little about the activities

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES:

of independent think tanks. They indicated that there is a lack of platforms for direct communication with non-governmental think tanks.

44% KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THINK TANKS

16% KNOW LITTLE ABOUT THINK TANKS ACTIVITIES

5% DID NOT ACTUALLY KNOW ANYTHING

3% DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES OF NONGOVERNMENTAL THINK TANKS

After the EuroMaidan victory, Western donors have been actively supporting new reforming ministers. Significant amounts of technical assistance were allocated to support reforms and Ukrainian ministries could pay for surveys. Donor funds pay for the development of different strategies, including the export promotion strategy for the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine (MEDT) or the new Tax Code, which was developed by the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and funded by the British Government. The representatives of the ministries often employ consulting firms such as PricewaterhouseCoopers or McKinsey to prepare the necessary analytics. This creates serious competition for local think tanks and it is not easy to compete with the high-quality and prompt services of international consulting companies. Whereas, as it was with the draft Tax Code, Ukrainian analysts might be engaged later in the discussion of an already finished product.

Think tank influence on policy making

The survey reported different opinions of government officials about the influence of think tanks on policy making and decision making. Compared to the data from 2014, last year (2015) a number of respondents expressing uncertainty about the role of think tanks in influencing public policy significantly increased.

95% ARE CONVINCED OF THE IMPORTANCE OF COOPERATION BETWEEN CENTRAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

66%

The share of uncertain respondents has grown over this period from 24% to 36%. At the same time, the share of government respondents who think that independent think tanks have no impact on the policy-making process fell to 15% in 2015, compared with more than a quarter of such respondents (26%) in 2014.

It should be noted that despite a fairly large share of respondents who are uncertain about the influence of think tanks on policy making, almost all the policymakers interviewed (95%) are convinced of the importance of cooperation between central and local governments, on the one hand, and independent think tanks, on the other.

Herewith, the majority of them (66%) believe that such partnership should be long-term and 29% indicated the need for ad hoc cooperation with independent think tanks whenever needed. Only 3% of government respondents see no need to cooperate with non-governmental think

of them

tanks, while 2% of respondents remained undecided on the issue.

BELIEVE THAT SUCH PARTNERSHIP SHOULD BE LONG-TERM

The government officials interviewed indicated the

29% INDICATED THE NEED FOR AD HOC COOPERATION WITH INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS WHENEVER NEEDED

3% OF GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS SEE NO NEED TO COOPERATE WITH NON-GOVERNMENTAL THINK TANKS

importance of think tanks in raising public awareness of reforms and promoting dialogue between government and the public. Independent think tanks help the public to hear an unbiased, most objective and reasonable opinion supported with a wide range of arguments on a particular issue. They can present the neccessary alternatives (policies or recommendations) to the society and decision makers.

Almost all policymakers interviewed indicated that it is important to partner with independent think tanks because they:

89% INDICATED THAT THEY NEED MATERIALS DEVELOPED BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL THINK TANKS

1. 2. 3.

are more up-to-date, flexible and competent compared to state research institutions; use best international practices; are non-governmental, and therefore independent, unbiased, and can fill the important research ‘gaps’, which government officials may not notice.

Moreover, the majority of policymakers and local governors (89%) indicated that they need materials developed by nongovernmental think tanks. The majority of respondents use research materials of independent think tanks: 63% use them occasionally, while 22% of state and local government officials use them regularly. 16% of respondents have never used research products of independent think tanks. Herewith, none of the government representatives interviewed could name at least one landmark study of Ukrainian think tanks in his/her field. The donors mentioned the Institute of World Policy Study “How could the EU accelerate reforms in Ukraine?”, the CASE Project “The Price of the State”, a cost benefit analysis by Texty.org.ua for the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine, public opinion studies by the Ilko

61% WORK WITH THINK TANKS ONLY OCCASIONALLY OR FROM TIME TO TIME

13% WORK WITH THINK TANKS REGULARLY

Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, CEDOS study of women in tough jobs. As you can see from the above data, the majority of the respondents are convinced that it is important to work with independent think tanks on a regular basis, although research materials of think tanks are not used regularly, but rather occasionally. The same way, actual cooperation with independent think tanks, either personal or institutional, is different from willingness to cooperate indicated by

26% HAVE NEVER HAD ANY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

government representatives: 61% of respondents work with them only occasionally or from time to time, while only 13% do that regularly. The sad part here is that about 26% of government officials, according to the study, have never had any personal experience working with independent think tanks.

The National Council of Reform (NCR) is trying

The government respondents listed some

to boost cooperation with Ukrainian think tanks.

good examples of partnership with think tanks,

However, it is often on an ad hoc basis. For instance,

including the development of the human rights

the NCR had difficulties finding specific experts

strategy, the strategy of national patriotic

to work on an export database - develop action

education, and a new national strategy for civil

plans, process raw data etc.

society development.

Among the factors that motivate MPs to work with non-governmental organizations, the respondents indicated a fairly high level of public trust in civil society.

“Trust in NGOs is higher than trust in MPs, so

However, 35% of the think tank respondents who

people trust their information”. For example, before

cooperate with government indicated that usually

constitutional amendments on decentralization

such partnerships are initiated by think tanks, while

were scheduled to vote in the Parliament, the

only 2 respondents (3%) stated that their services

MPs held an open discussion with think tanks and

were requested by government authorities.

NGOs in the Ukrainian crisis media center. The meeting and discussion, in turn, helped the MPs

Regarding cooperation between think tanks and

clearly define their positions on the proposed

business

associations,

business

representatives

constitutional amendments.

interviewed shared a positive view of such partnerships. They believe that the added value of think tanks is

As for independent think tanks, they share similar

primarily to provide an independent platform for

dynamics of cooperation with government officials,

debate, create opportunities for reconciliation of

very close to what government representatives

business and expert positions, and develop a new

themselves indicated with regard to the think tanks.

vision of old problems. Business associations do not

67% of NGO and think tank respondents indicated

use analytics very often. They conduct their own

the ad hoc character of partnerships, while only

opinion polls among member companies, the so-

27% cooperate with central and local governments

called “reality checks”, to learn business attitude

on a regular basis. Only 6% of public sector

towards some issue, and provide insights based on

representatives indicated that their organizations

the collected data. As an example, the American

do not work with government agencies at all.

Chamber did a report on energy sector reform.

http://www.chamber.ua/Content/Documents/-58349842Gas_Oil_WhitePaper_UA_WEB.pdf

Who are key end users of think tank products?

As you can see from the findings presented in the report, the relationship between think tanks, central government and local bodies of Ukraine has not grown into systematic and inclusive cooperation.

A predominant trend in their relationship is rather sporadic and ad hoc, despite allegedly declared willingness, both by the government and think tanks, to strengthen bilateral cooperation and grow it into consistent, mutually beneficial and long-term cooperation. The strength of the cooperation also often depends on previous relationships, level of awareness among government agencies and think tank experts, as well as available funding for analytical services and research.

Based on the study findings, key end users of nongovernmental think tank products are media and civil society, according to a majority of central and local government respondents and non-governmental think tanks interviewed. Meanwhile, NGO respondents chose international foundations and donor organizations that actually support think tank activities as key users of independent think tank products. In a separate interview government representatives also listed donor organizations as key users of think tank materials, while expressing a standard view that central and local governments should be actual users of think tank research and analysis. It is interesting to note that media and journalists were mentioned as key users only by one government respondent during the interview, while according to questionnaire results, media were selected by government respondents (along with international foundations and civil society organizations) as key users of independent think tank analytical products.

Donors who are interested in promoting reforms

oopers (PwC), Ernst&Young (EY), Sigma Blazer. As

in Ukraine do not see themselves as key users of re-

an example, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) de-

search and analysis. The western donors interviewed

veloped â&#x20AC;&#x153;Roadmap for development of the phar-

explained their motivation to support think tanks in

maceutical sectorâ&#x20AC;? for the American Chamber of

Ukraine first of all as a desire to strengthen dialogue

Commerce.

between the government and the public. They indicated that the role of think tanks is to promote

The American Chamber of Commerce has also

reforms, produce public expertise, and engage into

used some materials of Ukrainian think tanks. For

such government entities as the National Council of

example, the Chamber partnered with DiXi Group

Reform (NCR). Donor organizations support think

on energy issues, in particular in promoting the

tanks in developing high-quality research, which

Law of Ukraine on Gas Market. This cooperation is

can encourage public debate and influence public

viewed as a partnership, not just as a contract for

opinion. Thus, for example, the International Renais-

analytical services. DiXi Group held consultations

sance Foundation supported the Strategic Advisory

with the ACC member companies. Other examples

Groups, consisting of independent experts at Ukrai-

include the International Centre for Policy Studies

nian ministries. The SAGs have been quite successful

(ICPS) study on judicial and tax reforms. The Center

in working with the Ministry of Education, Ministry

for Economic Strategy actively cooperated with the

of Economic Development and Trade and the Min-

Chamber Banking Committee.

istry of Health of Ukraine. So, significant change has not been observed yet The number of public sector respondents, who,

in a hierarchy of think tank customer user group over

similar to policymakers, consider media and civil

the past year, as media, civil society organizations

society organizations to be key users of think tank

and international foundations still remain, according

products is somewhat smaller. Furthermore, twice

to government and public sector respondents, the

less respondents, both from non-governmental

main consumers of independent think tank prod-

organizations and from central and local bodies

ucts. This trend, in turn, shows the prevalence of

claimed that central or local authorities are key us-

rather indirect mechanisms of independent think

ers of think tank materials.

tanks influencing policy and state decision-making.. Such influence is mainly done through third

Business companies, especially international,

party, the mediators, which in this case would be

tend to use international analytics prepared by the

the above-mentioned media, civil society organiza-

World Bank or the European Bank for Reconstruc-

tions and international foundations. Herewith, there

tion and Development (EBRD). If a business associa-

is no 100% guarantee that after all, the actual

tion requests a research it prefers to employ such

impact of independent think tanks is achieved and

well-known consulting firms as PricewaterhouseC-

respective state policies or decisions are adopted.

3. 4.

http://www.usubc.org/site/files/Ukr_Monthly_Ec_Report_October_2015%20Final.pdf http://www.slideshare.net/KyivSchoolofEconomics/ss-38254406

What are the channels think tanks rely on to influence policy and decision making?

Another evidence of indirect influence exercised

them noted the importance of round table discus-

by non-governmental think tanks on public policy

sions and conferences with government represen-

and decision-making is based on how government

tatives (44%) and acting in an advisory boards to

and public sector respondents assess main tech-

the government (38%).

niques of this influence. It should be mentioned that the effectiveness of such influence techniques as transition of think

Thus, according to the majority of central and local government respondents a top-priority channel that think tanks rely on to influence public opinion is through media (57%). Slightly fewer government respondents referred to round table discussions (39%), an advisory capacity to the government (38%) and involvement of individual experts or entire think tanks into public policy and decision making (37% and 35% respectively).

tank experts to government jobs or various types of pressure on the government (rallies, protests, flash mobs, etc.) is estimated significantly higher by the public sector than by the government and local government respondents. So, just similar to how government and public sector respondents focus primarily on third party or the mediators in public policy and decision making (such as media, NGOs and international foundations) when identifying key users of independent think tank products, they also see primarily indirect channels as the most effective in policy influence: mainly, cooperation with international organizations, influencing public opinion through media and organization of public events. These mechanisms of influence are primarily associated with the

Whereas, think tank representatives have a dif-

necessity of direct interaction between think tanks

ferent opinion about their main channels and tech-

and third parties which actually were identified as

niques of public policy influence. Most of them be-

key users of think tank materials.

lieve that policy impact is achieved primarily through

partnerships with international organizations that

In addition, there is a positive sign that the role of

in turn influence the Ukrainian government (64%)

direct influence mechanisms on public policy and

at their end. Similar to government respondents,

decision making grows up because quite a signifi-

the public sector representatives interviewed also

cant part of both government and NGO representa-

refer to media (60%) as an important channel to

tives indicated, among other things, the effective-

influence public opinion as well as involvement of

ness of such influence technique as involvement of

individual think tank experts into public policy and

think tank experts into developing policy strategies

decision making process (58%). Slightly fewer of

and decision making process.

Policy influence: key elements for success

The study includes an additional online survey of think tank representatives to identify effectiveness of their direct influence on policy making.

The think tank respondents surveyed gave the following examples of effective influence on policy making: • • •

•

• • •

•

improvement of cross-border cooperation in the Lviv region adoption of the Law of Ukraine On Higher Education reform of social services in Odessa: improved payment procedure for social benefits and increased budget for local programs (by?) UAH 22 million. transfer of some medicine procurement procedures from the Ministry of Health of Ukraine to international organizations new Head and expanded mandate of EUAM Ukraine adoption of the Law On Public Television and Radio Broadcasting in Ukraine withdrawal from the ‘shadows’ of donations which are collected from patients by the charitable foundations and then settle ‘in the pockets’ of such funds adoption of the Law of Ukraine On Administrative Services, opening of centers of administrative services in cities of Ukraine launch of web portal E-DATA in accordance with the requirements of the Law of Ukraine On the openness of the public funds usage

THE THINK TANKS THEMSELVES BELIEVE THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTORS IN ACHIEVING IMPACT ON POLICY MAKING ARE THE FOLLOWING: •

Quality of research (77%)

•

Policy relevant research (55%)

•

Reputation of experts (44%)

77%

55%

44%

Table 1 shows a list of success factors in descending order of priority.

Table 1. List of success factors in descending order of priority.

DECISIVE FACTORS

IMPORTANT FACTORS

•

Quality of analysis

•

Policy relevant research

•

Reputation of experts

•

Partnerships with influential media

•

Political will of government officer in charge

•

International obligations

UNIMPORTANT FACTORS

LESS IMPORTANT FACTORS •

Innovations

•

Advisory support to stakeholders

•

Advocacy through reform champions

•

Image of a think tank as an independent organization

•

Draft law

•

Social media marketing

•

Leader positions in the coalition of experts

•

Pressure through Western partners

Think tank respondents gave different opinions

The above list of factors is for sure not complete

regarding the importance of having a draft law and

and a combination of these factors as well as their

international obligations that Ukraine has assumed

priority may vary depending on a situation, scope of

by becoming parties to international treaties and

work and even political environment. However, this

conventions.

list is useful because it is based on the experience of dynamic and quite successful even in today’s reali-

It is important to note that social changes and

ties think tanks. Here we present an interesting case

structural reforms take time. According to the think

study of DiXi Group’s cooperation with the govern-

tanks polled, the time required to achieve a success-

ment and its efforts in impacting energy policy in

ful outcome is from 6 months to 16 years, but on

Ukraine.

average - 5 years.

DiXi Group Сase DiXi Group DiXi Group has been working on promoting transparency in the extractive industries since 2010. The think tank is among leading Ukrainian NGOs in promoting the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (UAEITI) in Ukraine.

The main objective of the initiative is disclosing information about production volumes, payment and key players to reduce corruption in the mining industry and promote changes that would ensure proper management of these resources for the benefit of all citizens of Ukraine. Over the past years the oil and gas resources of Ukraine have often been abused for illicit enrichment, support of political elite and money laundering. That’s why the initiative is highly relevant today. In the past five years DiXi Group put a lot of effort into soliciting the first EITI Report from mining companies of Ukraine, which, according to the EITI standard, should be published annually. A major step towards success is expected this year. In December 2015, the first EITI Report will be prepared and presented to the government and the public by independent consulting firm Ernst & Young (EY) with the support of the World Bank. It will disclose the production volumes, taxes paid by mining companies and actual revenues from the industry. The Report should show major gaps and initiate a public debate on transparency and efficiency of the energy sector.

What are key success factors for DiXi Group? Strong information campaign

to promote the importance of transparency in the extractive sector to a wider audience. The think tank worked with influential media and experts from other non-governmental organizations. Some journalists went on a study tour to the EITI Secretariat (Oslo, Norway); every year three or four public activists or civil servants attend trainings in the Regional Hub (Istanbul). DiXi Group also holds regular roundtables and press conferences, prepares brochures on the Transparency Initiative with the support of embassies and other donors. The Initiative has its separate Ukrainian website – www.eiti. org.ua, which is a part of the global site www.eiti.org. In addition, the organization has its own website which is a separate source of information – www.ua-energy.org, and its attendance is more than 600 hosts per day.

Regular communication with the Ministry of Energy and Coal Industry of Ukraine

DiXi Group informed every newly appointed energy minister about the importance of the first EITI report. Also, the Organization worked closely not only with the top management of the ministry, but also with middle level managers, who form the basis of / institutional memory with regard to promotion of change. These relations allowed to pursue the Initiative even when top management of the ministry was not interested to implement it.

Appealing to the international obligations of Ukraine

The Government of Ukraine officially joined the Initiative in 2009, and its commitment to publish the first EITI Report was part of international donorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s requirements, including the World Bank and European Commission. It was important to maintain the requirement for a long time so the Report gets published.

Working with reform champions

who are interested in the energy sector, particularly in the Parliament. For example, 9 MPs from three factions became the co-authors of the Law on Strengthening the Transparency in Extractive Industries of Ukraine, which removed the legal obstacles preventing the publishing of the first EITI Report.

Building a multi-stakeholder group under the Ministry of Energy and Coal Industry

which includes representatives of large companies, government, and independent experts. The multi-stakeholder group was required by the Transparency Initiative. The group helped raise awareness of both companies and government officials about the importance of transparency in the industry. The group plays an important role by promoting dialogue, reaching a compromise between all parties involved and elaborating of joint coordinated solutions.

Building a regional coalition

of independent NGOs from the coal mining regions. It united the organizations from Poltava, Kharkiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, and Chernihiv, mainly the experts involved in regional development. DiXi Group together with Ukrainian and international partners did trainings and workshops for these organizations on monitoring local revenues from extractive companies. Civil activists were trained how to work with business and advocate the community interests on environmental issues. Strengthening local groups can stop corruption schemes where companies solve community problems by paying bribes to MPs. These groups help communities get their voices heard and can better protect citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; rights and community interests.

Strong expertise on energy issues

DiXi Group is a member of the international PWYP coalition that aims at promoting transparency in energy sector around the world and helping analyze documents to enhance transparency. In addition, DiXi Group works closely with international experts on transparency issues and consults with them about the experience of other countries in similar initiatives. Since increasing transparency in the mining sector is also among the EU directives, DiXi Group works closely with the European coalitions to exchange experience and develop common positions in this area.

Mechanisms of cooperation between think tanks and central and local governments In Ukraine there are certain techniques that non-

popular among government officials. The demand for

governmental organizations, including independent

state research institutions (29%) is relatively mediocre,

think tanks, rely on to influence policy making. They

while universities and foreign (or Ukrainian) consulting

include community councils, advisory boards, working

firms and experts are even less popular among the

groups at ministries, project offices for reforms, NCR,

government and local government respondents.

working groups for strategy development at the

However, besides the preferences and interests in

Presidential Administration, Parliament hearings, and

analytical services claimed by government officials in the

public expertise.

questionnaires, during interviews some representatives

previously

mentioned,

the

majority

of ministries and government departments emphasized

policymakers and local governors believe that it is

that they would be interested in employing major

important to cooperate with think tanks and are

consulting firms to develop policies. New technocrat

overall interested in building a long-term partnership.

reformers who came to the government mainly from

Moreover, central and local government respondents

private sector or business, have high expectations for

indicated that if they need some research or analysis,

quality and efficiency of analytical materials. They

the majority of them would seek help primarily from

require competence, policy relevance, time efficiency

individual experts and think tanks in general.

and high quality. They also expressed doubts of wether

All other sources and options of obtaining the necessary analytical services are significantly less

relevant expertise is offered by national independent think tanks.

Following regime change in Ukraine after the Euromaidan protests, Western donors started setting up project offices to promptly respond to the problem of inefficient bureaucracy and attract highly qualified staff to work in the ministries.

The project offices hired individual consultants

program supported 14 local experts in four ministries

who would often perform analytical work and

to implement seven reforms in trade, investment

develop policies and strategic documents. The

and growth, infrastructure, penitentiary system, gas

Canadian Program (EDGE) supports Professionals for

industry and public finance transparency. The experts

Reform Support Mechanism (PRSM), which provides

work in the Ministry of Economic Development and

the government ministries with human resource

Trade (5 people), the Ministry of Justice (3), the Ministry

support to reform initiatives. Only within six weeksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

of Finance (2) and the Ministry of Infrastructure of

work from November through December 2015 the

Ukraine. Most of the experts have experience in

the private sector, either investment or consulting

which most of the government officials would come

companies. They also perform the tasks that could

to looking for expertise or analytical materials on

be outsourced from independent think tanks. The

various issues concerned.

project offices help in solving the problems of low institutional capacity of Ukrainian ministries and

The data presented above is raising a good question

address urgent needs. Herewith, national non-

about where the central and local government

governmental think tanks are pretty much not

agencies get information about topics and issues

involved in the work of project offices.

of think tank research. That is what actually should guide government agencies in searching for the

However, despite the new realities and trends, independent think tanks still remain the organizations,

MAIN SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT NON-GOVERNMENTAL THINK TANK ACTIVITIES

53%

most relevant think tanks with respective areas of expertise, when needed.

41%

27%

WEBSITES OF THINK TANKS

THINK TANKS E-MAIL UPDATES

MEDIA

Main sources

49% PUBLIC EVENTS

22%

18%

COLLEAGUES AND FRIENDS

MANAGERS AND EXPERTS OF THINK TANKS

17%

18%

PROMOTIONAL BROCHURES

MATERIALS SPECIALLY TAILORED FOR A SPECIFIC GOVERNMENT AGENCY

The study revealed that two main sources of information about non-governmental think tank activities include, first of all, media (53%) and public events (49%) (presentations, round tables and conferences) organized by non-governmental think tanks. Slightly fewer government respondents look for the information directly on the websites of think tanks (41%). About a quarter of all government respondents say they learn of independent think tank projects from their e-mail updates (27%) and their staff, colleagues and friends (22%). About the same number of respondents receive relevant information from think tank managers and experts (18%), their promotional brochures (17%) and, importantly, the materials specially tailored to a specific government agency (18%)

Such priority of various information sources

between research agenda and government demand

with media, websites and public events being

respectively. Only about a fifth of all central and

on top of the list, clearly shows that government

local government respondents shape a research

representatives learn about think tank research

agenda of think tanks by their specific orders for

mainly post factum, which reveals a weak link

analytical materials.

Partner selection criteria: what government agencies consider when choosing an independent think tank to work with? In this study, we tried to find out what criteria the government representatives look for when selecting a think tank to partner with or obtain analytical services from. What do they consider above all when making a choice?

According to the survey findings, the government agencies usually consider three main criteria while selecting a partner think tank:

OVERALL QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND INFORMATION PUBLISHED BY THE THINK TANK

REPUTATION AND OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF A THINK TANK (FAIRNESS, POLITICAL IMPARTIALITY)

Much fewer government respondents, while selecting a think tank, look at such criteria as

RELEVANT EXPERTS ON STAFF

tank has available grants or funding to perform specific analytical services for the government.

previous experience in working with government agencies (20%), partnerships with foreign think

Furthermore, it is no secret that there have been

tanks (18%), available project-specific grants (16%).

cases when non-governmental organizations,

However, low rating of the above mentioned criteria

research services or even think tanks were

(compared to those identified as the main criteria)

established by specific sponsors in order to

may be explained by a somewhat stereotypical and

pursue certain political or business agenda. Such

idealistic response approach of civil servants who try

“institutions” are designed to manipulate an

hard to demonstrate their objective and impartial

‘expertise’ for a sponsor with the aim to legalize

attitude towards selecting a partner think tank.

some necessary for him (her) policy decisions.

Whereas, real-life experience indicates that personal

However, just to make things clear, these activities

relationships are very important when it comes to

have nothing to do with real research and

selecting an independent think tank, the same way

expert work that is carried out by unbiased non-

as a financial component: mainly whether a think

governmental think tanks with good reputation.

Texty.org.ua conducted a detailed survey “Sellers of Ratings” where they collected data on scam research services and researchers in Ukraine who have published shady information over the past 15 years - See http://texty.org.ua/d/socio/

When interviewed, the government respondents

Whereas,

during

the

interviews

government

mentioned, among other things, that our research

representatives emphasized that when selecting a

environment is politically biased. The examples

think tank, they, first of all, consider impartiality of

provided would include unethical partnerships

research and information, rigor, recommendations,

when the public voice was suspected to be used for

conclusions, policy relevance (including the use of

political games and to pursue a political agenda.

tabular data, info graphics, etc.) of research.

A GOVERNMENT EXPERT COMMENTED ON THE MOST USEFUL ANALYTICAL PRODUCT AS FOLLOWS:

“It should not be just bare analytics, cold facts, but analytics with a focus on practical application in your (professional - author) field”.

At the same time, almost all government

The business representatives interviewed also

respondents emphasized the importance of social

reported that researchers and experts in Ukraine

research and opinion polls. One of the experts shared

are often engaged in lobbying someone’s private

the following comment: “As for me, a politician

and at the same time an expert, in-depth analysis

respondents indicated, among other things, that an

supported with credible datasets is the most valuable

analytical product must be supported with strong

(...) because analytics without sociological data is

methodological justification, based on actual

scholastic and sometimes is personal in nature,

datasets and updated depending on the situation,

author’s opinion, which is not always unbiased”.

properly presented and unbiased.

political

interests.

International

business

What are main barriers to effective cooperation between government and independent think tanks?

The non-governmental think tanks, on the one hand, and central and local government respondents, on the other, have somewhat different opinions regarding the major barriers to their effective bilateral cooperation.

For example, the vast majority of policymakers and local governors agree that the major obstacle is the shortage of government funding to pay for services of independent think tanks (53%). In addition, government representatives pointed to such obstacles as lack of appropriate political culture on policy formation and decision making (48%).

THE VAST MAJORITY OF POLICYMAKERS AND LOCAL GOVERNORS AGREE THAT THE MAJOR OBSTACLE IS:

53% THE SHORTAGE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING TO PAY FOR SERVICES OF INDEPENDENT THINK TANKS

48% LACK OF APPROPRIATE POLITICAL CULTURE ON POLICY FORMATION AND DECISION MAKING

40% of respondents referred to poor awareness of think tank (interest groups) and politics. It was noted in the activities as a barrier. The respondents explain that lack of appropriate

political culture is a consequence of mixing business interview “many MPs simply do not care to read bills because they are not going to vote for them

Fewer government respondents indicated that the

for pure political reasons.» Another problem is that

government does not know how to work with experts

some interest groups take advantage of think tanks

(34%) and government employees suffer from chronic

for their own benefit, which discredits an entire

shortage of time (33%), that’s why they are forced

non-governmental sector. The intensity of reforms

to take quick management decisions without proper

and lack of time to discuss policies and strategies

prior analysis and expertise. Other possible barriers,

implemented also constitute an obstacle. A

such as low competence of government workers,

respondent made a comment that “the Parliament

no in-house think tanks or poor quality research

has an overwhelming amount of bills” and reform

produced by independent think tanks, were rated low

agenda is poorly planned and unpredictable.

by central and local government respondents.

Although poor quality materials of independent think tanks were indicated by a relatively small number of policymakers, as a part of the survey, it was done an attempt to better understand what exactly civil servants dislike about analytical materials produced by the think tanks? The study revealed that the things they dislike most of all are abstractness of analysis and lack of specific

WHAT GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS DISLIKE MOST OF ALL IN RESEARCH AND INFORMATION PRODUCED BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL THINK TANKS: ~

abstractness of analysis and lack of specific recommendations

common knowledge (summary of the generally known stuff) in reports

political bias of think tanks

recommendations, common knowledge (summary of the generally known stuff) in reports and political bias of think tanks. Whereas, about a quarter of all respondents are pretty much happy about the materials produced by non-governmental think tanks of Ukraine. The government respondents interviewed also pointed to the importance of applied nature of recommendations. It is important for them that the study considers the realities of the proposed amendment implementation as well as the capacity of theadministrative system. An analysis should be in-depth and include legal and regulatory component. Policy analysis with likely

ALSO, THEY POINTED TO: ~

Importance of applied nature of recommendations

An analysis should be in-depth and include legal and regulatory component

Policy analysis with likely effects of different policy choices

effects of different policy choices is very popular among the MPs.

Both government representatives and donors interviewed referred to poor quality of research

OTHER BARRIERS MENTIONED INCLUDE:

and analysis. They said, in particular, “many experts have a superficial knowledge, but if you dig deeper on many topics, you won’t find a true

low operational efficiency of think tanks

expert”. They also mentioned inconsistent quality

poor understanding of public administration system

of expertise when the quality of research produced

poor knowledge of bureaucratic procedures

lack of consistency in the obligations assumed

government agencies do not preserve institutional memory regarding cooperation with non-governmental think tanks

by the same think tank varies significantly. Other

barriers

mentioned

include

low

operational efficiency of think tanks, poor understanding of public administration system, and poor knowledge of bureaucratic procedures and lack of consistency in the obligations assumed. One of the respondents during the indepth interview shared

such an original point

as that “government agencies do not preserve institutional memory regarding cooperation with non-governmental think tanks”.

Other barriers to cooperation between government and think tanks include as follows:

1. 2.

poor understanding of government needs for research and information by donors lack of a transparent competitive environment (public tenders) in ordering analytical products of independent think tanks by the central and local authorities.

Some government respondents expressed their doubts as to whether independent think tanks can generate new innovative solutions. For example, lustration or restoring confidence in justice are complicated issues, and often, regulations are just compromise documents that weakens their strength and quality. Herewith, the proposals of independent think tanks are not always constructive and do not always offer innovative approaches to problem solving.

Speaking of barriers, it should be emphasized

events. Respondents also felt that there is a lack of

that most respondents from non-governmental

cooperation between government and civil society

sector indicated the same barriers as government

organizations. The quality of such cooperation

respondents did. They include the lack of

often depends on the personality working in a

government funding to pay independent think

government agency.

tanks (55%), government employees suffer from chronic shortage of time (44 %) and low awareness

Many of the identified barriers to bilateral

of think tank activities (38%). However, the

cooperation between government and think tanks,

majority of respondents primarily emphasized the

such as shortage of government funding, low

inability of government institutions to work with

awareness and, at the same time, the fact that

think tanks (69%) and, just as importantly, the very

government does not know how to work with

fact that government decisions might be motivated

independent think tanks, were selected both by

by political or personal financial gain (63%).

government representatives and NGO respondents. Therefore, the above-mentioned factors should be

Fewer government respondents mentioned in the

given priority attention. However, such structural

interview a poor planning by non-governmental

obstacles as political bias, poor quality of research

think tanks. Sometimes think tanks invite MPs

and information as well as simple government or

to participate in debates that take place during

think tanksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; disinterest in producing? unbiased and

sitting hours and MPs simply cannot attend such

rigorous analysis should also be considered.

Who will pay for research: financial side of the partnership

Financial aspect is a key determinant of bilateral

respondents would agree to share the cost of think

cooperation between government agencies and

tank services with a charitable foundation or donor

think tanks, as revealed by the survey results. Most

organization. Finally, about 20% of respondents

policymakers and NGO representatives believe

remained undecided on whether they are willing to

that a shortage in government funds to pay for

pay for think tank products.

the research of non-governmental think tanks is hampering partnership opportunities.

Such rather disappointing data is confirmed by funding sources named by non-governmental think

No more than one fifth (1/5) of all central and local government respondents expressed willingness to pay for research.

tanks themselves. The main source of income for them is international donors, while government is not listed among main sources of funding for independent think tanks.

The vast majority of them are willing to pay, but not as much as well-known and reputable think

When asked during interviews on whether they

tanks would be willing to accept. More than a third

are ready to pay for research respondents said it is

of all respondents are not willing to pay for think

very unlikely to have funds available for research in

tank services at all, while a little over a quarter of

the medium term.

Most relevant research topics according to think tanks and policymakers Think tanks, policymakers and local administrations need to develop mechanisms for the efficient long-term cooperation. To ensure highest impact and efficiency of such cooperation, it is important to make it address priority topics that are mostly requested by main

local government respondents noted that the main areas where government needs expertise and analytical support from non-governmental sector is primarily opinion polls, comprehensive assessment of current situation and development trends,

decentralization

and

anti-corruption

reforms. Policymakers were prompted to specify

consumers? of analytical services in Ukraine.

5 most important research areas from among a

Policymakers indicated a variety of research

variety of answer choices, and in addition to the

areas of social, political, legal and international,

already above mentioned four areas, they also

security, environment and cultural areas to be

selected national macroeconomic problems to

important. However, the majority of central and

the top-priority research areas.

Main areas where government needs expertise and analytical support from non-governmental sector

HIGHEST PRIORITY AREAS WHERE GOVERNMENT NEEDS EXPERT SUPPORT OF NONGOVERNMENTAL SECTOR. ~

decentralization

anti-corruption reforms

opinion polls

implementation of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement

development of civil society

opinion polls

2. 3.

comprehensive assessment of current situation and development trends decentralization and anti-corruption reforms

NGO respondents were also asked to specify the highest priority areas where, in their opinion, government needs expert support of non-governmental sector. Some of the priority areas (such as decentralization, anticorruption reforms and opinion polls) are the same as those specified by government respondents. However, only NGOs and think tanks indicated the implementation of the Association Agreement and development of civil society to be important areas, whereas according to policymakers they are not top priority at the moment.

Despite different opinions of government officials and think tanks regarding priority areas, each relevant problem specified by policymakers can be addressed by at least a few think tanks that deal with these issues and therefore can provide some issue-related research and relevant expertise.

Thus, among independent think tanks interviewed for the survey there are many organizations engaged more or less into priority areas for the government:

DECENTRALIZATION

ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT SOCIAL SITUATION AND TRENDS OF ITS FURTHER DEVELOPMENT

OPINION POLLS ON VARIOUS ISSUES

ANTI-CORRUPTION REFORMS

NATIONAL MACROECONOMIC PROBLEMS

At least 8 NGOs interviewed focus on energy security issues, while other 4 think tanks deal with judicial reform of Ukraine.

FOCUS ON ENERGY SECURITY ISSUES

JUDICIAL REFORM OF UKRAINE

The policymakers interviewed for the study also indicated such urgent research areas as information security, agricultural business development, privatization, antimonopoly regulation, trade and export policy of Ukraine.

Future reintegration of the occupied territories of Ukraine (Crimea and uncontrolled areas of Donbas) was also among relevant issues. In particular, Putin and Russian aggression united the country to resist but there are some concerns that this unity can significantly weaken in the future. The issue of demobilized ATO (anti-terrorist operation) soldiers was also mentioned. It is reported that there are more than 200,000 ATO veterans and 50,000 ex-soldiers who know how to use weapons and are not satisfied with current state of affairs in the country. It is very important to help them integrate and successfully engage into social and economic life of the country.

In general, according to the survey findings, nongovernmental think tanks are more or less engaged into priority research areas and can provide necessary expertise on relevant issues and topics. While it is important to focus on governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s priority list of research areas, it is also important to have those issues that can arise unexpectedly in the future covered with research as well. They include, first of all, the above mentioned issues such as reintegration of uncontrolled Donbas territories or integration of ATO ex-servicemen in social life of the country, which currently may seem to be not so urgent, but can come up on top of political agenda very soon.

Most reputable non-governmental think tanks The survey asked respondents from central and local government to name the think tanks whose products are, in their opinion, the most useful and helpful.

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies still leads among government preferences (the think tank was specified by 53 policymakers). The Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation is ranked second. Top five most popular and effective think tanks also include the International Centre for Policy Studies (ICPS), Centre of Policy and Legal Reform (CPLR) and the Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting (IER). Within the top ten are also the Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR), Kyiv Gorshenin Institute of Management, Centre for Global Studies “Strategy XXI”, Institute for Political Education (IPE) and Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS). However, at least one of the think tanks listed by policymakers is not really a non-governmental think tank: the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology is actually a privately owned company. 6

The latest ranking of think tanks 2015 shows an

Centre for Global Studies “Strategy XXI” and the

interesting dynamic especially compared to 2014

Institute for Political Education (IPE). During the

ranking results obtained from the survey two years

interview, respondents also noted the emergence

ago. Only first two think tanks, the Razumkov Centre

of new think tanks like the Center for Economic

for Economic and Political Studies and the Ilko

Strategy and Bendukidze Free Market Center. NGO

Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, remain

“Telekrytyka” and Civil Network OPORA were also

on their positions of the rankings. ICPS leapfrogs

mentioned by respondents.

the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform (CPLR) and moves up to the third position from the 5th position

It is difficult to determine true leaders among

in 2014 rankings. The latter dropped to the 4th

regional think tanks that are located outside of

spot accordingly. Finally, the Institute for Economic

Kyiv, because most central and local government

Research and Policy Consulting (IER) finished in the

respondents could not even remember any

bottom of top 5 independent think tanks according

of the regional think tanks. However, a few

to 2015 rankings. Only two years ago IER ranked

regional think tanks were mentioned one time,

the 6th in in the overall ranking of the most popular

including Kharkiv Fund for Local Democracy, Odessa

and useful independent think tanks according to

Civil Institute of Social Technologies, City Institute

government respondents.

(Lviv), Center for Education Policy (KamenetsPodilskyy), Luhansk Region Agency for Sustainable

Other

well-known

think

tanks

that

were

Development, Dnipropetrovsk Centre for Social

mentioned in the interview were the Reanimation

Research

(Dnepropetrovsk),

Package of Reforms (RPR) advocacy platform (two

European Integration (Lviv).

and

Institute

for

references), Civic Platform “Nova Kraina” (The New Country) (2 references) and Civil Society Institute (2 references).

Low awareness about regional think tanks can be explained by new local government that was elected at the end of 2015. Thus, the newly elected regional

It should be also noted that the 2015 ranking

MPs, who participated in the questionnaire survey,

of top 10 think tanks has got some “newcomers”

could have simply had no time to get to know and

like the Kyiv Gorshenin Institute of Management,

partner with local non-governmental think tanks.

Media perception of non-governmental think tanks The survey of policymakers, local administrations and nongovernmental think tanks, among other things, revealed the special role that media plays in the overall activity of non-governmental think tanks and, particularly, in their cooperation with government. Acting as an important bridge to provide information to central and local government about the activities of non-governmental think tanks, media is also recognized as a consumer of research and information produced by independent think tanks. Moreover, as previously mentioned, the majority of respondents from government and non-government sector find media to be the most effective tool to influence public opinion.

Representatives of the Ukrainian media organizations are generally well informed about the activities of non-governmental think tanks. Only 6 representatives of media sector know less than they would like to know, while 24 respondents are generally aware of the activities of non-governmental think tanks Every single journalist polled knows at least something about activities of non-governmental think tanks.

30 EXPERTS GENERALLY NEED THINK TANKS MATERIALS

18 EXPERTS NEED A LOT THINK TANKS MATERIALS

The vast majority of journalists personally use research and information produced by non-governmental think tanks: 30 experts generally need such materials, 18 - need them a lot. However, only three media respondents recognized that they generally do not need research and information produced by non-governmental think tanks. The vast majority of media respondents (37 experts) believe that research findings of think tanks are normally used from time to time. When identifying key users, representatives

3 EXPERTS DO NOT NEED RESEARCH AND INFORMATION PRODUCED BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL THINK TANKS

of journalist community agree with two other groups of respondents (government and NGO sector): the vast majority of experts (43 and 41 accordingly) named media and CSOs as key users of think tanksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; materials. A little fewer media experts referred to another indisputable favorite - international foundations and organizations (35 experts).

The study results indicate that media organizations are interested primarily in express analysis in the form of expert comments, brief survey findings or personal consulting for journalists on specific issues, while in-depth research and studies are of less interest to journalists.

tanks. In fact, only 3 experts admitted that they are paying for think tank services, and another 4 experts would be willing to pay for research and expertise provided by non-governmental think tanks, while most media respondents (21 experts) are not willing to pay for analytical products, and 12 experts will agree to pay if it would be

However, such priority placement for analytical genres looks quite reasonable given the dynamic

inexpensive. 12 experts remained undecided on this issue.

nature of journalistic work. It is interesting to note, that journalists, as well as policymakers and

The majority of answers provided in personal

local governors, learn about think tank activities

in-depth interviews confirm the quantitative data

primarily from media and less often from - websites

collected from media respondents after processing

of independent think tanks and their public events

questionnaires. The interview materials generally

(presentations, roundtables, conferences, etc.).

confirm that journalists have some experience

According to the journalists, the Razumkov Centre

for Economic and Political Studies and the Ilko

tanks, and would be interested to strengthen

Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation work

this cooperation in the future. The journalists

with media most often.

interviewed recognized, among other things,

partnering

with

non-governmental

think

that they use results of sociological research The most relevant research topics for journalists include general assessment of reforms and progress, Ukraine’s economic development, various opinion polls, military, security and international policy issues, etc.

(infographics) to prepare certain TV programs and news. Special attention is given to public events (conferences, round tables, etc.) organized by independent think tanks. Materials of interviews have confirmed the aforementioned demand for expertise on military and international affairs

Regarding possible barriers to cooperation between media and non-governmental think tanks, the journalists polled indicated a wide range of hindrances to cooperation, including those mentioned earlier in the study: experts of independent think tanks do not know how to work with the media, lack of funds and time shortage, chasing after sensations instead of seeking rigorous research and analysis.

among journalists and media organizations. A journalist commented in the interview as follows: “Life has revealed so many international, military, and legal issues, that our traditional provinciality turned out to be pretty much revealing. It is a huge problem to find an expert or research on, let’s say, the Middle East issue. (...) It would be good if think tanks could respond to the challenges of the present.” Overall, the research topics recognized by journalists as important during the interview

Although mass media is recognized as one of

largely overlap with those identified by media

the main users of think tank materials, as it was

respondents as top priority in the questionnaire

mentioned earlier, media organizations cannot be

survey - judicial reform, prosecution, economic

regarded as a key donors for independent think

and security issues.

Key recommendations on strengthening policy influence and cooperation between government and think tanks The study revealed a high level of interest of central and local government as well as nongovernmental think tanks in developing long-term bilateral cooperation. However, now the cooperation is rather ad hoc and sporadic. Non-governmental think tanks are regarded by policymakers as good partners for producing high-quality analytical products, which leaves room for optimism and hope that the declared willingness to deepen bilateral cooperation will be actually implemented in practice. To enter a new level of cooperation, non-governmental think tanks are recommended the following:

1. Today, non-governmental think tanks continue to have rather limited capacity to influence public policy and decision making. Therefore, it is necessary to create effective mechanisms for direct involvement of independent think tanks into expert-based policy and decision making process, which is impossible without having regular effective bilateral cooperation and communication between central and local government bodies and nongovernmental think tanks. It is important to enhance cooperation with the Secretariat of the National Council for Reforms and project offices at ministries, where such offices are already operating. Independent think tanks can strengthen efforts of project offices and, possibly, propose new projects, which would have had clearly defined order for independent research and analysis. Think tank experts should be actively involved in drawing out the Action Plan on the implementation of the National Strategy for Civil Society Development, where one of the objectives is â&#x20AC;&#x153;to ensure efficient procedures for public participation in shaping and implementing state and regional policy and addressing local issuesâ&#x20AC;?.7 2. Increasing technical assistance, growing cooperation between the ministries and international business consulting firms as well as the emergence of new think tanks drive competition in the market of analytical services. Non-governmental think tanks should focus on quality, innovation and efficiency to stay competitive in the marketplace. Government agencies look for quality research and analysis that are focused on the demands

and needs of policymakers. Government officials

government agencies, it is also important to

are not interested in academic texts or common

have civil servants and policymakers guide

knowledge facts; instead they are looking for in-

a research agenda of think tanks with their

novative while brief applied policy research that

clear and precise requests for research and

includes specific recommendations or proposals

expertise. Think tanks should strengthen rela-

for the government. Think tanks should moni-

tions at their end with those government agen-

tor the quality of their publications. External

cies, which deal with policy areas concerned.

reviews, perhaps involving policymakers,

Since most of policymakers learn about the

will help to improve the quality and applied

work of independent think tanks from the me-

nature of policy documents.

dia, it is important to improve communication and build relations with those media

3. The value of independent analysis for decision making process includes communicating

organizations and journalists that cover the topics related to think tankâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s expertise.

the most objective and unbiased information to the public. Government and donors have very

5. One of the main barriers to establishing a pro-

high expectations of think tanks in promoting re-

ductive cooperation between non-governmental

forms. Therefore, non-governmental think tanks

think tanks and government agencies remains is

should also improve their work with media, and

the factor of limited financial resource allocated

develop new formats of direct dialogue with pub-

for government agencies, which supposedly

lic activists. It is also important to assess impact of

holds them back from paying properly for the

reform on various groups and study the views of

service of independent think tanks. Building

various stakeholders on reforms in specific sectors

transparent and competitive market of an-

(education, healthcare, public service, etc.). Non-

alytical services in Ukraine should become a

govermental think tanks should find a balance be-

priority objective for the government in the

tween meeting government demand for research

nearest future. State research institutions must

services, on the one hand, and, not turning into

participate in open tenders and compete with

government subcontractors, on the other hand.

non-governmental think tanks and other institu-

Furthermore, independent think tanks should

tions (consulting firms or agencies) for the right

always remember their organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic

of providing provide their expertise and analyti-

objectives and pursue their mission in everything

cal services to government agencies and local

they do. It is important to observe the principle of

administrations. This will not only best serve to

impartiality, which is not that easy considering a

minimization of corruption in the field of expert

politically charged environment of Ukraine. Non-

and research services in Ukraine, but also help

governmental think tanks should advocate for

improve the overall quality of the services and

changes without promoting any political party or

research products. There is a possibility that in

political actor.

the future government funding allocated for state think tanks or departments will be restruc-

As much as it is important to have think

tured and some portion of these funds will be

tanks or individual researchers involved with

used to pay for services / products of non-gov-

ernmental think tanks under a tender. It is nec-

will strengthen think tanksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; legitimacy in the eyes

essary to study the use of research and informa-

of the government authorities. Given a slow pace

tion produced by government institutions and

of reforms and inactive political system think

compare it with the cost of non-governmental

tanks should strengthen advocacy of reforms and

research services. For example, where does the

proposals which they are promoting among pro-

Presidential Administration order opinion polls?

fessional groups, stakeholders, businesses and

Do the Ministry of Economic Development and

media. When the government ignores propos-

Trade use analytics of a state research institute?

als of independent think tanks, it is important to

( http://ndei.me.gov.ua)

increase the impact through public opinion and active external communication.

6. It is necessary to strengthen the synergy between donor assistance, independent think

8. Advocacy efforts of think tanks should also

tank proposals and government needs for

focus on society. Non-governmental think tanks

research. Today, the vast majority of leading

should conduct strategic debates on Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

think tanks receive funding from international

future path. One of the tasks of think tanks is to

foundations. To encourage non-governmen-

help citizens ask the right questions about ongo-

tal think tanks to partner with central and lo-

ing processes in the country. The political will to

cal government agencies, international donors

reform is weak on the Ukrainian side and there-

can set up specific financial incentives for both

fore it is important to build consensus within the

parties. For example, direct involvement of a

country for the understanding of what type of

think tank into policy and decision making can

Ukraine the citizens would like to live in. Con-

be fostered with additional funding. It would

solidated consensus-based public pressure will

also make sense to introduce (at least tempo-

strengthen the political will to reform.

rarily) cost sharing where international foundations and donors pay for a portion of cost of

9. It is important to strengthen research ca-

think tank products and services not covered by

pacity in those areas, where potential users

government agencies. As soon as government

and customers need it the most. The biggest

agencies understand the benefits of long-term

demand for NGO support and expertise among

cooperation with non-governmental think tanks

central and local government agencies is related

and allocate more budget funding for such co-

to public opinion polls, general analysis of society

operation, the financial participation of interna-

and its development trends, decentralization, an-

tional foundations and donors can be eventually

ti-corruption reforms and macroeconomic issues.

reduced or even completely eliminated.

Donors also recommend focusing on monitoring implementation of the new legislation and newly

7. Policy advocacy is very important in influencing decision making. This impact will be

established institutions, including anti-corruption agencies.

effective if think tanks and civil society organi-

zations join efforts and set up coalitions that

10. Most non-governmental think tanks are based

will work directly with citizens. Successful cam-

primarily in Kyiv and a few other cities with

paigns of the RPR (Reanimation Package of Re-

strong educational institutions. However, de-

forms) are a good example of such coalitions.

centralization processes, transfer of decision

Advocacy can be further enhanced by improv-

making power to local administrations require

ing relations with key stakeholders since that

relevant research and analysis on a regional level

to address local problems. The study revealed

non-governmental think tanks often jump from

that policymakers and especially local gover-

one topic to another and have no funding to

nors are extremely poorly aware of regional

further work within the topic of the project. Ex-

think tanks. Therefore, it is recommended to

perience with implementing change shows that

invite regional think tanks to partner and

successful organizational transition can take

implement joint projects together with

several years. It requires sustainable funding and

well-recognized analytical institutions and

predictability, which can be achieved with the

think tanks based in Kyiv. It is also advisable

help of institutional funding. A think tankâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s per-

to improve regional communication between

formance depends not only on researchers but

local administrations and regional think tanks

also on good human resource management,

through, inter alia, joint public events, press

democratic management, effective communica-

conferences or regional conferences with the

tion, and fundraising. Therefore, it is important

participation of local government that are or-

to develop institutional capacity of non-govern-

ganized by non-governmental think tanks with

mental think tanks with institutional funding for

donor assistance.

several years subject to a clear strategic development plan.

11. To get government agencies involved into shaping the research agenda of think tanks, it

13. Independent think tanks should focus on

is very important to strengthen two-way

a new area of activity: work on open data

communication between government and

provided by the Ministry of Finance, the

non-governmental think tanks. Such com-

Ministry of Infrastructure, the State Trea-

munication should ensure that government

sury, the National Bank of Ukraine and

authorities know about any future activities of

other institutions. These data can be used for

a think tank, and the latter understands the

future research, program monitoring and de-

research topics that government agencies and

velopment of new draft policies. For example,

policymakers might request.

Transparency International Georgia managed to effectively use open data to advance reforms in

12. Think tanks should pay special attention

Georgia.

to political impartiality and compliance of analytical products with practical require-

14. The think tanks that would like to get con-

ments of government agencies. Think tanks

tracts from private sector, should conduct

in Ukraine should increase innovation and ap-

marketing research to identify topics rel-

plied nature of their materials. International do-

evant to business. Possible research areas that

nors should consider helping non-governmental

were specified in the study include intellectual

think tanks in building analytical capacities.

property rights, agricultural business, customs

Think tanks often require institutional support

reform and development of transport infrastruc-

for their mission, while most donors give proj-

ture, administrative reform and governance, in-

ect funding for specific research. As a result,

novations and human capital.

Survey findings Annex 1 Non-governmental think tanks and government: partnership opportunities TOTAL RESPONDENTS 158 EXPERTS

NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Yes, a great deal

35.4

Less than I would like

43.7

Little

15.8

Nothing

5.1

Do you know about activities of non-governmental think tanks in Ukraine?

How often do you personally need research and information produced by non-governmental think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Very often

21.5

Fairly often

107

67.7

Almost never

3.2

Never

0.6

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

How do you learn about the activities of independent think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Directly from the materials developed by think tanks for us, our government agency

18.4

Websites of think tanks

41.1

Managers and researchers of the think tanks

17.7

Special events of think tanks (presentations, round tables, conferences)

49.4

Mass media

53.2

Information brochures of think tanks

17.1

E-mail updates and announcements

26.6

Employees, colleagues and friends

22.2

Other

1.9

Who do you think is a key user of independent think tank products? (Check all that apply)

КІЛЬКІСТЬ ЕКСПЕРТІВ

Media

101

64.7

Civil society organizations

55.1

Central government

37.8

Local government

22.4

Business associations

17.9

International foundations and organizations

42.9

Political parties and groups

48.7

Individuals

35.9

Schools and universities

11.5

Other (Please, specify)

1.9

Non-governmental think tanks do not have actual users

1.3

NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Most of the time

1.3

Sometimes

47.8

Undecided

36.3

Almost never

13.4

Never

1.3

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

How much do you think non-governmental think tanks influence policy and decision making?

If yes, what influence techniques are being used to impact policy making? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Involvement of think tanks in strategy building and decision making process in different areas

34.9

Involvement of individual experts in strategy building and decision making

36.9

Participation in public councils and other advisory boards to the government

37.6

Transition of think tank experts to government jobs

17.4

Impact of public opinion through mass media

Round table discussions and conferences with policymakers

38.9

Various forms of government pressure in partnership with other NGOs (protests, flash mobs, etc.)

18.8

Other

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

2.7

Do you agree that central and local governments should cooperate with independent think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Yes, regularly

104

65.8

Yes, whenever needed

29.1

No, there is no need

3.2

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

1.9

Have you ever used research and information produced by independent think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Yes, always

21.5

Occasionally, sometimes

62.7

Never

15.8

Have you personally (or an organization where you work) cooperated with independent think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Always

12.5

Occasionally, sometimes

61.2

Never

26.3

10.

(Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

State research institutions

29.1

Universities

15.2

Individual researchers

51.9

Non-governmental think tanks

51.3

Ukrainian consulting firms

5.7

Foreign consulting firms, if possible

Individual foreign researchers, if possible

17.1

Do ourselves

19.6

Other

3.2

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

5.1

11.

If you need research and analysis, where would you go first of all?

What would you consider first of all when selecting a nongovernmental think tank to partner with? (Choose no more than 3 answers)

REFERENCES

Reputation, overall performance (think tankâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s records, objectivity, political impartiality)

109

Quality of research and information produced by a think tank (in-depth study, reliable data, practical recommendations)

116

73.4

Respective experts on staff

57.6

Media representation

11.4

Influence, relations with government agencies and policymakers

6.3

Previous experience in working with government agencies or self-governments

20.3

Cooperation with Ukrainian consulting firms

5.1

Cooperation with foreign consulting firms

17.7

Think tank employees hold academic degrees, graduated from prestigious universities

3.8

Think tanks have grants for the projects concerned

15.8

Other

0.6

12.

What research areas can be of high demand among government authorities? REFERENCES

General analysis of society and its development trends

61.9

Constitutional Reform

27.7

Public opinion on various issues

58.1

Macroeconomic problems of the national economy

33.5

International economic cooperation

Donbas situation and further development forecast

24.5

Unity of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regions

32.3

Implementation of the Association Agreement with the European Union

25.8

Relations with the Russian Federation

14.8

Energy security of Ukraine

Reform of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, security issues

23.9

Ways and methods of international conflicts settlement

14.2

Judicial reform

36.1

Reform of law enforcement agencies

29.7

Democratization issues

34.2

Education reform

Healthcare reform

29.7

Retirement reform

24.5

Election law, building a multi-party system

21.3

Anti-corruption reforms

44.5

Creating a favorable business environment

35.5

Human rights

22.6

Development of civil society, civic education

29.7

Media development

12.3

Humanities (language, culture, arts)

19.4

National minority issues

12.3

Development of religions and their influence on society

7.7

Ecology, environment

23.9

Problems of rural development

19.4

Decentralization and local government development

52.9

Reform of housing and communal services

33.5

Other

7.7

13.

Specify five research areas from the aforementioned list, which you think are the most important REFERENCES

General analysis of society and its development trends

47.3

Constitutional Reform

18.5

Public opinion on various issues

30.8

Macroeconomic problems of the national economy

International economic cooperation

10.3

Donbas situation and further development forecast

19.2

Unity of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regions

19.2

Implementation of the Association Agreement with the European Union

15.8

Relations with the Russian Federation

8.9

Energy security of Ukraine

21.2

Reform of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, security issues

12.3

Ways and methods of international conflicts settlement

4.1

Judicial reform

21.9

Reform of law enforcement agencies

8.9

Democratization issues

14.4

Education reform

17.8

Healthcare reform

17.1

Retirement reform

9.6

Election law, building a multi-party system

8.9

Anti-corruption reforms

32.9

Creating a favorable business environment

17.1

Human rights

8.9

Development of civil society, civic education

13.7

Media development

2.7

Humanities (language, culture, arts)

6.2

National minority issues

4.1

Development of religions and their influence on society

1.4

Ecology, environment

4.1

Problems of rural development

Decentralization and local government development

34.9

Reform of housing and communal services

8.9

Other

2.7

14.

What type of materials do you need? What format? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Policy briefs, including recommendations

51.6

Opinion poll data

54.2

In-depth research reports

36.8

Research and studies with innovative ideas and solutions proposed

63.9

Materials for conferences, roundtables, public debate on management decisions

23.9

Other

1.9

15.

What do you think are main barriers to cooperation between government and independent think tanks? REFERENCES

Low awareness of activities conducted by independent think tanks

39.9

Lack of appropriate political culture on policy formation and decision making

47.5

Low competence of government workers

17.1

Government agencies do not know how to work with think tanks

33.5

Poor quality of materials produced by independent think tanks

10.1

Think tank experts do not know how to work with government agencies and do not understand the particular nature of their work

19.6

Lack of government funding to pay for services rendered by independent think tanks

52.5

Government employees suffer from chronic shortage of time, some decisions have to be made quickly, often backdating

32.9

No local think tanks to work with

17.7

Other

2.5

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

1.9

16.

REFERENCES

In general, almost everything is okay

25.5

Overall poor quality of analytical materials

Common knowledge facts in reports

28.4

Abstract with lack of specific proposals

39.7

Analysis detached from Ukrainian reality

21.3

Political bias

24.1

Academic nature of analysis, hard to understand

11.3

Texts are too long, poorly structured, without important things to be highlighted

12.1

Other (Specify, please)

4.3

17.

If you have ever used research and analysis of non-governmental think tanks, what do you dislike the most?

Are central and local government agencies ready to pay for think tank services? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Definitely, and quite a decent price

1.9

Yes, but not much

15.8

It would be good to share cost with a foundation/donor organization

27.2

Definitely Not

34.1

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know / No opinion

19.6

Skipped

1.3

18.

What think tanks do you think are the most useful and high demand?

REFERENCES

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation

International Centre for Policy Studies (ICPS)

Centre of Policy and Legal Reform (CPLR)

Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting

Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR)

Kyiv Gorshenin Institute of Management

Center for Global Studies ‘Strategy XXI’

Institute for Political Education

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS)

International Renaissance Foundation

SOCIS

CEDOS

Center for Political Studies and Analysis (CPSA)

Others mentioned: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation (IEAC) National Institute for Strategic Studies (NISS) Reanimation Package of Reforms (RPR) Institute of Mass Information (IMI) NGO OPORA Pylyp Orlyk Institute for Democracy (Kyiv) Center for Educational Monitoring Institute of Society Transformation Centre for Defense and Security Policy Maidan of Foreign Affairs Penta Center for Applied Political Studies Civil Society Institute Committee of Voters of Ukraine Kyiv Center of the East-West Institute Laboratory for Legislative Initiatives Institute for European Integration (IEI)

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Institute of Political Information Network of Think Tanks in Ukraine Project Ukrainian Institute of Public Policy (UIPP) Strategic Research Agency (SRA) Center for European and International Studies Ptukha Institute of Demography and Social Studies Social Monitoring VoxUkraine Economic Strategy Center CCC Creative Center Amnesty International Ukraine Regional Press Development Institute GfK Ukraine TSN Socis

19.

What non-Kyiv-based think tanks would you recognize? REFERENCES

Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies (University of Alberta, Canada)

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies

CEDOS

Others mentioned: • • • • • • •

Center for Education Policy National Institute for Strategic Studies Ukrainian National Information Service (USA) Foundation of Local Democracy Levada Center City Development Institute NISS (government think tank)

• • • • • • •

Academy of Economic Sciences of Ukraine City Institute Kharkiv Local Democracy Fund Odessa Civil Institute of Social Technologies Luhansk Region Agency for Sustainable Development Lugansk Office of the Association of Ukrainian Cities ICPS

•

Crimean Human Rights Group

•

Fama

20.

КІЛЬКІСТЬ ЗГАДОК

Presidential Administration

4.4

Cabinet of Ministers

3.1

Central executive authorities

9.4

Parliament of Ukraine

22.8

Local council

47.5

Local administration

12.7

КІЛЬКІСТЬ ЗГАДОК

Kyiv

101

63.9

Dnipropetrovsk

6.3

Lviv

6.3

Odessa

5.6

Kharkiv

10.1

Kramatorsk

3.1

Severodonetsk

4.4

21.

Where do you work?

City/town

Annex 2 Survey of non-governmental organizations and think tanks. Non-governmental think tanks and government: partnership opportunities TOTAL RESPONDENTS 82 Đ&#x2022;XPERTS

Who do you think is a key user of materials produced by independent think tanks? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Media

Civil society organizations

Central government

Business associations

Local government

International foundations and organizations

Parties and political groups

Individuals

Schools and universities

Other (specify, please)

Non-governmental think tanks do not have actual users

How much do you think non-governmental think tanks influence public policy and decision making? REFERENCES

Most of the time

Sometimes

Undecided

Almost never

Never

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

If yes, what influence techniques are being used to impact policy making? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Involvement of think tanks in strategy building and decision making process in different areas

Involvement of individual experts in strategy building and decision making

Participation in public councils and other advisory boards to the government

Transition of think tank experts to government jobs

Impact of public opinion through mass media

Round table discussions and conferences with policymakers

Partnerships with international organizations, which influence Ukrainian government at their end

Various forms of government pressure in partnership with other NGOs (protests, flash mobs, etc.)

Other (Specify, please)

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

What types of cooperation with the government do you find to be most effective in the future? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Involvement of think tanks in strategy and decision making in the areas where they have expertise and financial support

Think tanks provide their services to government agencies on a contract basis with proper payment

Involvement of think tank experts in strategy and decision making

Participation of think tank representatives in public councils and other advisory boards to the government

Transition of think tank experts to government jobs

Shaping public opinion through mass media

Round table discussions and conferences of think tanks and policymakers

Partnerships with international organizations, which influence Ukrainian government at their end

Various forms of government pressure in partnership with other NGOs (protests, flash mobs, etc.) to ensure that proper decisions are adopted

Other (Specify, please)

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

Has your think tank ever partnered with central government or local administration? REFERENCES

Yes, on a regular basis

Yes, whenever needed

Based on your experience in partnering with government agencies, who usually initiated such cooperation?

REFERENCES

Our think tank

Government agency

Donors who provide funding for relevant project

Depends on a situation

Skipped

Based on your experience in cooperating with government agencies, who usually paid for the work? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Payment was included in the project implemented by our think tank

The work was done on a voluntary basis

Our think tank shared cost with a government agency

All work performed was paid for by a government agency

The work performed for government was paid for from other sources (business, individuals, etc.)

Other (Specify, please)

What research area do you think can be of high demand among government authorities? REFERENCES

General analysis of society and its development trends

Constitutional Reform

Public opinion on various issues

Macroeconomic problems of the national economy

International economic cooperation

Donbas situation and further development forecast

Unity of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regions

Implementation of the Association Agreement with the European Union

Relations with the Russian Federation

Energy security of Ukraine

Reform of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, security issues

Ways and methods of international conflicts settlement

Judicial reform

Reform of law enforcement agencies

Democratization issues

Education reform

Healthcare reform

Retirement reform

Election law, building a multi-party system

Anti-corruption reforms

Creating a favorable business environment

Human rights

Development of civil society, civic education

Media development

Humanities (language, culture, arts)

National minority issues

Development of religions and their influence on society

Ecology, environment

Problems of rural development

Decentralization and local government management

Reform of housing and communal services

Other (Specify, please)

Check the research areas listed below where your think tank can provide certain research and information REFERENCES

General analysis of society and its development trends

Constitutional Reform

Public opinion on various issues

Macroeconomic problems of the national economy

International economic cooperation

Donbas situation and further development forecast

Unity of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regions

Implementation of the Association Agreement with the European Union

Relations with the Russian Federation

Energy security of Ukraine

Reform of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, security issues

Ways and methods of international conflicts settlement

Judicial reform

Reform of law enforcement agencies

Democratization issues

Education reform

Healthcare reform

Retirement reform

Election law, building a multi-party system

Anti-corruption reforms

Creating a favorable business environment

Human rights

Development of civil society, civic education

Media development

Humanities (language, culture, arts)

National minority issues

Development of religions and their influence on society

Ecology, environment

Problems of rural development

Decentralization and local government management

Reform of housing and communal services

Other (Specify, please)

10.

What do you think are the main barriers to cooperation between government and non-governmental think tanks? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Poor awareness of government agencies about the activities of independent think tanks

Government agencies do not know how to work with think tanks

Poor quality materials produced by independent think tanks, no practical application, etc.

Think tank experts do not know how to work with government agencies and do not understand the particular nature of their work

Government is looking for a ready policy decision instead of analysis

Lack of government funding to pay for services rendered by independent think tanks

Limited research topics of non-governmental think tanks

Government employees suffer from chronic shortage of time, some decisions have to be made quickly, often backdating

Government decisions do not create the best solutions to a problem but rather serve somebodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (political or financial) interests; therefore, an objective analysis is only troublesome.

Government agencies simply do not want to work with think tanks

Other (Specify, please)

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

11.

What are the main funding sources of your think tank? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

International donors

Ukrainian donors

Government

Ukrainian business

Foreign business

Individual donations

Other

12.

What is the area of expertise of your think tank? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Economy

Politics

Education

Culture

Human rights

Mass media

Public administration reform

National minorities

Social issues (unemployment, pensions, vulnerable social groups etc.)

Fighting corruption

Civil society development

Environment protection

Healthcare

Drug and alcohol addiction, AIDS

Gender issues

Foreign policy

Other (Specify, please)

13.

Where is your think tank based? REFERENCES

Kyiv

Kramatorsk

Lviv

Lutsk

Izmayil

Odessa

Sumy

Kharkiv

Chernivtsi

Chernihiv

Severodonetsk

Other

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

Annex 3 Survey of think tanks and mass media: best partnership models TOTAL RESPONDENTS 53 Đ&#x2022;XPERTS

Do you know about activities of non-governmental think tanks in Ukraine? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Yes, a great deal

Less than I would like

Little

Nothing

How often do you personally need research and information produced by non-governmental think tanks? NUMBER OF EXPERTS

Very often

Fairly often

Almost never

Never

No answer

How do you learn about the activities of independent think tanks? (Specify main sources of information)

REFERENCES

Websites of think tanks

Managers and researchers of the think tanks

Special events of think tanks (presentations, roundtables, conferences)

Mass media

Information brochures of think tanks

E-mail updates and announcements

Employees, colleagues and friends

Other

Who do you think is a key user of independent think tank products? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Mass media

Civil society organizations

Central government

Local government

Business associations

International foundations and organizations

Political parties and groups

Individuals

Schools and universities

Non-governmental think tanks do not have actual users

How much do you think the activities of non-governmental think tanks influence policy and decision making? 8

REFERENCES

Most of the time

Sometimes

Undecided

Almost never

Never

No answer

1 expert did not provide answer for this question

If yes, what influence techniques are used to impact policy making? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Involvement of think tanks in strategy building and decision making process in different areas

Involvement of individual experts in strategy building and decision making

Serving in public councils and other advisory boards to the government

Transition of think tank experts to government jobs

Impacting public opinion through mass media

Round table discussions and conferences with policymakers

Cooperation with international organizations that have influence on Ukrainian government

Various forms of government pressure in partnership with other NGOs (protests, flash mobs, etc.)

Other

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

As we know, there are different research institutions in Ukraine. Where do you usually go to get information on a specific issue? REFERENCES

The State Institute of the Academy of Sciences where the issue is studied

Government research institute

University

Business research center

Non-governmental think tank

Specific individual, regardless of place of work

Other

How much do you think the media uses research findings of non-governmental think tanks? REFERENCES

Regularly

Sometimes

Hardly ever

Almost never

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know / No opinion

How much have you personally used research findings of non-governmental think tanks in your work? REFERENCES

Regularly

Sometimes

Hardly ever

Almost never

Don’t know / No opinion

10.

Materials of what think tanks have you used in your work? REFERENCES

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology

Committee of Voters of Ukraine

Civil Network OPORA

Reanimation Package of Reforms

International Centre for Policy Studies

Sociological Group ‘Rating’

Centre of Policy and Legal Reform (CPLR)

Kyiv Gorshenin Institute of Management

Center for Applied Policy Studies ‘Penta’

Other

Other mentioned: • • • • • • • • • • •

Laboratory for Legislative Initiatives Ukrainian National Center for Policy Studies SOCIS CASE Ukraine Center for Political Studies and Analysis Civil Society Institute Strategic Research Agency DiXi Group Think Tank The Black Sea Center for Political and Social Research Situations Modeling Agency State Agency of Ukraine for Investments and Innovations

•

• • • • • • • • • •

Institute of World Economy and International Relations of NAS of Ukraine Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting Da Vinci AG Maidan of Foreign Affairs PravdaTUT Energy Strategy Fund Center UA RAND Corporation CSISS VoxUkraine Institute of World Policy

• • • • • • • • • • • •

DESPRO Association of Cities of Ukraine R&B Group CEDOS CHESNO Slovo i Dilo Center for Global Studies ‘Strategy XXI’ InMind Institute of Society Transformation Nestor Group ProMova Pylyp Orlyk Institute for Democracy

10.1

What materials? REFERENCES

Opinion polls

Policy briefs, research reports

Expert opinions and comments

Economic situation analysis

Press-releases

Other

Don’t know / No opinion

11.

Do you personally need regular cooperation between mass media and non-governmental think tanks? REFERENCES

Yes

Not regularly, but sometimes - yes

No, I don’t need it

12.

What materials do you need? What format do you need? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

In-depth research on specific topics

Analysis of alternative solutions for case problems

Analytical briefs on relevant issues

Expert comments on various issues

Expert consultations on various issues

Other

Actually, I don’t need such materials

13.

What do you think hinders cooperation between media and non-governmental think tanks the most? (Check all that apply)

REFERENCES

Poor awareness of media organizations about the activities of independent think tanks

Media organizations do not know how to work with think tanks

Think tank experts do not know how to work with media and do not understand the specific nature of their work

Chasing after sensations instead of seeking rigorous research and analysis

Lack of funding to pay for services of independent think tanks

Limited research topics of non-governmental think tanks

Journalists suffer from chronic shortage of time, overwhelming schedule

Media is biased and tends to consult with the “right” rather than best experts

Media organizations simply do not need to partner with think tanks

Other

Don’t know / No opinion

14.

What research topics are the most relevant for you today?9 REFERENCES

General assessment of reforms and progress

Analysis of Ukraine’s economy and reforms

Security policy of Ukraine, army, NATO partnership

Opinion polls

Law enforcement and court reforms

Situation in the occupied territories (Crimea, Donbas), analysis of military conflict, relations with the Russian Federation

Relations with EU, implementation of the Association Agreement

Specifics of overall social and political process

Energy efficiency and saving

Fight against corruption and government control

Local governance and decentralization

Education and healthcare

Analysis of media and communication with the public

1 expert did not provide answer for this question

15.

What think tanks in your opinion have the most effective cooperation with mass media? REFERENCES

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation

Committee of Voters of Ukraine

Civil Network OPORA

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology

Reanimation Package of Reforms

Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation

Centre for Political and Legal Reforms

Laboratory for Legislative Initiatives

Maidan of Foreign Affairs

Institute of World Policy

Center UA

Other

Don’t know / No opinion

Others mentioned: • • • • • •

International Renaissance Foundation Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research «DiXi» Group “Penta” Center for Applied Political Studies Kyiv Gorshenin Institute of Management Institute of Energy Strategies

16.

• • • • • • •

Center for Army Conversion and Disarmament Studies Defense Express Center Center for Peace Conversion and Foreign Policy of Ukraine Anti-Corruption Action Center Civil Society Center Wostok SOS

• • • • • •

Ukrainian Helsinki NGO “Telekrytyka” Center for Middle East Studies CASE-Ukraine International Center for Policy Studies Association of Cities of Ukraine Despro

What think tanks experts have the most effective cooperation with mass media? КІЛЬКІСТЬ ЗГАДОК

Iryna Bekeshkina

Volodymyr Fesenko

Oleksiy Haran

Mykola Sunhurovskyi

Olga Aivazovska

Maria Zolkina

Oleksandr Sushko

Vadym Karasev

Andriy Kohut

Igor Koliushko

Mykola Melnyk

Other

Don’t know / No opinion

Також були названі: • • • • • •

Oleksandr Paskhaver Jaroslav Yurchyshyn Dmitro Boyarchuk Olexander Zholud Igor Burakovsky Yulia Tyshchenko

17.

• • • • • •

Maxym Latsyba Iryna Sushko Viktor Taran Oleksandr Slobozhan Oleksiy Koshel Volodymyr Dubrovskyi

• • • • • •

Oleh Rybachuk Mykhailo Honchar Igor Semyvolos Olesya Jakhno Taras Berezovets Milan Lelich

What think tanks have you personally worked with most efficiently? REFERENCES

Razumkov Centre for Economic and Political Studies

Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation

Committee of Voters of Ukraine

Kyiv International Institute of Sociology

Reanimation Package of Reforms

Civil Network OPORA

Laboratory for Legislative Initiatives

Centre for Political and Legal Reforms

Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation

Institute of World Policy

Center for Middle Eastern Studies

‘DiXi Group’

NGO ‘Europe Without Barriers’

Sociological Group ‘Rating’

Other

Don’t know

Others mentioned: • • • • • • • • • • •

The Black Sea Center for Political and Social Research Da Vinci AG International Centre for Policy Studies CASE Ukraine Kyiv Gorshenin Institute Energy Strategy Fund Center for Army Conversion and Disarmament Studies Defense Express Centre UA VoxUkraine

• • • • • • • • • • •

Center for Peace Conversion and Foreign Policy of Ukraine Anti-Corruption Action Center Ukrainian Helsinki Union Ukrainian Center for Independent Policy Research Transparency International Ukraine ProMova Despro Association of Cities of Ukraine “Europe 21” Foundation SOCIS

18.

What experts? REFERENCES

Iryna Bekeshkina

Volodymyr Fesenko

Oleksiy Haran

Mykola Sungurovskyi

Maria Zolkina

Ihor Koliushko

Volodymyr Paniotto

Andriy Bychenko

Ruslan Kermach

Taras Berezovets

Mykhailo Honchar

Olesia Yakhno

Ihor Semyvolos

Iryna Sushko

Oleksandr Okhrymenko

Borys Kushniruk

Також були названі: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Andriy Novak Anatoliy Baronin Dmytro Boyarchuk Oleksandr Zholud Ihor Burakovskyi Natalia Lynnyk Olga Aivazovska Oleksandra Rashmedilova Ruslan Bortnyk Yevhen Magda Carl Volokh Oleksiy Golobutskyi Anatolyi Oktysyuk Vitalyi Sharlay

19.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Liubov Akulenko Yevhen Borzylo Oleksiy Koshel Mykola Melnyk Ihor Kohut Sergiy Solodkyi Yevhen Golovakha Leonid Polyakov Daria Kaleniuk Andriy Matviychuk Svitlana Barbelyuk Oleksandr Sushko Igor Koziy Dmytro Potekhin

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Sergiy Tolstov Alyona Getmanchuk Kateryna Zarembo Svyatoslav Pikul Yulia Tyshchenko Vadym Karasev Roman Nitsovych Natalia Byelitser Andriy Klymenko Sergiy Danylov Julia Kazdobina Yuriy Yakymenko Volodymyr Usatenko Kost Bondarenko

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Andriy Zolotarev Dmytro Tymchuk Jaroslav Hrycak Victoria Bryndza Yevhen Hlibovytsky Svyatoslav Pavlyuk Svitlana Zalishchuk Oleksiy Khmara Vadym Miskyi Andriy Yeremenko Oleksiy Shevchenko Nataliya Vatamanyuk Maryna Kozlova Oleg Rybachuk

Are media organizations ready to pay for think tank products and services? 10 REFERENCES

We are already paying

Yes, ready

Ready, if it is not very expensive

No, not ready

Think tanks should pay us for using mass media to promote their materials

Don’t know / No opinion

1 respondent did not answer this question

20.

What media do you work for? REFERENCES

Print media (newspaper, magazine)

Radio

News websites

News agency

Non-governmental organization engaged into media and news

Other