Do Business-Backed Think Tanks Represent Class Interests? The Co-evolution of Policy Learning and Economic Elites in the Canadian Knowledge Regime

Julien Landry

doi:10.1177/00953997211065340

Abstract

Business-backed think tanks are often presented as representing the interests of economic elites. This article provides a more nuanced argument by using field theory to present the co-evolutionary dynamics between economic elites and other social forces. Three Canadian think tanks are examined to illustrate how different social forces can converge around business-backed think tanks, and how governance contexts and institutions shape these relationships. The paper also reflects on the kinds of learning these think tanks can enable depending on the kinds of actors that converge around them and on the forms of power that these actors represent.

Highlights

Business-backed think tanks are often presented as representing the interests of economic elites
A framework designed to assess the co-evolution of elite social systems could help grasp the complex interrelationships between think tanks and their support networks in a way that acknowledges the interdependencies between the holders of power and the holders of knowledge, and their relative autonomy and diversity—that is to say their inclusion in distinct social systems that can co-evolve
This paper explores the ways in which think tanks with ties to business communities are enmeshed in the co-evolution of knowledge and power in the Canadian knowledge regime through the lens of Pierre Bourdieu’s Field Theory

Summary

Introduction

Business-backed think tanks are often presented as representing the interests of economic elites. A related albeit narrower question is whether policy analysis units like think tanks represent business interests (Alam, 2021; Hauck & Resende, 2021; Plehwe, 2021; Salas-Porras, 2021) They are broadly understood to be organizations specialized in the production and dissemination of knowledge and expert discourse on public policy, think tanks maintain strong ties with various clients, donors, and allies, and their views on policy are often congruent or aligned with the policy goals, preoccupations, and desiderata of those that make up their support network (Landry, 2020; Medvetz, 2012b; Plehwe, 2014; Stahl, 2016). These relationships between elites can be conditioned by national contexts and institutional configurations—that is, distinct knowledge regimes (see Campbell & Pedersen, 2011, 2014) that shape the relations between institutions and actors, and the types of learning they enable

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion