Prestigious New Think Tank Publishes Exhaustive Report Recommending Immediate Creation of More Think Tanks
WASHINGTON — A newly formed independent research organization has released what it describes as a "landmark contribution to American policy discourse" — a 400-page study concluding, after three years of rigorous analysis, that the single most effective solution to the nation's most pressing challenges is the establishment of significantly more independent research organizations to study the nation's most pressing challenges.
The report, titled Toward a More Thoughtful Future: A Comprehensive Framework for the Expansion of Independent Analytical Capacity in an Era of Complex Problems Requiring Sophisticated Institutional Responses, was published Tuesday by the Center for Independent Policy Research on Independent Policy Research, which was itself founded eighteen months ago for the express purpose of studying whether more institutions like itself were needed.
The answer, it turns out, is yes. Many more.
The Findings, Summarized
The full report runs to 412 pages, including a 40-page executive summary, a 28-page summary of the executive summary, and a 12-page document that the authors describe as "a brief orientation to the summaries" for readers who found the other summaries demanding.
The core conclusion, stated on page 7 and repeated with minor variations on pages 89, 156, 203, 278, and 391, is as follows:
"The evidence strongly suggests that the complexity of contemporary policy challenges has outpaced the analytical capacity of existing institutions, and that the establishment of new, well-funded, independent research bodies — each with clearly defined mandates, robust methodological frameworks, and ideally endowed chairs — represents the most promising pathway toward meaningful progress on any issue of national significance."
The report identifies fourteen specific policy areas — including healthcare, infrastructure, climate, education, economic inequality, housing, criminal justice, foreign policy, technology governance, agricultural sustainability, electoral integrity, public health preparedness, financial regulation, and "miscellaneous" — and concludes that each requires "at least one dedicated research center, and in several cases a coordinating meta-institution to manage the outputs of the dedicated centers."
The report does not specify what the centers should conclude. That, the authors note, is for future research.
The Center Explains Itself
Founded in 2022 with $4.2 million in seed funding from a foundation whose donor list is described in the report's acknowledgments as "generously anonymous," the Center for Independent Policy Research on Independent Policy Research occupies a suite of offices in a building that also houses four other think tanks, two of which the Center has formally recommended for expansion.
Executive Director Dr. Caroline Marsh, who previously served as Deputy Director of Research at an institution that studied the effectiveness of research institutions, said she was proud of what her team had produced.
"We asked a simple question," she told this publication. "Are there enough people in Washington being paid to think about problems without being required to solve them? And the data said no. Emphatically no."
When asked whether the Center's conclusion — that more think tanks are needed — was influenced by the fact that the Center is itself a think tank, Dr. Marsh said that concern had been anticipated and addressed in Appendix D, which recommends the formation of an independent body to study potential conflicts of interest in think tank research.
Appendix D recommends that this body be structured as a think tank.
The Washington Policy Community Responds Warmly, Immediately
Reaction from Washington's research community was swift and, in a city not known for consensus, remarkably unified.
The Brookings Institution called the report "a rigorous and timely contribution." The Cato Institute praised its "methodological independence." The Center for American Progress described it as "essential reading." The Heritage Foundation said it "raises important questions." The American Enterprise Institute noted it was "exactly the kind of work Washington needs more of," which, given the report's conclusions, was either an endorsement or a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The Bipartisan Policy Center issued a joint statement signed by both its Republican and Democratic co-chairs, which read in its entirety: "We agree with this."
"It's rare to see a piece of research that speaks to every part of the ideological spectrum," said Marcus Webb, a senior fellow at the Institute for the Study of Institutes, which was founded in 2019 and has been waiting, he said, for exactly this kind of validation. "Normally we can't agree on anything. But everyone agrees we need more of us. That's actually very moving."
The Methodology, Briefly
The report's research methodology, outlined in a 60-page section that the authors recommend skipping, involved a comprehensive literature review of existing think tank output, 47 interviews with think tank staff, a survey of 200 policymakers (response rate: 12 percent), and what the authors describe as "extensive deliberative reflection" — a term defined in the glossary as "internal discussion among the research team."
Critics have noted that the report contains no data from outside the think tank ecosystem — no polling of ordinary Americans, no analysis of legislative outcomes, no assessment of whether any existing think tank's recommendations have ever been implemented.
Dr. Marsh said those concerns were "well taken" and would be addressed in a forthcoming follow-up report, the production of which will require additional funding, a larger staff, and, she suggested, possibly a new center.
Funding Opportunities Enclosed
The report's final chapter pivots from analysis to action, presenting what it calls a "realistic and immediately actionable" roadmap for expanding America's independent research capacity. The roadmap includes:
- Fourteen new dedicated policy centers, estimated cost $2–8 million each
- Three coordinating meta-institutions, estimated cost $15 million each
- One "apex convening body" to host annual summits at which the centers and meta-institutions can share findings, estimated cost "subject to venue"
- A communications strategy to ensure the public is aware of the centers' existence, to be developed by a separate communications-focused center yet to be established
A funding prospectus is attached to the report as Appendix G. It is addressed, the document notes, "to whom it may concern."
What Happens Next
The report has been submitted to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and fourteen individual congressional offices, none of which have acknowledged receipt.
A launch event was held Tuesday evening at a hotel in Dupont Circle. Attendance was strong. Twelve think tanks sent representatives. Four of those representatives were, according to their business cards, themselves the think tank.
Dr. Marsh said she was optimistic about the report's impact.
"Change takes time," she said. "And research. Mostly research. That's really the takeaway."
The Center's next report — a study of whether the recommendations of this report are being sufficiently studied — is expected in eighteen months.
Funding is, as always, welcome.