Germany is one of the first countries in the world to build think tanks. According to the statistics of the 2014 Global Think Tank Report released by the University of Pennsylvania, Germany currently has 194 think tanks, ranking fourth in the world in terms of the number of think tanks.
According to the classification of German think tank researcher Martin Thunter (martinthunert), German think tanks are mainly divided into academic think tanks, contract think tanks, propaganda think tanks and political think tanks, among which academic think tanks funded by public finances account for Germany. The vast majority of think tanks. The phenomenon of “revolving door†between the think tank and the government in the American think tank culture is rare in Germany. More common is the two-way communication between think tanks and universities. According to research data from the German Foreign Policy Association (dgap) researcher Josef Braml, 60% of German think tanks do not have a specific ideological imprint, but adhere to the methods and guidelines of academic research. All of this determines the academic evaluation of the German think tank. The common evaluation mode is the combination of internal evaluation and external evaluation. The external evaluation is commissioned by a third-party agency responsible for the evaluation, and the process of peer review is adopted. Representatives are the German Science Council, the Leibniz Institute of Germany, and the German Federal Audit Office's evaluation system. In addition, some private enterprise consulting agencies and audit institutions will also be commissioned to participate in the assessment. In general, the evaluation system of German think tanks has four characteristics.
The assessment information is open and transparent. The evaluation of German think tanks adheres to the principle of openness and transparency. Information related to the assessment can be found on the think-tank and the official website of the assessment agency, including the composition of the evaluator, the evaluation details, the assessment report, the assessment recommendations and the implementation. Founded in 1957, the German Science Council is currently Europe's largest academic policy advisory body. In its "Publications" section of the official website, you can find out more about the assessments that the agency has been responsible for since 1980. Take the German political party think tank, the adenauer-stiftung, which has been evaluating its development assistance cooperation projects since the 1970s. After decades of experience, it has won A high degree of recognition. The Foundation has a dedicated evaluation department. The evaluation generally invites external experts to conduct the evaluation. The evaluation department also supervises the implementation of the evaluation recommendations. The “Foundation Profile†section of the Adenauer Foundation's official website features a “effectiveness monitoring†section that details how the Foundation monitors the effectiveness of related work.
A combination of quantitative assessment and qualitative assessment. The importance of quantitative indicators in the assessment is unquestionable. However, merely adopting quantitative criteria is not sufficient to guarantee quality. First, first, some quantitative indicators will have a marginal benefit that will decrease after reaching a certain value. Secondly, the proportion of German think tanks receiving public financial funding is very high, and the funders and the public have the right to know which measures and projects of the think tank are sustainable. Therefore, the evaluation of German think tanks mainly adopts the principle of combining quantitative assessment and qualitative assessment, using scientific research methods popular in the social sciences, such as statistical analysis, questionnaires, interviews and bibliometric analysis. It should be pointed out that the rules for qualitative assessment are not uniform, according to a unified standard, but are adjusted according to different assessment targets and updated regularly.
For example, the German academic think tank, the German Global and Regional Research Centre (Giga), which just concluded a new round of assessments, is a member of the Leibniz Institute in Germany and is generally evaluated at least every seven years. The assessment is conducted in two phases. The first phase is the academic evaluation phase, and the assessed organization first submits written assessment information in the prescribed format. The next important step is a two-day on-site assessment. In September 2014, an expert committee composed of 11 domestic and foreign experts visited the German Global and Regional Research Center to hold a discussion with the leaders and staff of the center and listened to the opinions of the representatives of the partners of the evaluated institutions. The criteria for the assessment include quantitative indicators such as the number of publications, the number of partner universities, the amount of third-party funds, and the proportion of female researchers, as well as the research priorities of the four research institutes under the think tank. The magazine sponsored by the think tank enjoys a reputation in the academic community at home and abroad, and the quality of the think tank interacts with government agencies, international organizations and the media, as well as the training of academic successors. The expert committee will prepare an expert evaluation report after synthesizing various indicators. The second stage is the decision-making stage. The Leibniz Institute Board of Directors issued a decision-making statement on the evaluated institution based on the expert evaluation report.
Expert assessment is separated from decision making. The evaluation report given by the experts is of course important, but the final decision-making attitude of the German evaluation agency does not completely reflect the expert's assessment.
Take the German Science Council as an example. The agency follows the two-stage principle of separation of peer expert assessment and decision making when evaluating relevant think tanks. First of all, the evaluation committee under the Science Committee appointed experts to form an evaluation team. The team members are mostly well-known scholars in the field of assessment. After the results of these peer-reviewed experts are published, they cannot be changed in the next evaluation process. Before the evaluation process is initiated, the expert assessment team is clearly informed that it will not evaluate the institution being evaluated from a decision-making perspective or make a statement about its future development. If the chairman of the expert assessment team is not a member of the relevant committee, he or she will generally be invited to participate in the follow-up evaluation committee and the scientific committee's consultation meeting. Subsequently, the evaluation committee made a decision statement after reading the evaluation report submitted by the peer experts and listening to the evaluation client's recommendations. The decision-making attitude of the evaluation committee often takes into account all aspects of consideration, and does not necessarily completely duplicate the expert's assessment. In addition, the assessed organization may even have limited interaction with the evaluation agency before the decision is made. For example, the assessed institution may submit an appeal report if it has doubts about the evaluation report prepared by the expert committee. Of course, once the final decision-making statement deviates from the evaluation results of peer experts, it is necessary to conduct a large-scale argument in advance.
Promote development with evaluation. The German evaluation agency will also propose amendments at the same time as the evaluation report, and continue to follow the implementation of the recommendations. The whole process of evaluation is also a process to promote the sound development of think tanks. This also makes the German think tank not regard the assessment itself as an objective, nor does it regard the assessment as a means of supervision required by the federal fiscal system, but as an aid to strategic decision-making, better from the concept. Promote work.
For example, the Adenauer Foundation specifically stated in its official website that from a methodological point of view, evaluation is a demanding task. In particular, political education and consulting work have not yet formed an “academic kingdom†(meaning the best path to academic high goals), so evaluation is a challenge, a learning process. To this end, the Adenauer Foundation Assessment Department regularly conducts assessment training to enhance the supporting characteristics of the assessment. Currently, on his official website, he can read and download three reports entitled “Learning from Evaluation†published by the Adenauer Foundation's European and International Cooperation Department for 2006-2007, 2008-2009 and 2010-2011. Assessment results and their implementation.
Promoting development through evaluation is not only conducive to the sustainable development of various think tanks, but also facilitates the rational allocation of German think tank resources. In a paper entitled “German Think Tanks – Advisors in Politics?â€, Tunelt specifically points out the changes that assessments bring to German think tanks: most of the recommendations given by the evaluation committee are adopted by relevant institutions, such as federal government funding. Some of the important foreign and security policy institutes were merged as proposed to the German Institute for International Policy and Security (swp, also known as the German Science and Political Foundation). After the integration, the German Institute for International Policy and Security has grown stronger and has developed into the largest think tank in Europe's foreign and security policy.
It should be noted that the current evaluation system of German think tanks also faces many challenges.
The concept of think tanks is rich in content, and academic circles at home and abroad have so far failed to agree on a clear definition of their concepts. Patrickköllner, director of the Asian Institute of Global and Regional Research Centers in Germany, pointed out that the number of think tank concept attributes is inversely related to the number of institutions covered by the think tank concept. The ambiguity of the think tank concept and the diversity of the think tank group make the assessment more difficult, and the think tank evaluation system needs continuous adjustment and improvement.
Think tanks are different from academic institutions. Their purpose is to influence government decision-making. It should not develop into an “ivory towerâ€, but should maintain interaction with all walks of life. The evaluation of think tanks should not stop at the academic level, but should be examined in multiple dimensions. Since the academic think tank is the main force in Germany, the current evaluation system in Germany pays more attention to the investigation of the academic influence of the think tank, and there are certain deficiencies. The Körberstiftung, founded in 1956, is a typical representative. The private foundation created by the German entrepreneur Colbert has long been one of the focus of its dialogue with Asia and has a certain influence in the field of international policy. On March 29, 2014, Chinese President Xi Jinping had invited the Foundation to deliver an important speech in Berlin on China's peaceful development path and independent foreign policy of peace. Klaus Board Vice Chairman Klauswehmeier has stated his views on the assessment. Weimeier does not value the external evaluation and believes that the Foundation has submitted a list of invited domestic and foreign celebrities (such as Kissinger). , Soros, Merkel, etc.) can conduct self-assessment. Judging the influence of think tanks is also an important aspect of think tank evaluation, and how to make a reasonable and objective assessment of the influence of think tanks is not only a German think tank, but also an urgent question for the think tanks of countries around the world.
The assessment is the product of the “new public management†movement that emerged in the Western countries represented by the United States and the United States in the 1970s. The concept pursued by the movement is economy, efficiency and efficiency. As the birthplace of Humboldt’s academic freedom thoughts, many scholars in Germany are skeptical about the “new public management†movement. Critics believe that evaluation is not only a manifestation of lack of trust for scholars, but also a paradox for academic freedom. Does the current evaluation system of German think tanks conflict with the concept of academic freedom? How should the relationship between the two be coordinated? The construction of the German think tank evaluation system has a long way to go.
Wuxi Doton Power , https://www.dotonpower.com