Big Ideas and Big Money: An In-depth Analysis of the Funding Sources of American Think Tanks

Key Chapter Title List

1. Introduction
2. What the Think Tank Funding Tracker Database Includes (and Excludes)
3. Think Tank Transparency Scoring System
4. Fully Transparent Think Tanks
5. Partially Transparent Think Tanks
6. "Dark Money" Think Tanks
7. Data Insights: Quantitative Analysis of Think Tank Funding
8. Foreign Government Funding of Think Tanks
9. Pentagon Contractor Funding of Think Tanks
10. U.S. Government Funding of Think Tanks
11. Why Think Tank Funding Matters
12. Policy Recommendations for Rebuilding Trust in the Think Tank Industry

Document Introduction

Think tanks play a pivotal role in shaping American public opinion and public policy formulation. Their scholars often serve as professional authorities influencing media narratives, congressional hearings, and legislative drafting. However, as think tanks become increasingly reliant on funding from special interest groups and foreign governments, the potential conflict between funding sources and research independence has raised widespread concern. Public trust in think tanks continues to decline, with only 48% of respondents believing think tank experts are valuable to society.

This report, based on the world's first publicly available U.S. Think Tank Funding Tracker database (www.thinktankfundingtracker.org), provides a systematic analysis of the funding sources for the top 50 U.S. think tanks over the past five years. It covers three core funding entities: foreign governments, the U.S. government, and Pentagon contractors. The database employs a transparency scoring system built on five binary indicators to quantitatively assess the level of financial disclosure by each think tank, filling a long-standing information gap in this field.

The data used in this study primarily comes from self-disclosed information such as think tank annual reports and donor lists. It focuses on the 50 most influential think tanks (selected based on academic influence rankings) and defines Pentagon contractors as the top 100 defense companies by revenue in 2023, plus nine companies involved in classified contracts or making substantial donations. The report's statistical analysis of funding data is based on the lower bound of disclosed ranges, ensuring conservative and reliable estimates.

Key findings reveal that among the top 50 think tanks, only 18% (9) are fully transparent, 46% (23) are partially transparent, and 36% (18) are "dark money" think tanks. Over the past five years, foreign governments and state-owned entities donated over $110 million, with the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and Qatar being the largest donors. The top 100 defense companies donated over $34.7 million, with Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, etc., being the primary contributors. Direct U.S. government funding amounted to at least $1.49 billion, of which over $1.4 billion went to the RAND Corporation. Financial dependence triggers issues like self-censorship and perspective filtering. Some think tanks engage in "pay-to-play research," and individual researchers holding simultaneous positions at both a think tank and its funder constitute clear conflicts of interest.

Finally, the report proposes a series of recommendations for Congress, the Department of Justice, think tanks, and the media. These include legislating mandatory disclosure of large donations, clarifying guidance related to Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) registration, terminating pay-to-play research models, and establishing media standards for disclosing conflicts of interest. The aim is to rebuild public trust in the think tank industry by enhancing transparency and safeguarding its core value as an independent policy research institution.