{"id":2852024,"date":"2025-09-16T05:42:30","date_gmt":"2025-09-16T10:42:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/?p=2852024"},"modified":"2025-09-16T13:12:37","modified_gmt":"2025-09-16T18:12:37","slug":"beyond-the-donor-think-tank-resilience","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/beyond-the-donor-think-tank-resilience\/","title":{"rendered":"Beyond the donor: New doors to think tank resilience"},"content":{"rendered":"

When USAID closed its mission in Jamaica earlier this year, many civil society organisations\u2014such as NGOs, advocacy groups, and service providers\u2014faced an uncertain future. Similarly, many think tanks and policy research institutes worldwide share this view, as aid budgets shrink and political priorities shift. At CAPRI, however, we were not affected. Not because we never received USAID funding, but because even if one of our foreign donors were to pull out suddenly, our work would continue uninterrupted. Why? Because we have a source of untied core funding from the Jamaican private sector.<\/span><\/p>\n

Download the On Think Tanks State of the Sector Report 2025<\/a><\/p>\n

The question of financial sustainability is at the forefront of most of us in the think tank sector. According to OTT\u2019s 2025 <\/span>State of the Sector<\/span><\/i> Survey, 67% of think tanks in Latin America and the Caribbean cited fundraising as a pressing concern. Globally, nearly half expect the funding landscape to get even tougher. Many have written about these challenges. CAPRI is among the minority of think tanks that receive core funding from the private sectors of the countries where they operate. Given the shifting political landscape for think tanks, especially with declining aid budgets in traditional donor countries, looking to the private sector for support is an often unexplored option.<\/span><\/p>\n

Traditional funding models, which feature short-term project cycles, are now facing a shrinking pool of new funding sources, making it difficult for think tanks to work sustainably and achieve a lasting impact. Globally, 13% of think tanks identify this as a key barrier to strategic planning. In Latin America and the Caribbean, nearly 93% report that their typical funding lasts two years or less. This persistent instability not only stifles long-term planning but also undermines the ability of think tanks to adapt, lead, and engage effectively in complex policy environments.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Many think tanks are seeking to diversify their income streams. In the LAC region, 61% report having done so. For CAPRI, private sector funding has been a key stabilising force. During the OTT School for Thinktankers 2025<\/a>, which had 29 participants from 16 countries, CAPRI was the only think tank with private sector backing. This funding source offers a valuable path to sustainability, but it is underutilised. <\/span><\/p>\n

What do we mean by private sector funding? In our case, it takes the form of relatively small, multi-year contributions from companies, typically allocated within their corporate social responsibility budgets. These funds are untied to any specific project or research theme, which we consider core funding, giving us the flexibility to plan strategically, respond to emerging issues, and stay true to our mission.<\/span><\/p>\n

Naturally, a significant reason for the failure to exploit private sector funding is that think tanks are sceptical. There are concerns about the influence of corporate sponsorship on intellectual freedom and independence, and these concerns are valid. What if a sponsor strongly suggests that you take on a project which just so happens to align with the mandates of their company? We know that the general public is increasingly distrustful of think tanks and other evidence-based research organisations. What if those we are trying to engage lose all confidence in your think tank\u2019s commitment to truth and independence?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Transparency and firm boundaries are the only adequate safeguards against these risks. At CAPRI, we have formal protocols that govern the structure of funding relationships, including strict conditions that prevent sponsors from influencing the direction, findings, or publication of research. These are documented and well-known internally, so any departure from them is readily apparent.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Our commitment to intellectual independence is not a vague ideal; rather, it is a working practice, reinforced by internal checks, board oversight, and a proven track record of following the evidence wherever it leads, even when the findings are uncomfortable or inconvenient.<\/span><\/p>\n

Several years ago, we published a report on the National Housing Trust \u2014 a government agency responsible for increasing and enhancing the availability of housing. Among our recommendations was that the NHT should stop subsidising developers as a strategy for affordable housing. One of our sponsors at the time was a developer, and our position ran counter to their commercial interest; they withdrew their sponsorship. We had to be \u2014 and were \u2014 prepared for that.<\/span><\/p>\n

Far from compromising credibility, private sector partnerships can reinforce it. CAPRI invites sponsors to contribute as part of their corporate social responsibility, making it clear that their support advances democratic governance and evidence-based policymaking, which helps foster a stronger, more stable economic environment for their own businesses, as well as for the country as a whole.<\/span><\/p>\n

Building and maintaining sponsor relationships is demanding work. It takes ongoing prospecting, regular engagement, and dedicated administrative support. It also requires establishing a shared understanding that sponsorship does not buy influence over our research agenda. However, the financial stability that corporate sponsorship offers can be the difference between an organisation staying afloat or shutting its doors.<\/span><\/p>\n

The State of the Sector Survey confirms what we already know, whether through observation or direct experience: the funding landscape for think tanks is tightening. The viability and sustainability of think tanks in the LAC region and globally are under pressure. Think tanks must look to open new doors; the doors of a business might be the ones worth walking through.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
This blog is part of the\u00a0State of the Sector 2025 regional analysis series<\/a>, contributed by our partners to share perspectives from their own contexts.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\"\"<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When USAID closed its mission in Jamaica earlier this year, many civil society organisations\u2014such as NGOs, advocacy groups, and service providers\u2014faced an uncertain future. Similarly, many think tanks and policy research institutes worldwide share this view, as aid budgets shrink and political priorities shift. At CAPRI, however, we were not affected. Not because we never […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":30,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"tags":[200,1423,194,181,3588],"class_list":["post-2852024","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-funding","tag-jamaica","tag-latin-america","tag-politics-and-context","tag-state-of-sector-report","article-types-case-study","people-naomi-reitzin-palmer","series-state-of-the-sector-2025","theme-better-informed-policy","theme-funding-and-support-think-tanks","theme-understanding-think-tanks"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2852024","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/30"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2852024"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2852024\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2852467,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2852024\/revisions\/2852467"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2852024"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2852024"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}