Previous
Political polarisation not only shapes public discourse; it also directly affects how think tanks operate. This is reflected in the findings from this year’s State of the Sector survey, which show that most research organisations face constraints on their work due to growing political polarisation.
In response, many think tanks are recalibrating by expanding their work, strengthening collaboration and partnerships, and finding new ways to build trust and foster engagement across differences. This blog explores how think tanks are navigating the shrinking neutral ground.
Download the On Think Tanks State of the Sector Report 2025
Polarisation is reshaping research and policy environments
The survey findings suggest a growing concern among research and policy organisations: polarisation is not only influencing how research is received; it is limiting organisations’ ability to operate. When asked to what extent polarisation has impacted their country’s research environment:
- Only 8% of respondents said it has had no impact at all.
- A combined 56% reported that the effect was moderate (39%) or significant (17%).
- An additional 5% reported that polarisation has affected their work “very much”.
In total, three out of every four respondents now see polarisation as a constraint on their ability to carry out research and function effectively.
Polarisation is intensifying across all regions, with 33% of think tanks in Africa and 32% in Latin America reporting that it has significantly impacted their ability to operate—the highest among all regions.
Globally, the percentage of respondents stating that polarisation had no impact at all decreased by more than half, from 17.7% in 2024 to 8.4% in 2025. The decline was especially steep in Africa and Asia, where the percentage fell by 27.8 and 19.5 percentage points, respectively. This suggests that few countries or organisations remain fully insulated from growing political divides.
In terms of how political polarisation has affected their work, 61% said it impacts the way they share research and engage with diverse audiences, 32% said it hinders collaboration and interaction with policy experts from different political backgrounds, and 25% said it affects their ability to obtain funding. The work of think tanks, which includes sharing evidence, shaping public debate, and engaging decision-makers, has always been political in a broader sense. But in more polarised settings, these activities carry a greater risk of being misunderstood, mistrusted, or drawn into partisan dynamics.
There is an increasing concern that researchers are no longer seen simply as objective voices contributing to public understanding. Instead, their motives are scrutinised and their credibility is called into question. This erosion of trust weakens the public’s access to fact-based discussion, independent thought, and collaborative problem-solving.
As polarisation grows, maintaining dialogue across political divides becomes harder. In 2025, only 27.5% of respondents said it was easy or very easy to engage individuals across political lines—down from 38% the previous year. Meanwhile, 22% reported it as hard or very hard, a 5-point increase from last year.
Without institutions that are seen as fair, credible, and impartial:
- Evidence loses power, as facts are dismissed as partisan tools.
- Public discourse becomes more polarised, with fewer spaces for constructive dialogue.
- Policy decisions become more reactive and ideological, rather than grounded in data and collective interest.
If think tanks cannot function as neutral conveners or trusted analysts, it weakens the mechanisms that keep democracy inclusive and responsive to society’s interests.
Navigating complexity through growth, collaboration, and credibility
Despite the pressures of polarisation, most think tanks remain focused on growth. Globally, 61% of respondents expect to expand within the next 12 months. This anticipated growth is not just about scaling up operations; it reflects a strategic commitment to impact. The areas identified for expansion include research (78%), partnerships (67%), and policy engagement (61%), suggesting that organisations are choosing to invest in more profound influence, broader collaboration, and more evidence-informed dialogue even as the operating environment becomes more complex.
Many think tanks remain focused on their core mission, and the data suggests a commitment to addressing real-world challenges over responding to partisan trends. When asked what drives changes in their research agendas, 78% cited public policy needs—well above the 54% who pointed to political shifts. Funding (64%) and stakeholder demands (50%) are also influential factors.
Think tanks appear to be adapting with intention, staying grounded in their purpose to inform and improve public policy. In Central Europe, some think tanks have emerged as “depolarisation entrepreneurs,” stepping into contested civic spaces and employing both passive and active strategies. These include avoiding confrontation and tension, as well as more proactive approaches such as building trust through shared experiences and collaborative problem-solving. In 2018, a consortium of thinkzines in Poland launched the Short Circuit (Spiecie) Project as a demonstration of cooperation and open exchange of ideas across diverse ideological perspectives. They facilitate discreet, cross-bloc dialogues, Chatham‑House‑style convenings, and joint publications to maintain a ‘middle ground’.
At the OTT Conference 2025, several speakers offered concrete examples of how think tanks can adapt strategically and act as catalysts in polarised environments. Luciana Servo, President of Brazil’s Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA) detailed how IPEA maintains its autonomy within government—embedding staff in ministries—while safeguarding its credibility across political transitions. Mavis Owusu‑Gyamfi, President & CEO of Ghana’s African Center for Economic Transformation (ACET), showcased how think tanks in Africa are embracing “co‑competition”, pooling resources, co-bidding for projects, and building trust-based networks that amplify collective influence. And Sara Pantuliano, CEO of ODI Global, shared how ODI has pivoted from focusing on research volume to values-driven influence, committing to fewer but deeper engagements and leveraging creative formats like podcasts to maintain resonance in complex, polarised settings. These examples underscore opportunities that exist for think tanks to have impact and influence, even in fragmented public domains.
Conclusion
In polarised contexts, the role of think tanks becomes not just harder to fulfil, but more essential. The path forward calls for a purpose-driven approach and strategic adaptation. This paper highlights several ways think tanks are rising to the challenge:
- Collaborating to build shared influence through trust-based networks
- Communicating with clarity and creativity to promote values-driven engagement and make evidence more accessible
- Maintaining autonomy while staying close to power
- Fostering dialogue across divides by creating space for diverse perspectives
Think tanks cannot control the political environment, but they can choose how they respond. As stewards of the spaces where evidence and engagement inform action, they can build bridges and foster trust through inclusive dialogue, adaptive communication, and sustained collaboration.
