Difference between revisions of "Transparify"

From WikiCorporates
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎2018 Transparency Assessment)
m (→‎2018 Transparency Assessment)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
{{Columns|width=30em|lst=square|class=vspace|content=
 
{{Columns|width=30em|lst=square|class=vspace|content=
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Amnesty International|png=Amnesty-International.svg|pw=57|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Amnesty International|png=Amnesty-International.svg|pw=57|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Centre for Health and the Public Interest|png=Centre-for-Health-and-the-Public-Interest.svg|pw=74|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Development Initiatives|png=Development-Initiatives-Poverty-Research.svg|pw=106|ph=20}} [http://devinit.org/about/finances/ website]</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Development Initiatives|png=Development-Initiatives-Poverty-Research.svg|pw=106|ph=20}} [http://devinit.org/about/finances/ website]</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=European Council on Foreign Relations|png=European-Council-on-Foreign-Relations.svg|pw=42|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=European Council on Foreign Relations|png=European-Council-on-Foreign-Relations.svg|pw=42|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Fabian Society|png=Fabian-Society-sm.svg|pw=44|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition|png=Global-Open-Data-for-Agriculture-and-Nutrition.svg|pw=60|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition|png=Global-Open-Data-for-Agriculture-and-Nutrition.svg|pw=60|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute for Fiscal Studies|png=Institute-for-Fiscal-Studies.svg|pw=60|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute for Fiscal Studies|png=Institute-for-Fiscal-Studies.svg|pw=60|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute for Government|png=Institute-for-Government.svg|pw=75|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute for Government|png=Institute-for-Government.svg|pw=75|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute of Development Studies|png=Institute-of-Development-Studies.svg|pw=73|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Institute of Development Studies|png=Institute-of-Development-Studies.svg|pw=73|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=International Food Policy Research Institute|png=CGIAR-System-Organisation-IFPRI.svg|pw=37|ph=20}}</li>
 
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=New Economics Foundation|png=New-Economics-Foundation.svg|pw=53|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Overseas Development Institute|png=Overseas-Development-Institute.svg|pw=77|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Overseas Development Institute|png=Overseas-Development-Institute.svg|pw=77|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Tax Justice Network|png=Tax-Justice-Network-horiz.svg|pw=52|ph=25}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Tax Justice Network|png=Tax-Justice-Network-horiz.svg|pw=52|ph=25}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Transparency International|png=Transparency-International.svg|pw=83|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Transparency International|png=Transparency-International.svg|pw=83|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=World Wide Web Foundation|png=World-Wide-Web-Foundation.svg|pw=77|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Chatham House|png=Chatham-House.svg|pw=33|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Chatham House|png=Chatham-House.svg|pw=33|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Demos|png=Demos.svg|pw=88|ph=18}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Demos|png=Demos.svg|pw=88|ph=18}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=LSE Ideas|png=LSE-Ideas.svg|pw=70|ph=20}}</li>
+
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Fabian Society|png=Fabian-Society-sm.svg|pw=44|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Institute for Public Policy Research|png=Institute-for-Public-Policy-Research.svg|pw=78|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Institute for Public Policy Research|png=Institute-for-Public-Policy-Research.svg|pw=78|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Middle East Institute|png=Middle-East-Institute-horiz.svg|pw=61|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=ResPublica|png=ResPublica-opt.svg|pw=86|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=ResPublica|png=ResPublica-opt.svg|pw=86|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Royal United Services Institute|png=Royal-United-Services-Institute.svg|pw=43|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Royal United Services Institute|png=Royal-United-Services-Institute.svg|pw=43|ph=20}}</li>
 +
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=3|org=Centre for European Reform|png=Centre-for-European-Reform.svg|pw=61|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=3|org=LSE Ideas|png=LSE-Ideas.svg|pw=70|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=3|org=LSE Ideas|png=LSE-Ideas.svg|pw=70|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=3|org=Centre for European Reform|png=Centre-for-European-Reform.svg|pw=61|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=2|org=Centre for Economic Policy Research|png=Centre-for-Economic-Policy-Research.svg|pw=57|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=2|org=Centre for Economic Policy Research|png=Centre-for-Economic-Policy-Research.svg|pw=57|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=1|org=Policy Network|png=Policy-Network.svg|pw=30|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=1|org=Policy Network|png=Policy-Network.svg|pw=30|ph=20}}</li>
 +
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Adam Smith Institute|png=Adam-Smith-Institute.png|pw=78|ph=20}}</li>
 +
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Centre for Policy Studies|png=Centre-for-Policy-Studies.svg|pw=20|ph=20}}</li>
 +
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Civitas|png=Civitas.svg|pw=82|ph=20}}</li>
 +
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Institute of Economic Affairs|png=Institute-of-Economic-Affairs.svg|pw=24|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Policy Exchange|png=Policy-Exchange.svg|pw=37|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Policy Exchange|png=Policy-Exchange.svg|pw=37|ph=20}}</li>
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Institute of Economic Affairs|png=Institute-of-Economic-Affairs.svg|pw=24|ph=20}}</li>
 
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Civitas|png=Civitas.svg|pw=82|ph=20}}</li>
 
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Centre for Policy Studies|png=Centre-for-Policy-Studies.svg|pw=20|ph=20}}</li>
 
−
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Adam Smith Institute|png=Adam-Smith-Institute.png|pw=78|ph=20}}</li>
 
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=X|org=International Institute for Strategic Studies|png=International-Institute-for-Strategic-Studies.svg|pw=32|ph=20}}</li>
 
<li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=X|org=International Institute for Strategic Studies|png=International-Institute-for-Strategic-Studies.svg|pw=32|ph=20}}</li>
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 18:01, 13 October 2018

Transparify provides the first-ever global rating of the financial transparency of major think tanks. In early 2014, we visited the websites of over 150 think tanks in over 40 countries to find out whether they provide information on who funds them and how much they receive from each source. The good news is that there already is momentum towards greater transparency. In early 2015, we followed up with a second round of ratings of the same think tanks to see whether their transparency has improved. This momentum has held for our 2016 ratings -- think tanks around the world are becoming more and more transparent.

We are part of the On Think Tanks Labs, a collection of innovative ventures in policy research.

Linkback: Transparency, Who Funds You?


2018 Transparency Assessment

In 2018, we again assessed think tanks and identified more than 60 institutions that received the maximum possible five-star rating, reflecting their exemplary transparency when it comes to publicly disclosing their sources of funding. These think tanks use their websites to disclose in great detail who funds them, with what sums, and for what research projects. They set the gold standard for the field as a whole. Note: the list here only covers UK think tanks.[1]

Articles

  • Jul.16.2018: How Has Think Tank Transparency Evolved in 2018? Think tank financial transparency is becoming the norm across the globe: in 2013, when Transparify carried out its baseline, 25 organizations were transparent; 92 are in 2018. This represents clear progress towards transparency, as highlighted in Transparify’s 2018 report released today. Transparify.

References

  1. ^ Think Tanks in the UK 2017: Transparency, Lobbying and Fake News in Brexit Britain. Transparify. Accessed Aug.20.2018.
Retrieved from ‘https://www.wikicorporates.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Transparify&oldid=32059’