Difference between revisions of "Transparify"
m (→2018 Transparency Assessment) |
(→2018 Transparency Assessment) |
||
(19 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | {{img|Transparify.svg|250|46}} | + | {{Info Small|ntb=1 |
+ | |img={{img|Transparify.svg|250|46|float=none}} | ||
+ | |wpl={{wpl|Transparify}} | ||
+ | |web=[http://www.transparify.org/ Transparify.org] }} | ||
{{TOC right|limit=3}} | {{TOC right|limit=3}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | 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. | + | {{em|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. | We are part of the [[On Think Tanks]] Labs, a collection of innovative ventures in policy research. | ||
− | + | === 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, with two exceptions.''<ref name="transparify-2017"/><ref name="transparify-2018"/> | |
− | |||
− | == 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.'' | ||
{{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=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/ | + | <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=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>{{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> | ||
Line 28: | Line 25: | ||
<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| | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=5|org=Transparency International|img=Transparency-International.svg|sz=83x20px}}</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=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>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Demos|png=Demos.svg|pw=88|ph=18}}</li> |
− | <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>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=LSE Ideas|png=LSE-Ideas.svg|pw=70|ph=20}}</li> |
− | <li>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=Middle East Institute|png=Middle-East-Institute-horiz.svg|pw=61|ph=20}}</li> |
− | <li>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=4|org=ResPublica|png=ResPublica.svg|pw=86|ph=20}}</li> |
− | <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>{{ | + | <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>{{ | + | <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>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Centre for Policy Studies|img=Centre-for-Policy-Studies.svg|sz=20x20px}}</li> |
− | <li>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Civitas|img=Civitas.svg|sz=82x20px}}</li> |
− | <li>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Institute of Economic Affairs|img=Institute-of-Economic-Affairs.svg|sz=24x20px}}</li> |
− | <li>{{ | + | <li>{{ratings|TPY|type=tpy|band=0|org=Policy Exchange|img=Policy-Exchange.svg|sz=37x20px}}</li> |
− | <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>{{ | ||
− | <li>{{ | ||
− | |||
− | <li>{{ | ||
}} | }} | ||
− | == | + | == References == |
− | {{Src| | + | <references> |
− | + | <ref name="transparify-2018">{{Src|ref|date=Jul.16.2018|title=How Has Think Tank Transparency Evolved in 2018?|website=Transparify|url=http://www.transparify.org/blog/2018/7/16/new-report-how-has-think-tank-transparency-evolved-in-2018}}</ref> | |
+ | <ref name="transparify-2017">{{Src|ref|accessdate=Aug.20.2018|title= Think Tanks in the UK 2017: Transparency, Lobbying and Fake News in Brexit Britain.|website=Transparify|url=https://www.transparify.org/s/Transparify-Think-Tank-Transparency-in-the-UK-2017.pdf}}</ref> | ||
+ | </references> | ||
[[Category:ToDo]] | [[Category:ToDo]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Influencers]] | ||
[[Category:Transparency]] | [[Category:Transparency]] |
Latest revision as of 11:42, 18 September 2020
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.
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, with two exceptions.[1][2]
- Amnesty International
- Centre for Health and the Public Interest
- Development Initiatives website
- European Council on Foreign Relations
- Fabian Society
- Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition
- Institute for Fiscal Studies
- Institute for Government
- Institute of Development Studies
- International Food Policy Research Institute
- New Economics Foundation
- Overseas Development Institute
- Tax Justice Network
- Transparency International
- World Wide Web Foundation
- Chatham House
- Demos
- Institute for Public Policy Research
- LSE Ideas
- Middle East Institute
- ResPublica
- Royal United Services Institute
- Centre for European Reform
- Centre for Economic Policy Research
- Policy Network
- Adam Smith Institute
- Centre for Policy Studies
- Civitas
- Institute of Economic Affairs
- Policy Exchange
- International Institute for Strategic Studies
References
- ^ Think Tanks in the UK 2017: Transparency, Lobbying and Fake News in Brexit Britain. Transparify. Accessed Aug.20.2018.
- ^ How Has Think Tank Transparency Evolved in 2018? Transparify, Jul.16.2018.