EU Think Tank Lobbying Strategies: Between Theoretical Advice and Practice

  • Jesper Dahl KelstrupEmail author
  • Doris Dialer


There is demand for more in-depth knowledge about the strategies, which think tanks employ to influence EU policy-making. The strategies of the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) and the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) are explored based on desktop research and interviews with practitioners. The two think tanks have drawn on strategic advice through their concern about assuring quality, independence, transparency, integrity, and last but not least resources. Whereas CEPS has been hesitant to make large-scale changes to its core strategies, the ECDPM has introduced a sound strategy paper 2017–2021. This challenges the idea of a one-size-fits-all template for think tank strategies. While theoretical recommendations may be used in practice, strategic consideration from practitioners might also inspire and nuance advice for successful think tank strategies in the EU and beyond.


  1. Abelson, D. E. (2014). Old world, new world: The evolution and influence of foreign affairs think-tanks. International Affairs, 90, 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BEPA. (2012). European think tanks and the EU. Berlaymont Papers, 2, Brussels: EU Commission.Google Scholar
  3. Berling, T. V. (2012). Bourdieu, international relations, and European security. Theory and Society, 41, 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertelsmann Foundation. (2016). Transformation index BTI. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from
  5. Boucher, S., & Royo, M. (2012). Les think tanks. Cerveaux de la guerre des idées. Paris: Éditions du Félin.Google Scholar
  6. Callahan, W. A. (2007). Future imperfect: The European Union’s encounter with China (and the United States). Journal of Strategic Studies, 30(4–5), 777–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campbell, J. L., & Pedersen, O. K. (2014). The national origins of policy ideas: Knowledge regimes in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coen, D., & Richardson, J. (Eds.). (2009). Lobbying the European Union. Institutions, actors and issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dialer, D., & Füricht-Fiegl, G. (2014a). EU think tanks in the back seat? Perspectives for the 21 century. Challenging Organisations and Society, 3(2), 561–572.Google Scholar
  10. Dialer, D., & Füricht-Fiegl, G. (2014b). EU think tanks: Brücke zwischen Wissenschaft, Politik und Öffentlichkeit? In D. Dialer & M. Richter (Eds.), Lobbying in der Europäischen Union. Zwischen Professionalisierung und Regulierung (pp. 307–318). Wiesbanden: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Dressler, W., Sicakkan, H. G., Fuga, A., Mitroi, V., & Terrazzoni, L. (2012). The French republican model, the European diversity perspective and the European public sphere. Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales, 51(3), 418–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ECFR. (2017). European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2016. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from
  13. EU Transparency Register. (2018). Transparency and the EU. Retrieved June 26, 2018, from
  14. Garcia-Blanco, I., & Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2013). Remote, elitist, or non-existent?: The European public sphere in the debates of British political elites. Javnost-the Public, 20(3), 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gueguen, D. (2008). European lobbying. London: John Harper.Google Scholar
  16. Howorth, J. (2004). Discourse, ideas, and epistemic communities in European security and defence policy. West European Politics, 27(2), 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kelstrup, J. D. (2016). The politics of think tanks in Europe. Routledge Research in Comparative Politics. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelstrup, J. D. (2018). Think tanks in EU public policies. In H. Heinelt & S. Münch (Eds.), Handbook of European policies: Interpretive approaches to the EU. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  19. Klinke, I. (2012). Postmodern geopolitics? The European Union eyes Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 64, 929–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lahrant, M., & Boucher, S. (2004). Think tanks in Europe and US: Converging or diverging? Paris: Notre Europe.Google Scholar
  21. McGann, J. G. (2016). 2015 Global Go-To Think Tank Index Report, Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program (TTCSP), University of Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  22. McGann, J. G. (2017). 2016 Global Go-To Think Tank Index Report, Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program (TTCSP), University of Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  23. Selee, A. (2013). What Should Think Tanks Do? A Strategic Guide to Policy Impact. Stanford, CA: Stanford Briefs.Google Scholar
  24. Sherrington, P. (2000). Shaping the policy agenda: Think tank activity in the European Union. Global Society, 14(2), 173–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith, K. E., Fooks, G., Gilmore, A. B., Collin, J., & Weishaar, H. (2015). Corporate coalitions and policy making in the European Union: How and why British American tobacco promoted better regulation. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, 40(2), 325–372. Scholar
  26. Stryk, R. (2015). Improving think tank management: Practical guidance for think tanks. In Research advocacy NGOs and their funders. Washington: Results for Development Institute.Google Scholar
  27. Svallfors, S. (2016). Out of the golden cage: PR and the career opportunities of policy professionals. Politics & Policy, 44(1), 56–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ullrich, H. (2004). European Union think tanks: Generating ideas, analysis and debate. In D. Stone & A. Denham (Eds.), Think tank traditions. Policy research and the politics of ideas (pp. 51–68). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and BusinessRoskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark
  2. 2.European Integration, Department of Political ScienceUniversity of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations