Introduction:

Powerful forces – ranging from economic globalization to new information technologies to massive demographic shifts – are fundamentally changing our lives. There are great opportunities but also severe problems that people face: unemployment risks particularly for less qualified workers, the need for reforming social security systems such as health and retirement assurance, or enormous ecological threats, just to give some striking examples. Against this background various interest groups demand political action for achieving or improving socially responsible management. As a consequence, the market for economic policy advice might be booming. And indeed, there are plenty of policy proposals presented by research institutes related to economic, social and ecological sustainability. In Germany however government officials often ignore such advices. Policy-makers criticize its lack of reality and the impossibility of its enforcement, whereas scientists complain political ignorance toward their research findings. The communication between academic and political system is so highly troubled and disconcerted that sometimes the situation can be characterized as a dialogue of deafs.

The German scenario differs significantly from the situation in the United States where independent and private-funded research institutes “are an integral part of the civil society and serve as an important catalysts for ideas and actions.” During the last years the number of those think tanks has increased rapidly: Solely in Washington, D.C. more than 100 organizations compete for identifying, articulating, and evaluating emerging issues. Obviously a vital interaction between social science, politics, and economy is possible, if there is an appropriate institutional setting. Thus, the following article deals with two questions: Firstly, what are the reasons for the different performances of think tanks in both countries? Secondly, what is to be done to improve the scientific contribution to public debate on socially responsible management? Section 2 sketches the landscape of economic research institutes in Germany. A survey on the American system of policy advice is given in section 3; it examines the business strategies of three leading think tanks. Section 4 banks on institutional economics in order to explain the different performance of economic think tanks in participating and broadening public discussion. Finally, some recommendations are presented in section 5 on how to strengthen research institutes’ voice in the political discourse on social responsibility in Germany.