Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Arizona State University)

According to Marans and Stimson (2011), the Morrison Institute for Public Policy is a leading Arizona and statewide leader think tank that conducts critical analysis on issues such as education reform, water resources, human services, health care, government structures, urban growth, environmental sustainability, technology, the quality of life, public finance, and economic development. It takes into account concerns that may affect Arizona and nearby regions, including its capacity to speed up processes that promote public debate. To accomplish its objectives and goals in line with institutes’ mission and vision, the institution relies on nonpartisan research, conducts analysis, and depends on public outreach leading to improved quality of life in the state.

Nevertheless, the institution in collaboration with the United States Government is able to manage the Indicators of Arizona, oversees the online collection of relevant data as well as analysis of significant topics such as transportation, the region's demographics and rates of innovation (Marans, & Stimson, 2011). For instance, the institution focus on improving the quality of life of the Latino populace launched Latino Public Policy in 2012 with the aim of clarifying why and the manner in which Latino policy matters, the challenges as well as opportunities together contributed towards determining the future of Arizona.

Finally, Morrison Institute for public policy has certain significant responsibilities accounted for by the Institute Advisory Board constituted by nonpartisan businesspersons, public officials, scholars, and policy experts. For example, the stakeholder's major areas of focus are not only engaging in the analysis, evaluation of Arizona’s social patterns and policy impact, development of strategies and realistic programs that encourage growth and development for the benefit of all but also offers education, training, as well as technical assistance to the stakeholders. Additionally, the advisory board deals with research reports and all available data that regard Arizona (Kellough, & Nigro, 2006).

The Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy (University of California Berkeley)

The Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy thinks tank is based on a simple ideology, which regards the fact that long-term technology cannot be the driver of American Economy. As such, Stalder (2006) notes that continued leadership in terms of production, development, as well as applications of the advanced technologies within the United States, are the pillars for America’s economic growth. Technology drives production hence the Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy highlights that a national comparative advantage is created as opposed to the ideology of being revealed. For instance, it creates awareness on the idea that high technology trade patterns are subject to be under the control of domestic policies. In such a view, a state can only produce and trade a composition of its domestic products, which relatively determines its growth and security status.

The Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy (BRIE) is of value to the current United States Government since it is capable of conducting quality research whose results can be integral in drafting policies, recommendations, and adjustments to existing governmental policies and economic issues. According to In Hargreaves (1998) BRIE in 1984 had the opportunity to prove worthy by producing a draft which President Reagan used to commission the Industrial Competitiveness. Currently, its contribution stood the test of time and that draft is up-to-date remains commonly accepted to highlight the definition of competitiveness. Nonetheless, BRIE in collaboration with previous government regimes had the opportunity to chair the council of economic advisers growing to head the White House National Economic council. All those have been accomplished based on the findings that BRIE research is firm and detailed from the perspectives of getting to understand the real world technologies, the market trends, various policies, as well as strategies.

Institution for Social and Policy Studies (ISPS)

The ISPS according to In Wildeman, In Hacker, In Weaver, and American Academy of Political and Social Science (2014) is one of the social and policy institutions think tanks, which advances in such an area of expertise by incorporating interdisciplinary research in the area of social science. Therefore, the ISPS institution prospects included the need to shape the public policies as well as create awareness on democratic deliberation. The institution in order to accomplish its policy objectives does so by being inward looking hence encourages the students’ community and the scholars internalize academic lessons and integrate them into policy making processes while shadowing policymakers and creating such awareness during public debates. Through taking advantage of such opportunities, the institution encourages the students and scholars alike to produce analyzed and well reasons policies during the debates and participate in the formulation of policies at both the state as well as the national level.

Correspondingly, the Institution for Social and Policy Studies supports certain programs including policy education, students’ and scholars fellowship programs as well as extracurricular activities that enable the participants to share ideas and learned lessons through integration activities that establish relationships and good communication (Rose-Ackerman, 1981). In such opportunities, ISPS is able to develop quality and important leaders who are well trained in police making to assist the states when time comes. It is thus, through the aforementioned participation in the activities and educational training that ISPS over the years has been able to conduct successful sponsored research that has been fruitful in addressing extraordinary policies including those allied to topics such as corruption at national levels, poverty, taxations, health policies and the stem cell research.













References

In Hargreaves, A. (1998). International handbook of educational change: Part one.

In Wildeman, C. J., In Hacker, J. S., In Weaver, V. M., & American Academy of Political and Social Science. (2014). Detaining democracy?: Criminal justice and American civic life.

Kellough, J. E., & Nigro, L. G. (2006). Civil service reform in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Marans, R. W., & Stimson, R. J. (2011). Investigating quality of urban life: Theory, methods and empirical research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Rose-Ackerman, S. (1981). Unfair competition and corporate income taxation. New Haven, Conn: Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University.

Stalder, F. (2006). Manuel Castells: The theory of the network society. Cambridge: Polity.