In Conversation

01 December 2008 20:10 BST

Today Westminster, tomorrow the world

As is often the case in world affairs, alliances and partnerships tend to work out as the best means of achieving change.

That's certainly the experience of the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), a UK-based thinktank which is expanding its activities on the world stage.

Its co-directors, Lisa Harker and Carey Oppenheim, are leading IPPR away from the traditional world of Westminster politics to engage in other spheres of activity: below national government, where local authorities are becoming increasingly important, and above, where in today's intertwined world so many issues are relevant to all.

The idea that thinktanks are just linked to Westminster is changing partly because politics itself is changing and partly because the players involved are "much more diverse", Ms Harker told me.

"Networks do matter – when we talk about change it's not just about having good ideas, it's also about being able to persuade - but the idea that any organisation is not wedded to any one set of networks is now outdated," she says.

No more is this the case than in IPPR's international activities. "Working with others we can be so much more effective," Ms Oppenheim says. IPPR has just set up its own climate change network with thinktanks in a range of countries. It hopes to bring together their various agenda to shape the post-Kyoto agenda.

Ambitious, to say the least, but this seems to be the theme for IPPR. Its work on the impact of migration in developing countries is a case in point. Here, partnerships with organisations have borne an additional fruit: creating new thinktanks in countries which currently don't have much of this kind of work.

"In places like Rwanda and Jamaica we've had requests for advice and consultancy to think through how these organisations in those countries might develop," Ms Harker adds. This, it seems, is the birds and the bees of how thinktank culture reproduces itself. "This way we can multiply the effect of what we can achieve."

The political space occupied by thinktanks is difficult to define – it's somewhere in the elusive Thinktank Triangle marked out by government, civil society and academia. In Britain, broadly speaking, they fill the space previously occupied by university professors. Abroad is slightly different, but IPPR is convinced there remains a role for thinktanks in every society. There are transferable skills and ideas, Ms Oppenheim insists. "It's part of the jigsaw of what makes a fully functioning democracy."

IPPR believes its lack of specific experience in global matters can work as a strength. Bodies like Amnesty International are often "embroiled" in the substance of an issue, Ms Oppenheim muses. IPPR can understand these as well as any other stakeholder but can bring its knowledge of issues of governance to the table. "We've got real potential to bring insights to both worlds," Ms Oppenheim says.

The thinktank's flagship international programme is its security commission, an impressive alliance of senior politicians, lobbyists and academics working on the changing security environment. Paddy Ashdown and George Robertson are chairing the body, which has met five times and is now frenetically preparing its interim report. "Their credibility will add to its weight," it is hoped.

"It seems to us to represent one of the biggest challenges facing us not just in the UK but also internationally," Ms Harker said.

"How do you marry this need to ensure better security for citizens but at the same time protect people's liberties? How do you think across the range of potential threats to our security and not narrowly define them?"

IPPR is an organisation dealing with international affairs from a starting point rooted in politics. It is not tied with Labour, but it is most definitely progressive. Its attitude to issues of security reflects that perfectly: it's a pressing, global issue, but one which is being met by IPPR with its domestic political connotations close to their minds. That's why Ms Oppenheim is frustrated by the reluctance of some on the centre-left to engage in security issues, which the right has traditionally been more comfortable in dealing with.

"It's not an issue which belongs to somebody else in terms of getting that message across and being able to think about security in a progressive way is very important," she said.

"This is an issue that matters to everybody – it's really important we define it in a way which is fit for the 21st century."

That underlines IPPR's approach, which is entirely forward-thinking. It wants to create change through its work and – by reaching out to individuals and organisations – is as intent on achieving that goal abroad as it is in the UK.

Alex Stevenson