Scholarlink

<p>This article explores the use of generative AI (GenAI) in policy analysis as it is conducted by think tank researchers in the United Kingdom. Think tanks focus their policy analysis activities on the three dimensions of problem recognition and definition, the development of policy ideas, and the influencing of the public, politicians and public servants. These three dimensions form the framework for analysis of survey and interview data. For the survey, 554 individuals, identified as think tank ‘policy analysts’ or ‘policy researchers’, from 94 UK-based think tanks were invited to take part. Eight in-depth interviews with individuals from this group were conducted as well. The data suggest that for UK think tank analysts, GenAI currently plays a rather insignificant role in policy analysis. GenAI is used only in limited ways to help with menial tasks and for dissemination and publication whilst ideation and policy formulation are still ‘done’ by humans, with only some support from GenAI. It appears also that think tank analysts are aware of the risks of GenAI whilst they understand and embrace its current opportunities. But&#xa0; there is some concern about the lack of concrete policies that govern the use of GenAI at think tanks. The biggest concern, however, revolves around how GenAI could reduce the quality of policy analysis and therefore the quality of policy proposals if used inappropriately.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Generative artificial intelligence in policy analysis: a study of UK think tanks

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月20日

查看全文
  • Hartwig Pautz,
  • Arno van der Zwet,
  • Pedro Munoz-Ramirez,
  • Scott Leatham

摘要

This article explores the use of generative AI (GenAI) in policy analysis as it is conducted by think tank researchers in the United Kingdom. Think tanks focus their policy analysis activities on the three dimensions of problem recognition and definition, the development of policy ideas, and the influencing of the public, politicians and public servants. These three dimensions form the framework for analysis of survey and interview data. For the survey, 554 individuals, identified as think tank ‘policy analysts’ or ‘policy researchers’, from 94 UK-based think tanks were invited to take part. Eight in-depth interviews with individuals from this group were conducted as well. The data suggest that for UK think tank analysts, GenAI currently plays a rather insignificant role in policy analysis. GenAI is used only in limited ways to help with menial tasks and for dissemination and publication whilst ideation and policy formulation are still ‘done’ by humans, with only some support from GenAI. It appears also that think tank analysts are aware of the risks of GenAI whilst they understand and embrace its current opportunities. But  there is some concern about the lack of concrete policies that govern the use of GenAI at think tanks. The biggest concern, however, revolves around how GenAI could reduce the quality of policy analysis and therefore the quality of policy proposals if used inappropriately.