On Thursday morning, we began our day at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. There, we had a very interesting conversation with Thomas Carothers, a senior fellow and co-director of Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program. Carothers initiated the conversation by asking us a series of questions that helped us grasp the distinction between doing research work at a think tank and at the government. This discussion went into the details of the daily work of these different organizations, as well as the possibility of the impact that this type of research might have on policy creation and implementation. Understanding these different forms of impacting policy was a large aspect of this honors trip, and we found this conversation to be particularly interesting because, in the two days prior to this visit, we had also met with three other think tanks and the State Department.

Besides this initial discussion about the different manner of impacting policy through research, Carothers also presented us some of the important criteria that are used to define the research agenda of the institution, particularly in the program he co-directs, the Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program. The first criterion he mentioned was whether the project is putting a new issue on the map, that is, if it is informing the public about an issue that has not yet been developed. The second is whether a project will provide a systematic overview of the issue, providing new insights in a broader form. The third is whether a project “pops the bubble” — if it shows that the conventional way to think about an issue is incorrect. The fourth and last is whether a project stretches the landscape, usually taking a comparative approach that will bring new information to an issue. Carothers mentioned that it is important for successful research projects inside the think tank to fulfill one of these criteria. This discussion was really fascinating because it provided us with some insight into the management and decision-making process in this research.

Later in the afternoon, we headed to the impressive building of the World Bank. First, we met with Abigail Baca, a Stanford alumna (BA ‘01), who introduced us to her work as a Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist at the World Bank Group. It was particularly interesting to hear about her work in Latin America and how the operational conversations with the governments work when implementing projects in the countries. We also had the opportunity to hear from Lauren Culver, another Stanford alumna (Ph.D ‘17) and Senior Energy Specialist at World Bank Group, who told us more about the work that the World Bank is doing with the Country Climate and Development Reports. We finished the visit with a small tour of the central area of the bank, which was a truly beautiful building.