The price of independence: Think tanks in Mexico face growing fragility in 2026

Over the past two years, think tanks in Mexico have moved from uncertainty to adaptation under constant pressure. If 2024 was marked by a weakening public policy environment and 2025 by what we described as structural fragility, the latest On Think Tanks State of the Sector Report points to a new reality. Survival depends not only on technical excellence but also on the ability to withstand mounting fiscal, financial and political pressures that threaten to erode think tanks’ role as independent contributors to public debate and democratic accountability.

1. The fiscal maze: oversight or censorship?

One of the most pressing challenges facing think tanks today is the growing complexity of legal and tax requirements. In 2026, 57% of Mexican think tanks identified regulatory compliance and government distrust as major challenges.

A particularly worrying trend is government authorities revoking organisations’ tax-exempt charitable status. In many countries, this status is more than an administrative designation: it allows organisations to issue tax-deductible donation receipts and is often a prerequisite for receiving funding from multilateral organisations and foreign governments.

The problem is that it is not always clear whether these reviews are driven by legitimate tax oversight—ensuring organisations operate within their legally authorised charitable purpose—or whether they are used to pressure on organisations that have been critical of the government.

This ambiguity has immediate operational consequences. Organisations already operating with limited resources must divert scarce funding to specialised legal advice simply to preserve their legal status.

2. Agendas under pressure: technical issues versus politically sensitive topics

Political polarisation continues to shape the operating environment for think tanks across Latin America, affecting 62% of organisations. Yet its impact is far from uniform. The survey points to a growing divide in think tanks’ ability to influence different policy agendas.

Today, organisations are finding more space to work on relatively technical issues, such as climate change, emerging technologies and community development. By contrast, influencing public debate on security, human rights and anti-corruption has become increasingly difficult.

In these areas, a defensive and often hostile government stance—identified by 43% of respondents as an operational challenge—combined with the withdrawal of major donors such as USAID, is pushing critical issues off research agendas and out of international cooperation programmes. These topics have not become any less important; they have simply become more difficult and riskier to work on. As funding shrinks and government scrutiny intensifies, think tanks’ ability to provide independent evidence and hold power to account on politically sensitive issues is at risk of diminishing.

This raises an important question for future editions of the survey: how much of the funding currently available in the region is directed towards politically “safe” topics, and how much supports work on issues that governments may find more uncomfortable?

3. The short-term funding trap: when impact never has time to take root

Financial sustainability remains the sector’s Achilles’ heel—a challenge that has persisted since last year’s survey. In Mexico, 86% of think tanks reported a decline in funding during 2025, and a similarly high proportion identified fundraising as the organisational capacity they most urgently need to strengthen.

Yet the problem goes beyond the amount of funding available. How funding is structured also shapes how think tanks behave and work, often undermining their ability to remain relevant, build expertise, and achieve lasting impact.

One example is donors’ growing preference for short-term project funding. Across the region, 38% of grants last between six months and one year, with budgets typically ranging from USD 50,000 to USD 100,000. Projects of this scale and duration rarely provide enough time or resources to drive systemic change or sustain policy influence.

This funding model runs counter to the very nature of think tanks. Producing robust evidence, building trusted relationships with policymakers and influencing public policy all require continuity, institutional memory and a long-term perspective—qualities that are difficult to sustain when organisations move from one short-term grant to the next.

4. New tools and leadership in times of crisis

Despite these challenges, signs of resilience also emerge. Most think tanks in Mexico have already integrated AI into their work, primarily to strengthen research processes. Used well, these tools can streamline routine tasks, improve efficiency and allow researchers to focus more time on strategic engagement and policy influence.

However, the widespread adoption of AI also raises an important question. Across Latin America, nearly three in ten think tanks have reduced staff in response to declining revenues. In some organisations, AI may not simply complement analytical capacity—it may fill gaps left by budget cuts and shrinking teams.

Another finding highlights a significant shift in the sector’s profile in Mexico: 71% of think tanks are led by women, compared with a regional average of 40% among organisations that reported leadership data. These leaders are navigating an environment in which 86% of Mexican think tanks expect the political context to remain one of their greatest challenges over the coming year.

Conclusion: Redefining purpose while remaining committed to evidence

Think tanks’ survival as informed democratic counterweights depends on their ability to resist self-censorship in the face of government hostility. The response cannot be limited to technical adaptation alone; it must also defend intellectual autonomy and maintain an unwavering commitment to evidence-based policymaking.

If the sector continues to contract and research agendas become increasingly shaped by shrinking budgets and hostile political environments, think tanks risk becoming irrelevant. True resilience in 2026 will not mean adapting indefinitely until organisations disappear, but building bridges of trust with governments, acknowledging the depth of the sector’s contraction, and defending the essential role of independent policy research.

The greatest risk is not simply that some organisations may disappear. It is that the ecosystem itself becomes less diverse, less independent and less capable of contributing to informed public debate. If think tanks increasingly reshape their agendas to fit shrinking grants or avoid politically contentious issues, they risk weakening the very role that gives them public value.

Ultimately, the cost of a more fragile think tank ecosystem will not be borne by think tanks alone. It will show up in poorer public debate and a reduced capacity for evidence to inform public decision-making.