Search

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is arguably one of the most powerful and disruptive technologies of our times which may pose challenges as well as opportunities to contemporary political organizations. Studying AI from a lens of perceived uncertainty, this article studies the policy response of the European Commission toward this fast-paced emerging technology. By empirically focusing on the Commission's policy process from start to end, from initial communication to concrete proposal, the article shows how different types of narratives are used to construct the new policy area of AI policy. A novel theoretical framework is constructed building on a combination of narrative organizational studies and narrative policy studies, displaying how narratives play a key role in organizational sensemaking, agency construction and anchoring. The paper finds that the Commission broadly makes sense of AI technologies with a future-oriented discourse, establishes agency to existing and new forms of political organizing and anchors the policy response within the overarching frame of the EU single market policy. The main contribution of the paper is that it shows how political organizations settles uncertainty through narratives and sketches a way forward through establishing policy goals and anchoring them within pre-existing lines of political mobilization. Paid Open Access

The paper compares the politics of e‐health policy with a particular focus on the implementation of e‐health records (e‐HRs) in two SHI countries: Austria and Germany. Although these countries share many similarities in terms of political and health care regime, they differ widely with respect to health care digitalization. Thus, the question arises which configuration of factors has facilitated health system digitalization in Austria while being potentially absent in Germany. As a research strategy, we use the Advocacy Coalition Framework to identify the respective actor coalitions for and against the advancement of e‐HRs and analyze how their formation, their resources, and strategies are related to country‐specific governance structures. We find that differences in the beliefs of patient representatives; variations in the institutional access for physician associations; and, finally, differing internal dynamics within the pro e‐HRs main coalition do account for differences in health care digitalization. 本文比较了电子健康政策政治，特别聚焦于电子健康记录在奥地利和德国这两个社会医疗保险国家中的执行情况。尽管这两国在政治制度和医疗制度方面具有许多相似点，但它们在医疗数字化一事上存在巨大差异。因此，问题则是，哪些因素配置促进了奥地利医疗系统数字化，而这部分配置是德国还没有的？我们将倡导联盟框架（ACF）作为研究策略，识别支持和反对提升电子健康记录的行动者联盟，并分析联盟形成、联盟资源及策略如何与特定国家的治理结构相关。我们发现，病患代表的信念差异；内科医生机构（physician associations）的制度获取所存在的差异；以及支持电子健康记录的联盟内的不同内部动态，都是造成医疗数字化差异的原因。 El documento compara la politica de la salud en linea con un enfoque particular en la implementacion de registros de salud en linea en dos paises de SHI: Austria y Alemania. Si bien estos paises comparten muchas similitudes en terminos de regimen politico y de atencion medica, difieren ampliamente con respecto a la digitalizacion de la atencion medica. Por lo tanto, surge la pregunta de que configuracion de factores ha facilitado la digitalizacion del sistema de salud en Austria mientras esta potencialmente ausente en Alemania. Como estrategia de investigacion, utilizamos el Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) para identificar las respectivas coaliciones de actores a favor y en contra del avance de los registros de salud electronicos y analizar como su formacion, sus recursos y estrategias se relacionan con las estructuras de gobernanza especificas de cada pais. . Encontramos que las diferencias en las creencias de los representantes de los pacientes; variaciones en el acceso institucional de las asociaciones de medicos; y, finalmente, las diferentes dinamicas internas dentro de la coalicion principal de registros pro e‐salud explican las diferencias en la digitalizacion de la atencion medica.

Governments play an active role in promoting corporate social responsibility and specifically environmental management system (EMS) programs, but few studies have examined the impact of such support on the decision of businesses to adopt EMS programs. We ask two questions in this paper: how does government support for EMS programs affect adoption of such programs? Second, what effect does this government support have on the pace of adoption of such programs? The answer to the first question can reveal how effective government programs are in boosting membership in EMS programs. The answer to the second reveals to what extent businesses within EU member states are converging upon particular EMS standards. We examine these questions in the context of the European Union’s Eco‐Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), 2010–2014. There is significant variation in government support of EMAS across the EU and at the same time, EMAS competes for business attention with the more established ISO 14001. Our quantitative and qualitative analyses therefore reveal the effectiveness of government programs in boosting adoption, but also to the extent to which such programs cause convergence upon EMAS in the face of a competing standard such as ISO 14001.

On‐bill financing (OBF) schemes have been welcomed as innovative mechanisms for encouraging the adoption of low‐carbon energy technologies. Yet while the potential effects of these schemes have received growing attention, less is known about their actual performance. Departing from New Institutional Economics and insights from Behavioral Economics, this theory‐driven assessment examines the How$mart® program in Kansas (United States) and the Green Deal in the United Kingdom. The study identifies the mechanisms designed to trigger behavioral change and technology adoption. We focus on market agents, and related market failures and behavioral anomalies that often prevent energy efficiency improvements. The paper adds to our theoretical and empirical understanding of public and utility‐driven OBF programs applied to the residential sector. Our findings suggest that simple, carefully designed on‐bill programs, where the financing of efficient technologies takes the form of a service rather than a loan, are more effective for the diffusion of low‐carbon energy technology and the reduction of transaction costs. At the same time, on bill‐financing schemes challenge the core business of utilities, and given the complexities and dynamics of energy efficiency markets and energy use, other policy interventions are needed. (Less)

Although governments are developing and implementing policies to adapt to the impacts of climate change, it remains unclear which factors shape how states are developing these policies. This paper aims to assess whether or not administrative traditions matter for the formation of national climate change adaptation policy in 32 high-income countries. We operationalize administrative traditions based on five structural criteria: vertical dispersion of authority, horizontal coordination, interest mediation between state-society, role of public administrator, and how ideas enter bureaucracy. We construct a unique adaptation policy dataset that includes 32 high-income countries to test seven hypotheses. Our results indicate that countries’ adaptation policies align to some extent with their administrative structure, particularly dispersion of authority and horizontal coordination. However, we find limited evidence that other public bureaucracy factors are related to national adaptation policy. We conclude that administrative traditions matter, but that their influence should not be overestimated.