Search

This paper investigates the association of housing configurations reflected by different regimes with more specifically determined elements of the welfare state regime, which are pension regimes. The study aims to answer the question of whether the linkage between housing and pensions can be recognized also at the “regime” level. For this purpose, in our analysis, we review and employ the existing typologies of housing and pension regimes identified in the previous literature. The paper presents the results of empirical research comprising comparisons between housing and pension regimes, with reference to decommodification and stratification, as well as homeownership in 24 welfare states. We found little empirical evidence for the existence of a straightforward correspondence between housing regimes and pension regimes. Nonetheless, our analysis reveals some findings that refer to common characteristics in terms of decommodification and stratification in both domains. This could be also a premise for further research to investigate the nexus between pensions and housing by identifying similarities within joint housing‐pension regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration policy reached the fore of the political agenda during the 109th Congress of 2005–2006, achieving near‐record levels of congressional committee attention. Literature on agenda setting typically portrays such attention spikes as evidence that the inertial forces of a status quo policy regime are losing the ability to keep the issue off the political agenda. Change may not necessarily follow, but from this perspective, opponents to change are in a vulnerable position. Yet, as this paper shows, opponents of immigration reform were the ones driving the flurry of committee activity. By demonstrating that opponents of policy change wielding agenda control can also leverage attention as a means of obstruction, the paper identifies a potential limit to using certain attention indicators as evidence of policy momentum. In the second part of the paper, I hypothesize conditions under which status quo defenders in Congress might abandon their negative agenda power. I argue that it is most likely when policy entrepreneurs elevate an issue with two or more unstable policy images that divide the majority party. The findings here offer further evidence of the congressional committee system's declining role in policy development and the intractability of immigration reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper re‐evaluates conventional Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) scholarship which has traditionally prioritized the study of specific rules configurations and their role in forming effective institutional arrangements. We suggest that effective institutional governance may actually be more reliant on the narrative foundations and personal cognitive interpretations of these rules than on the explicit rules themselves. By drawing insights from the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF), which delves into the internal cognitive processes of individuals, we seek to enrich the understanding of institutional‐actor‐rule dynamics. We contend that policy actors often rely on narrative heuristics to navigate complex institutional landscapes, underscoring the role of narratives in both understanding institutional structures and instigating collective action. Although institutional scholarship recognizes the centrality of communication, its impact on shaping institutional arrangements and rule formation remains insufficiently explored. This paper advocates for the integration of the NPF and the Institutional Grammar Tools' (IGT) ADICO, identifying potential parallels between the two frameworks. Our preliminary theorization suggests a cyclical relationship between narratives and institutions, with narratives shaping and being shaped by institutional rules and norms. Building upon Narrative Attention Theory, we aim to understand the broader implications of institutional narratives in driving or reinforcing policy stasis. Our paper represents a foundational step toward a comprehensive theoretical framework on the role of narratives in institutions, spotlighting institutional rules and pointing to future research directions. Through the proposed integration of NPF and IGT's ADICO, we hope to provide a more nuanced understanding of narrative dynamics in institutional arrangements and pave the way for empirical exploration of this relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gross National Happiness (GNH), a concept first introduced by Bhutan, has gained immense traction as an alternate development paradigm to GDP toward achieving wholesome global progress. In this paper, we investigate the origins of the policy of GNH, through the theoretical lens of the punctuated equilibrium theory (PET), and when and how GNH came to the national agenda. By focusing on the year 2008, that is, when Bhutan's Government transitioned from an absolute monarchy to a democratic constitutional monarchy, this paper analyses the key events that serve as policy windows and the policy entrepreneurs responsible for agenda‐setting the policy of GNH. We argue there is a major change, such as, the government changing its form from monarchy to democracy, it is a definitive benchmark as to what punctuation means. In addition to providing a definitive meaning of "punctuation" in public policy, we also identify and discuss the key methodological issues in relation PET and offer explanations through Bhutan's policy of GNH to determine policy punctuation and measuring policy change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public emergencies are focal events that present possibilities for policy changes. This study aims to explain policy insights on policy change in Iran through analyzing how the Iranian government's policy toward the long‐awaited e‐authentication finally changed in the wake of the outbreak of COVID‐19. Due to the policy context of Iran, it uses the Multiple Stream Model, in which three streams were identified: problem, policy, and political dynamics. The paper contends that while the second stream existed prior to the pandemic, the first one had not yet been appropriately recognized by the government. Furthermore, it identifies the political stream as the third missing link for policy change. With the spread of coronavirus, these three streams converged, thus opening a window of opportunity for enacting this policy change. Two main reasons behind the emergence of this opening are identified: first, arising a new complex problem (COVID‐19) that necessitated new initiatives, and second, growing public anxiety about the pandemic. Iran's desperate circumstances, which included an already severely depressed economy as the result of sanctions, were further exacerbated through the socio‐economic repercussions of the pandemic. Furthermore, the growing demand from prospective traders to register for the stock exchange during the lockdown prompted officials to make a realistic decision. As a result, barriers to e‐authentication were overcome and policy change happened. The paper highlights the security perspective as a necessary condition for policy change in Iran. Finally, it discusses the likelihood of permanency of the change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Citizen Income (Reddito di cittadinanza—RdC) is the most extensive program to fight poverty ever adopted in Italy. RdC is a Minimum Income Scheme that grants a cash amount to beneficiaries but obliges some specific groups to participate in active measures and in social inclusion programs. After 4 years of implementation, RdC seems not to have fully achieved its goals and scholars blame policy legacies as one of the main causes of its failures. Drawing on the literature on policy feedback, the paper proposes an analytical framework that identifies the mechanisms related to resources, incentives, and meanings affecting policy actors (public administration, organized civil society, and citizens). The framework is then applied to the case of RdC to detect through what specific mechanisms deriving from past anti‐poverty, active, and social policies impacted on the implementation of the RdC. The paper is moreover aimed at advancing the debate about policy legacies and their effects on current policies through the elaboration of a framework specifying the mechanisms through which policy feedback produces change or stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses whether the effect of campaign‐style enforcement can surpass the short term from the perspective of authority allocation. Based on the theory of authority allocation, we establish an explanatory framework for the impact of authority allocation on the effect of campaign‐style enforcement. We argue that, through authority allocation, the central government has both formal authority and real authority, which helps to extend the effect of campaign‐style enforcement beyond the short term. We empirically studied the regulatory compliance in China's environmental administrative talk from 2014 to 2016. Statistical findings supported by robustness checks confirm our theoretical hypotheses. Further analysis shows that campaign‐style enforcement can be more effective when local officials have longer tenure, higher levels of education, or older age. Our paper shows that authority recentralization on specific issues can bridge the conflict of policy goals between central and local governments, prolonging the effect of campaign‐style enforcement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information exchange is critical to the functionality of governance networks. Traditionally, it has been argued that actors within governance networks tend to engage in information exchange with others who share similar beliefs and motivations, as these are deemed catalysts for achieving collective objectives. An alternative viewpoint posits that actors may prioritize strategies aimed at minimizing transaction costs and maximizing returns when selecting their partners. This paper proposes that information exchange predominantly occurs with partners who are easily accessible (i.e., where transaction costs are low) and with partners who are perceived as influential (i.e., where benefits are high). To investigate these alternative propositions, we examine three distinct opportunity structures that actors may utilize, which are based on their preferences for (1) partners with similar participatory motivations, (2) partners who co‐participate in institutional committees, and (3) those perceived as influential. We empirically test these opportunity structures using unique survey data gathered from 10 anti‐corruption multi‐stakeholder partnerships within the public infrastructure domain in countries of Latin America, Africa, and Eurasia. Results from Exponential Random Graph Models suggest that shared participatory motivations do not significantly impact information exchange within our context, whereas the perceived influence of a partner emerges as a critical predictor. In addition, co‐participation in institutional committees significantly facilitates information dissemination, particularly when those committees involve discussions on deliberating about strategies to communicate findings on public‐sector infrastructure discrepancies and formulating recommendations to governments on transparency and accountability. These findings prompt discussions on four network management strategies aimed at restructuring networks and fostering stakeholder involvement and inclusivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While emotions are an inherent component of the human experience that influence behavior, values, and beliefs, they have largely been left out of policy process studies theoretically and methodologically. Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), with its focus on how individuals coalesce into coalitions around a set of common beliefs, we begin to situate emotions as a critical component of belief systems and discourse about public policies. This study analyzes legislative testimony from four policies debated during the 2021 Colorado Legislative Session using discourse analysis to identify the emotions and coalitional beliefs. We find that policy actors express emotions and beliefs similarly to other policy actors in the same coalition and differently from policy actors in the opposing coalition. We conclude this paper by discussing the theoretical and methodological contributions of including emotions in the ACF. The move to incorporate the analysis of emotional expressions, and hence the study of affect, into the ACF mirrors the ongoing incorporation of how people feel in politics and not just how they think. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lack of research in farm animal welfare governance is noticeable given how political science traditionally describes the agricultural field as politicized, i.e., subject to private and public regulations and governance. This paper shows how this issue is making its way into social and political science by using a scoping review methodology to map and analyze what exists in the research literature on farm animal welfare governance from 2000 to 2021. In evaluating drivers in farm animal governance, the literature points to increasing public concern. This is not necessarily because it changes the public's actions, but rather give legitimacy to actors to drive change in other domains such as research and the market. This review identifies retailers and animal welfare organizations as key actors in private farm animal welfare governance. Public government and political parties are perceived as "slower drivers," thus leaving room for private governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the causal relationship between the carbon tax's revenue recycling measures and political acceptability. The Irish carbon tax reform of 2019 forms the basis of the study. The findings are based on deductive content analysis and semi‐structured, elite interviews with key politicians, climate policy advisors, and other influential figures involved in the policy‐making process. Analyzing the extensive Irish revenue recycling scheme, encompassing compensatory measures and various forms of climate spending, provides researchers with the chance to track distinctive causal mechanisms over the course of a politically intense period, leading up to general elections. The results show that relief measures were crucial to alleviate concerns about the negative distributional impact of the policy, which was fiercely attacked by some opposition parties. Additionally, climate spending increased political acceptance by offering low‐carbon alternatives to consumers, even though the policy was initially construed as punitive measure, especially in regions and sectors where switching to low‐carbon options, public transport, or less carbon intense heating, were challenging or even impossible. A unique finding of the study is that revenue recycling facilitates the emergence of cross‐party agreement among ideologically distant parties. Another crucial contribution of this study is the detailed comparison, from the perspective of political acceptability, of two alternative social compensation models, the fee and dividend model, and the integration of targeted social cushioning and climate spending (hypothecation). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although literature on energy cooperation highlights that cooperation is more successful at the regional level, it largely fails to understand and conceptualize energy cooperation as part of the wider phenomenon of regionalism. Energy cooperation tends to be analyzed through prisms of security and geopolitics, thus, downplaying other important regional integration processes. The present paper addresses this lacuna, defining energy regionalism and conceptualizing its various dimensions, logics, motivations, and interests. We apply a comparative perspective, examining two regions which exhibit extensive energy cooperation yet differ in several ways: North America and the European Energy Community. Our findings suggest various trajectories and models, and indicate that formal institutionalization is neither a necessary condition for nor a guarantee of strong energy regionalism. We discern that regional anchor is key in North American and European energy regionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To what extent do expert opinions affect public opinion in policy making? While most existing studies were conducted in democracies, experts' influence under authoritarian settings is still understudied. This paper examines how expert opinion and vocational affiliation influence public attitudes toward genetically modified (GM) food in China. Through a survey experiment with over 1600 respondents, we find that experts' endorsement can increase policy support for GM food but that their opposition exerts no influence. Different vocational affiliations do not generate significantly different effects, although endorsement from foreign experts has larger effects than endorsement from domestic counterparts, who have closer connections with the Chinese government. We finally discuss the policy implications of expert involvement in policy making and promoting GM food in China based on the above findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The influence of visualizations on decision‐making about controversial policy issues is increasingly recognized in the political and policy sciences. In this paper, we explore how combinations of visuals and text on Twitter (now X) lead to the formation of networks of actors sharing similar textual and visual framings about a policy issue in an online setting, which we conceptualize as Multimodal Online Discourse Coalitions (MODCs). MODCs struggle over the meaning of contested policy issues. We examine multiple MODCs in 2018 in the context of the regulatory decisions in that year about CRISPR‐Cas gene editing technology in the USA, Mercosur, and the EU. Based on an SNA and a qualitative visual and discursive analysis in three languages on Twitter in 2018 (covering in total ~ 427 k Tweets), we show that MODCs in English and Spanish focused on technocratic aspects of CRISPR‐Cas, resembling the regulatory decisions in the USA and Mercosur. In Europe, next to technocratic MODCs, an MODC in French formed around ethical/normative framings of the consequences of CRISPR‐Cas applications, using visuals of embryos to represent “GMO babies.” These visuals were emotional triggers in their framing of CRISPR technology. The ethical/normative framing reflected the argument brought to the CJEU by a group of French actors involved in the court case which categorized CRISPR‐Cas as a GMO technology in the EU. These results suggest that the French MODC and their visualization was of influence on the EU decision‐making process; however, more research is needed to verify the role of this online debate in the decision‐making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important, although insufficiently answered, environmental governance research question concerns how exactly participation improves policy implementation at different scales. Numerous studies have highlighted important variables influencing the effectiveness of participatory processes. However, studies of participation tend to be strongly process‐oriented rather than system‐oriented and often overlook the reality that participatory processes are part of increasingly complex and broader decision‐making systems. By analyzing particular process‐system linkages, this paper contributes new knowledge regarding how participatory processes can influence decision‐making in polycentric governance systems. This study focuses on the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive, which aims for good ecological and chemical status in all European waters, in six German states with varied polycentric decision‐making structures. No direct decision‐making power was found to be associated with any of the participatory processes themselves. Rather, the power remained embedded within the other established institutional structures. Nevertheless, the participatory processes did still intend to influence decision‐making within those established structures through the aggregation and multiplication of information. The findings show that only a few representatives or a small proportion of the total number of decision‐makers are involved in participatory processes. Therefore, those processes may either affect decisions directly due to the binding nature of the decisions taken within participatory processes or alternatively have effects through more complex and nuanced multiplication routes following the conclusion of each participatory process. Moreover, all of the participatory processes examined in this study were reliant to some extent on such multiplication mechanisms to amplify the effects on decisions throughout the overall polycentric governance system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shared belief systems are generally assumed to forge policy networks. Empirical evidence whether and to what extend shared policy core beliefs create ally networks and under which circumstances shared policy core beliefs are not necessary to form these networks, however, is limited. Based on a novel inferential network approach in combination with mediation analysis, this study investigates the role of belief systems as a link between interest group type and policy preference congruence, ultimately leading to ally networks in the European Union. In order to measure the intervening effect of policy core beliefs, automated text analysis is used. Our results suggest that shared policy core beliefs are a strong mediator for members of the same interest group. In addition, "strange bedfellow" networks between NGOs and businesses do, in fact, lack belief congruence and emerge on issues with low potential for intergroup conflict. This paper makes a contribution to our understanding of ally network formation and adds to the emerging line of research which combines quantitative text with inferential network analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While UN reports indicate increasingly dire consequences of climate change, the political will to initiate rapid decarbonization is lacking, as nations fail to meet targets set by international agreements. Given these developments, this paper investigates the role of climate dread and fatalism in the discourse about climate science. We examine the treatment of fatalism in major theories of the policy process, noting that climate policy represents a relatively novel situation—in which a problem once deemed solvable is being redefined as an issue outside the realm of human control. Using automated content analysis, we examine how journalists and interest groups framed reports issued by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 2013 to 2022. We find limited changes in the tone and content of news stories and environmental groups' statements, and we suggest that these findings reflect under‐reaction of the political system to new information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public support is a key contributor to successful policy adoption and implementation. Given the urgency of climate change mitigation, scholars have explored various determinants that affect public support for climate change mitigation policy. However, the relative decisiveness of these factors in shaping public support is insufficiently examined. Therefore, we deploy interpretable machine learning to understand which factors, among many previously investigated, are most decisive for structuring public support for various climate change mitigation policies. In this paper, we particularly look at the decisiveness of problem definition for shaping public support among various factors. Using U.S national survey data, we find that how individuals define the issue of climate change is more decisive for structuring public support for promoting renewable energy and regulating pollutants to mitigate the risks associated with climate change. However, the results also indicate that the most decisive factors associated with public support vary depending on the types of mitigation policy. We conclude that different strategies should be utilized to increase public support for various climate change mitigation policy options. Our findings contribute to a scholarly understanding of the specific politics of problem definition in the context of environmental and climate change policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When advocating for policy change, coalitions rely on various elements and strategies of policy narratives, including emotions. However, past research on the Narrative Policy Framework, and more broadly on the policy process, has largely ignored the role of emotions. This paper argues that emotions, such as anger and fear, are central to how coalitions advocate for policy change. It explores the role of anger and fear in policy narratives by examining the oral testimony (n = 474) given over four legislative committee hearings in March 2019 concerning Colorado Senate Bill 19‐181. This bill changed the mission of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to prioritize protecting the environment and public health over oil and gas development. This research finds the coalition that successfully supported the bill used anger towards the oil and gas industry, while those that opposed the bill relied more on fear of the uncertain consequences of the bill. It also finds the coalition that opposed the bill relied on self‐characterization as heroes and victims, which was a failed strategy. The implications for this research on the Narrative Policy Framework and, more broadly, for the policy process and advocacy are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]