Search

Research on agenda setting often requires long time frames to illustrate and explain the rise and fall of issues on agendas and the punctuated nature of policy change. But less common are studies which treat time itself as a variable that helps to explain the particular trajectory of a policy issue or set of issues. To appreciate the importance of timing, we must examine agenda setting and policy change processes around similar issues in two settings, where the timing and sequence of key events and strategies differ. This paper examines differences in agenda-setting and policy change around the issue of lawn care pesticides in the United States and Canada. I argue that the timing and sequencing of events, actor mobilization, and venue shifts significantly shaped the divergent paths of the conflicts. The relative mobilization of competing advocacy groups at the start of the campaigns, and successful venue shifts at key moments in the conflicts led to different policy outcomes in the two cases. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines municipal bylaw campaign to restrict lawn and garden pesticides in Canada from an agenda setting perspective. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public policy scholars are increasingly incorporating the notion of ?venue shopping? into their analyses of policy change. Venue shopping refers to the activities of advocacy groups and policymakers who seek out a decision setting where they can air their grievances with current policy and present alternative policy proposals. Studies of venue shopping recognize that advocacy coalitions who are intent on changing policy will ‘shop? around for a favorable venue, whether it is a court or a congressional committee, that is receptive to their claims about the nature of a policy problem and its solution. Such activities can lead to dramatic changes in policy if a new policy image is adopted and a new set of institutions achieves some control over an issue. Venue shopping is an integral part of the policy process, and at the heart of many political strategies. But the practice of venue shopping is often more complex than some studies suggest, and an oversimplified portrayal of venue shopping runs the risk of overstating the opportunities for and frequency of policy change. This paper supports the general theory of venue shopping but presents a more complicated analysis of its practice than most empirical studies to date. I focus in particular on the motivations of advocacy groups who may, or may not, search for alternative policy venues. The paper begins with a general discussion of venue shopping and its relationship to policy change. I then review several assumptions implicit in theories of venue shopping, and raise questions about some aspects of them. The final part of the paper presents evidence from a case study of forest policy advocacy in Canada to illustrate the complexity of venue shopping strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]