May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1848 | 997 | 144 |
Full Text Views | 238 | 15 | 0 |
PDF Downloads | 160 | 13 | 0 |
EPUB Downloads | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Policy positions are used extensively to explain coalition formation, advocacy success and policy outputs, and government consultations and stakeholder surveys are seen as important means of gathering data about policy actors’ positions. However, we know little about how accurately official consultations and stakeholder surveys reflect their views. This study compares advocacy organisations’ publicly stated positions in their responses to official consultations with their positions expressed in confidential surveys conducted by the authors. It compares three decision-making processes in Switzerland – in energy, climate and water protection – to analyse responses via two different types of data gathering methods. The results show a substantial divergence between official and private expressions of policy positions. Specific types of policy actors (losers), instruments (persuasive measures) and subsystems (collaborative network) produce more divergent positions. This has important methodological implications for comparative policy studies that use different data gathering methods and focus on different policy domains.
Ansell, C. and Gash, A. (2007) Collaborative governance in theory and practice, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4): 543–71. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mum032
Baumgartner, F.R. and Jones, B.D. (1991) Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems, Journal of Politics, 53(4): 1044–74. doi: 10.2307/2131866
Baumgartner, F.R., Berry, J.M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D.C. and Leech, B.L. (2009) Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Belli, R.F., Traugott, M.W., Young, M and McGonagle, K.A. (1999) Reducing vote overreporting in surveys: Social desirability, memory failure, and source monitoring, Public Opinion Quarterly, 90–108.
Benoit, K. and Laver, M. (2009) Party policy in modern democracies: Transferred to digital print, Routledge Research in Comparative Politics, 19 i.e. 18, London: Routledge, www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0654/2006014032-d.html
Bidwell, D. (2016) The effects of information on public attitudes toward renewable energy, Environment and Behavior, 48(6): 743–68. doi: 10.1177/0013916514554696
Bräuninger, T., Debus, M. and Müller, J. (2013) Estimating policy positions of political actors across countries and time, Working Paper 153, Mannheim: Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung.
Budge, I. and Klingemann, H.-D. (2010) Estimates for parties, electors, and governments, 1945– 1998, Mapping policy preferences, 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bundi, P., Varone, F., Gava, R., and Widmer, T. (2018) Self-selection and misreporting in legislative surveys, Political Science Research and Methods, 6(4): 771–89. doi: 10.1017/psrm.2016.35
Bunea, A. (2012) Issues, preferences and ties: determinants of interest groups’ preference attainment in the EU environmental policy, Journal of European Public Policy, 20(4): 552–70. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2012.726467
Bunea, A. and Ibenskas, R. (2015) Quantitative text analysis and the study of EU lobbying and interest groups, European Union Politics, 16(3): 429–55. doi: 10.1177/1465116515577821
Cairney, P. and Jones, M.D. (2016) Kingdon’s multiple streams approach: what is the empirical impact of this universal theory?, Policy Studies Journal, 44(1): 37–58. doi: 10.1111/psj.12111
Calanni, J.C., Siddiki, S.N., Weible, C.M. and Leach, W.D. (2015) Explaining coordination in collaborative partnerships and clarifying the scope of the belief homophily hypothesis, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(3), 901–27. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mut080
Coleman, J.S. (1974) Power and structure of society, New York: Norton.
Crowne, D.P. and Marlowe, D. (1960) A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4): 349–54.
DeMaio, D.J. (1984) Social desirability and survey measurement: A review, in C.E. Turner and E. Martin (ed), Surveying subjective phenomena, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 257–82.
Dermont, C., Ingold, K., Kammermann, L. and Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2017) Bringing the policy making perspective in: a political science approach to social acceptance, Energy Policy, 108: 359–68. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.05.062.
Fischer, M. (2014) Coalition structures and policy change in a consensus democracy, Policy Studies Journal, 42(3): 344–65. doi: 10.1111/psj.12064
Fischer, M., Ingold, K., Sciarini, P. and Varone, F. (2016) Dealing with bad guys: actor- and process-level determinants of the ‘devil shift’ in policy making, Journal of Public Policy, 36(2): 309–334. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X15000021
Guerrero, A.M., Bodin, Ö., McAllister, R.R.J., Wilson, K.A. (2015) Achieving social-ecological fit through bottom-up collaborative governance: an empirical investigation, Ecology and Society, 20(4). doi: 10.5751/ES-08035-200441
Groves, R.M., Fowler, Jr, F.J., Couper, M.P., Lepkowski, J.M., Singer, E. and Tourangeau, R. (2011) Survey Methodology, 561.
Heikkila, T. and Gerlak, A.K. (2013) Building a conceptual approach to collective learning: lessons for public policy scholars, Policy Studies Journal, 41(3): 484–512. doi: 10.1111/psj.12026
Henry, A.D. (2011) Ideology, power, and the structure of policy networks, Policy Studies Journal, 39(3): 361–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00413.x
Hill, M.J. and Varone, F. (2017) The public policy process (7th edn), London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.
Howlett, M. and Lejano, R.P. (2013) Tales from the crypt, Administration & Society, 45(3): 357–81. doi: 10.1177/0095399712459725
Ingold, K. (2011) Network structures within policy processes: coalitions, power, and brokerage in Swiss climate policy, Policy Studies Journal, 39(3): 435–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00416.x
Ingold, K. and Christopoulos, D. (2015) The network of political entrepreneurs: a case study of Swiss climate policy, In I.N. Aflaki (ed), Entrepreneurship in the Polis, Farnham: Ashgate.
Jourdain, C., Hug, S. and Varone, F. (2016) Lobbying across venues: an issue-tracing approach, State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 17(2): 127–53. doi: 10.1177/1532440016672272
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (eds) (2009) Choices, values, and frames, 10 printing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kammermann, L. and Strotz, C. (2014) Akteure und Koalitionen in der Schweizer Energiepolitik nach Fukushima, Master Thesis, Bern: University of Bern.
Klingemann, H.-D. (2008) Estimates for parties, electors, and governments in Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990–2003, Mapping policy preferences, 2, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Klüver, H. (2009) Measuring interest group influence using quantitative text analysis, European Union Politics, 10(4): 535–49. doi: 10.1177/1465116509346782
Knill, C. and Tosun, J. (2012) Public policy: A new introduction, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C., Neter, J. and Li, W. (2005) Applied linear statistical models (5th edn), Operations and Decision Sciences series, Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Landry, R. and Varone, F (2005) Choice of policy instruments: confronting the deductive and the interactive approaches, in P Eliadis, MM Hill, M Howlett (eds) Designing government: From instruments to governance, Montreal and Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Lasswell, H.D. (1956) The decision process, College Park, MD: University of Maryland Press.
Laumann, E.O. and Knoke, D. (1987) The organizational state: Social choice in national policy domains, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press (WIS-Edition).
Leach, W.D. and Sabatier, P.A. (2005) To trust an adversary: integrating rational and psychological models of collaborative policymaking, American Political Science Review, 99(4): 491–503. doi: 10.1017/S000305540505183X
Leach, W.D., Weible, C.M., Vince, S.R., Siddiki, S.N. and Calanni, J.C. (2014) Fostering learning through collaboration: knowledge acquisition and belief change in marine aquaculture partnerships, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3): 591–622. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mut011
Linder, S. and Peters, G. (1989) Instruments of government: perceptions and contexts, Journal for Public Policy, 9(1): 35–58. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X00007960
Markard, J.O., Suter, M. and Ingold, K. (2016) Socio-technical transitions and policy change: advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18: 215–37. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2015.05.003
Marks, G., Hooghe, L., Steenbergen, M.R. and Bakker, R. (2007) Crossvalidating data on party positioning on European integration, Electoral Studies, 26(1): 23–38. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2006.03.007
Metz, F. (2017) From network structure to policy design in water protection: A comparative perspective on micropollutants in the Rhine River Riparian countries, Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Montpetit, É. and Lachapelle, E. (2015) Can policy actors learn from academic scientists?, Environmental Politics, 24(5): 661–80. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2015.1027058
Moyson, S. (2017) Cognition and policy change: the consistency of policy learning in the advocacy coalition framework, Policy and Society, 36(2): 320–44. doi: 10.1080/14494035.2017.1322259
Sabatier, P., Hunter, S. and McLaughlin, S. (1987) The devil shift: perceptions and misperceptions of opponents, Western Political Quarterly, 40(3): 449–76. doi: 10.2307/448385
Sabatier, P.A. (ed) (1999) Theories of the policy process, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P.A. and Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (1993) Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sager, F. (2009) Governance and coercion, Political Studies, 57(3): 537–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00743.x
Schneider, A. and Ingram, H. (1993) Social construction of target populations: implications for politics and policy, American Political Science Review, 87(2): 334–47. doi: 10.2307/2939044
Slapin, J.B. and Proksch, S.-O. (2008) A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts, American Journal of Political Science, 52(3): 705–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00338.x
Steenbergen, M.R. and Jones, B.S. (2002) Modeling multilevel data structures, American Journal of Political Science, 46(1): 218–37 . doi: 10.2307/3088424
Tourangeau, R. and Yan, T. (2007) Sensitive questions in surveys, Psychological Bulletin, 133(5): 859–883 .
Varone, F., Ingold, K. and Jourdain, C. (2017a) Defending the status quo across venues and coalitions: evidence from California interest groups, Journal of Public Policy, 37(1): 1–26. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X16000179
Varone, F., Ingold, K., Jourdain, C. and Schneider, V. (2017b) Studying policy advocacy through social network analysis, European Political Science, 16(3): 322–36. doi: 10.1057/eps.2016.16
Vedung, E. (1998) Policy instruments: typologies and theories, In M.-L. Bemelmans-Videc, R.C. Rist, E. Vedung (eds) Carrots, sticks and sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation, New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers
Weible, C.M., Sabatier, P.A. and McQueen, K. (2009) Themes and variations: taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework, Policy Studies Journal, 37(1): 121–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x
Weible, C.M., Sabatier, P.A., Jenkins-Smith, H.C., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A.D. and deLeon, P. (2011) A quarter century of the advocacy coalition framework: an introduction to the special issue, Policy Studies Journal, 39(3): 349–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00412.x
Weible, C., Ingold, K., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A.D. and Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (2019) Sharpening Advocacy Coalitions, Policy Studies Journal, First published: 28 June 2019. doi: 10.1111/psj.12360
Wilder, M. (2015) What is a policy paradigm? Overcoming epistemological hurdles in cross-dispciplinary conceputal adaptation, In J. Hogan (ed) Policy paradigms in theory and practice: Discourses, ideas and anomalies in public policy dynamics, Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 19–42.
May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1848 | 997 | 144 |
Full Text Views | 238 | 15 | 0 |
PDF Downloads | 160 | 13 | 0 |
Institutional librarians can find more information about free trials here