An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein

1988 ◽  
Vol 21 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 129-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul A. Sabatier
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Koebele

AbstractAs collaborative governance processes continue to grow in popularity, practitioners and policy scholars alike can benefit from the development of methods to better analyse and evaluate them. This article develops one such method by demonstrating how collaborative governance theory can be integrated with the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to better explain coalition dynamics, policy-oriented learning and policy change in collaborative contexts. I offer three theoretical propositions that suggest alternate relationships among ACF variables under collaborative governance arrangements and illustrate these propositions using interview data from an original case study of a collaborative governance process in Colorado, USA. The integration of collaborative governance theory with the ACF improves its application in collaborative contexts and provides new theoretical insights into the study and practice of collaborative governance.


Author(s):  
Paúl Cisneros

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Please check back later for the full article. Paul Sabatier and Hank Jenkins Smith introduced the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) in the late 1980s, to refine the theoretical and methodological tools available for the study of the policy process. In the past two decades, the framework has grown in use outside the United States, and it is now applied to study a broad range of policy arenas in all continents. ACF scholars have created a core community that regularly synthetizes findings from applications of the framework, giving the ACF the form of a true research program. The ACF has three principal theoretical domains: advocacy coalitions, policy subsystems, and policy change. Expectations about the interactions between and within these domains are contained in 15 main hypotheses. The ACF posits that advocacy coalitions and policy subsystems are the most efficient way to organize actors interested in the policy process for empirical research. The policy subsystem is the main unit of analysis in the ACF, and there are four paths leading to policy change. The aspect that has received more attention in existing applications is the effect that external events have on policy change, and some areas in need of refinement include: policy-oriented learning, interactions across subsystems, the theoretical foundations to identification of belief systems, and how the interactions between beliefs and interests affect coalition behavior.


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-541
Author(s):  
Stephanie L. DeMora ◽  
Loren Collingwood ◽  
Adriana Ninci

In recent years scholarship has drawn attention to the role of large multi-issue interest groups in policy networks and in public policy diffusion. This paper develops this field of study by demonstrating empirically the leverage of the ‘sustained organisational influence’ theory of policy diffusion. Specifically, it focuses on the role of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in diffusing the Stand Your Ground policy across US state legislatures. By comparing ALEC’s template policy to bills introduced and legislation subsequently enacted within state legislatures, we demonstrate that ALEC has positioned itself as a ‘super interest group’, exerting sustained organisational influence across an expanding number of states. In doing so, this paper moves theory beyond the typical advocacy coalition framework that implicitly assumes policymaking occurs discretely among specialists on an issue-by-issue basis. It also highlights the democratic implications of the role of super interest groups in shaping policy behind the scenes.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Chidi Wachuku

Advocacy coalition groups such as closed border supporters and open border advocates play a role in Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. Using political mobilization, they exploit pathways of policy change to promote policy objectives which favour or limit policy changes relating to the detention of asylum seekers and irregular migrants for immigration purposes in Canada. This paper investigates the role of actors from opposing advocacy coalition groups in promoting or challenging immigration detention in Canada. The paper adopts the theoretical underpinnings of “Advocacy Coalition Framework” as a lens of analysis to trace the role of advocacy coalition groups in recent history of Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. This paper assumes an actor-centric approach with an aim to contribute to current body of knowledge on Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. Keywords: immigration detention; open border advocates; closed border supporters; advocacy coalition groups; advocacy coalition framework; Canada; policy subsystem


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document