An Examination of Policy Narratives in Agricultural Biotechnology Policy in India

World Affairs ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 181 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juhi Huda

The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) focuses attention on the importance of narratives in policy debates and on their empirical analysis. While NPF has become an increasingly important and accepted approach to studying the policy process, the vast majority of research applies it to the policy contexts of the United States, which limits tests of its potential generalizability and responsiveness to cultural specificity. To broaden the contextual scope of the approach, this study applies the NPF to a non-U.S. policy context through examining the controversial issue of agricultural biotechnology policy in India. It analyzes media coverage from leading English newspapers in India to explore the strategic use of narrative variables in policy narratives. In doing so, it highlights the important role of incomplete policy narratives in policy debates and outcomes. Policy narratives do not always contain a full suite of narrative components, and yet they may be among the most common messages received by the public and political actors. Through an analysis of incomplete narratives, this study attempts to further refine the definition of policy narratives and consider which narratives are important from empirical and audience reception perspectives. Results show that incomplete narratives occur more frequently and contain relevant narrative variables.

Author(s):  
Sergei A. Samoilenko ◽  
Andrey Miroshnichenko

This chapter contributes to scholarship in the fields of media ecology and political communication by investigating the effects of the Trump bump in media-driven democracy. Specifically, it explains how the media's obsession with Donald Trump allowed them to capitalize on his political brand, which in turn contributed to changing the tone of political discourse in the United States. The effects of mediatization, including click-bait framing, increased negativity, and person-centered media coverage, had a distinct impact on the behavior of political actors and the political system as a whole. The dominance of marketing logic in contemporary media democracies provides a compelling argument for critical investigation of brand appropriation in political communication and its impact on the state of democracy. This chapter advocates for the further investigation of the current media ecosystem in order to move toward a public deliberation model that would support enhanced media literacy and citizen engagement in public policy debates.


2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Jeanne M. Powers ◽  
Kathryn P. Chapman

Background In the past decade, the laws governing teachers’ employment have been at the center of legal and political conflicts across the United States. Vergara v. California challenged five California state statutes that provide employment protections for teachers. In June 2014, a California lower court declared the statutes unconstitutional because they exposed students to “grossly ineffective teachers.” Purpose The purpose of the article is to document and analyze how Vergara was presented in the print news media. It is important to understand how the print news media presents education policy debates to the public, because the print news media shapes the general public's understanding of education and other public policy debates by providing frames and themes for interpreting the issues in question and people associated with them. Research Design Using the social construction of target populations and political spectacle as conceptual lenses, we conducted a content analysis of print news media articles on the Vergara case published between June 2012 and November 2014. We provide a descriptive overview of the full corpus of articles published during this period and a thematic analysis of the 65 unique news articles published in the aftermath of the decision. The latter focuses on news articles because they are intended to provide more objective coverage of the case than opinions or editorials. Findings In the print news media coverage, the word “teacher” was often paired with a negative qualifier, which suggests that Vergara was an effort to change the relatively advantaged social construction of teachers. Similarly, metaphors and the illusion of rationality associated with political spectacle were used in ways that bolstered the plaintiffs’ claims. While Vergara consumed a substantial amount of philanthropic and public dollars, ultimately it did not change the policies that govern teachers’ employment in California. Vergara may have been more successful in shaping the general public's perceptions of teachers and the conditions of teachers’ employment in the period following the trial.


2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELIZABETH A. SHANAHAN ◽  
MARK K. MCBETH ◽  
PAUL L. HATHAWAY

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 1632-1653
Author(s):  
Damasio Duval Rodrigues Neto ◽  
Márcio Barcelos

Abstract This study applies the “Narrative Policy Framework” (NPF) to the affirmative action policy process of the Federal University of Pelotas (UFPEL) and proposes theoretical intersection between the NPF and agenda setting literature, seeking to find out the role of policy narratives in policy processes. NPF is an empiric-oriented framework that posits that the policy-makers’ stories have generalizable components and are built and crafted in accordance to their ideas. These are policy narratives, and are at the center of the policy process. By analyzing formulation stages of public policy and referring to ideas and narratives, the NPF refers to the agenda setting literature and provides means for empirical research of agenda setting concepts. The study undertook analysis of regulatory outputs and semi-structured interviews. Findings indicate that policy narratives have affected institutional regulatory outputs regarding UFPel’s affirmative action policies.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (02) ◽  
pp. 251-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jules Boykoff

AbstractMuch was at stake at the 2010 United Nations climate change conference in Cancún, Mexico. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was being challenged by the world's two largest greenhouse gas emitters, China and the United States, after these countries reached a tenuous backroom deal one year earlier in Copenhagen. Meanwhile, scientific studies were warning of serious and severe climate change. This article analyzes newspaper articles and television segments from the US media that appeared during the timeframe of the Cancún conference, focusing on two key facets of coverage that continue to be important as negotiations proceed: the economic impacts and opportunities that climate change creates and the role that China plays in negotiations. I also examine which sources were allowed through the news gates and which ones were marginalized. I find that the US media discussed economic opportunities more frequently than economic impacts and that the media treated China in an even-handed way. Established political actors dominated coverage, followed by representatives of nongovernmental organizations and the business community. Meanwhile, grassroots activists and indigenous voices were marginalized.


Human Affairs ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcela Veselková

AbstractThis paper discusses the theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the use or non-use of expert-based information in policy-making. Special attention is paid to the Narrative Policy Framework introduced by Jones & McBeth in 2010. This theory of the policy process adopts a quantitative, structuralist and positivist approach to the study of policy narratives. The Narrative Policy Framework is useful for the analysis of the use of expert-based information to resolve so-called wicked problems, which are characterized by intense value-based conflict between policy coalitions. The methodological approach of the Narrative Policy Framework is illustrated using the policy issue of mandatory vaccination.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. xviii-xxii
Author(s):  
Kaitlyn Laws ◽  
Ravichandran Ammigan

We’ve all seen the numbers—In 2016, the Institute of International Education (2020) reported a 3% decrease in first-time enrollment of international students in the United States, amounting to nearly 10,000 students. This initial dip, a first since the Institute for International Education began collecting data in 2005, has continued in both 2017 and 2018 (see Table 1). Some in the field have attributed the trend to an increase in the price of education, heightened global competitiveness, and a decrease in sponsored scholarships from key markets. However, many have also pointed to the U.S. political climate following the election of President Donald Trump (Glum, 2017; Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017; Saul, 2018; Smith, 2017). While some international educators have called the impact of Trump immigration policies on international college students trivial, other institutions have noted concerns over the experiences of international students (Deruy, 2017; Pottie-Sherman, 2018). In response to the 2016 election, a number of institutions quickly reacted with messages of support to their international community. Universities across the nation leapt to action. Most notably, the #YouAreWelcomeHere campaign swept the nation, with more than 380 institutions of higher education participating (NAFSA, 2020). With its “America First'” vision, the Trump administration has focused its efforts in three main areas of immigration: border security, interior enforcement, and employment (The White House, 2018). The President has encountered setbacks in achieving some of his goals, but many proposed changes in immigration law have succeeded (Pierce, 2019). Among his most recent actions are presidential proclamations that suspend certain employment-based visas to preserve domestic jobs and support the U.S. economic recovery amid the Coronavirus pandemic. In order to pursue its aggressive immigration agenda, the administration has crafted and adopted a powerful narrative for the American public that has been distributed through digital and news media. It can be argued that this narrative, employed as a tool for supporting policy change, has had an impact on the feelings of safety, security, and belongingness for many people, including international students and scholars in the United States.  The Narrative Policy Framework (Shanahan et al., 2018) argues that stories are integral in shaping the entire policy cycle, from agenda setting through implementation. It acknowledges a narrative’s four main structural elements: setting, characters, plot, and the moral of the story. Beyond its structure, the Narrative Policy Framework also suggests that policy actors may utilize strategies to move their audiences in one direction or another, serving as a powerful catalyst for change (Shanahan et al., 2018). Burgeoning literature in the field of international student services hints at this connection between an increasingly unwelcoming environment for international students and their growing feelings of insecurity (Bartram, 2018; Mathies & Weimer, 2018; Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2017). International student support offices across the world may vary in organizational structure and the range of services they provide, but all share the responsibility of assisting international students in their educational and cultural transition to campus (Ammigan & Perez-Encinas, 2018; Briggs & Ammigan, 2017). As international educators, it is our responsibility to reach across disciplines for tools that help us better understand and serve our communities. While some of us have institutional responsibilities to administer regulatory compliance with shifting immigration policies and procedures, we must also acknowledge that the support model for our students may need to be recalibrated so we can directly address the potential impact of other environmental factors, including political narratives. Below, we offer a few recommendations for administrators and support staff to consider as they bolster support for their international community. Incidentally, these propositions might also be relevant to many non-U.S. institutions that are addressing similar situations and issues on their respective campuses internationally. Provide access to accurate immigration advising. Amid confusion and varying perspectives on changing immigration policies, it is important for designated university officials to remain accessible to students and scholars who seek timely and factual guidance on their visa status and employment options as per official government regulations. Establish an open forum for addressing concerns. Some students, despite struggling to understand the effects of a changing political climate, may experience social withdrawal and hesitate to come forward. Institutions must consider creating a safe and supportive space for dialogue. This also includes regularly assessing the needs and challenges of their students. Partner with service offices, academic units, and student organizations on campus to develop collaborative resources that can help address the overwhelming fears and anxieties among international students and scholars, and ensure their wellbeing and academic success. Develop initiatives with local government and community organizations to create a welcoming home and friendly setting for international visitors. International student support offices can play a leadership role in developing supportive networks and connections with the wider community. Implement culturally sensitive orientation programs and early interventions that support international students during times of high stress to help them with their academic, social, and cultural adjustment to campus. As university administrators and staff recognize the impact of political narratives on the wellbeing of our international communities, it is critical that we remain proactive in providing support services that are intentional and inclusive in nature. Such initiatives not only enhance the student experience but can help advance diversity and internationalization efforts across the institution.


Dynamis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-347
Author(s):  
Kimberly Probolus

This paper explores how discourses of giftedness informed attitudes towards parenting in the United States from 1920 to 1960. Using psychologists’ studies of giftedness, media coverage of the topic, and guidebooks for parents of gifted children, I argue that giftedness emerged in the 1910s, and by the 1920s addressed a newly limited definition of intelligence and problems in urban public education, coinciding with the popularity of the culture and personality school. Scholarly debates about giftedness traveled from the academy to the wider public through the media and guidebooks for parents. Media coverage brought awareness of the problem of the neglected gifted student, and guidebooks offered parents practical suggestions about how to raise gifted children. I show that the discourse contributed to racial segregation in American schools and classrooms by using merit to determine access to educa- tional opportunity. Experts’ advice about giftedness also altered expectations about childrearing and encouraged parents to become more involved in their child’s educational development. This argument puts the history of psychology in conversation with histories of parenting, and it evidences how the discourse on giftedness impacted institutional inequality both through merit-based gifted and talented programs and by impacting ideologies of parenting. Thus, I provide a more comprehensive account of how and why giftedness profoundly shaped both the school and the home. This article considers the cultural work the discourse accomplished; it gave the public the impression that disparities in educational achievement between individuals and groups could be explained by the parenting a child received, putting significant pressure on all parents to make educational achievement a top priority for their child.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document