policy subsystems
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

44
(FIVE YEARS 10)

H-INDEX

10
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-443
Author(s):  
Heber Silveira Rocha ◽  
Felipe Gonçalves Brasil

This article aims to discuss the role of policy subsystems in the public policy process, highlighting maintenance and change in their implementation. In particular, it analyzes the process of agenda-setting and policy formulation of the Política Nacional de Juventude [National Youth Policy] in Brazil during the Lula government, emphasizing the symbolic and political disputes around ideas and values conducted by the different actors that permeated the subsystems of this sectoral policy.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antti Gronow ◽  
Maria Brockhaus ◽  
Monica Di Gregorio ◽  
Aasa Karimo ◽  
Tuomas Ylä-Anttila

AbstractPolicy learning can alter the perceptions of both the seriousness and the causes of a policy problem, thus also altering the perceived need to do something about the problem. This then allows for the informed weighing of different policy options. Taking a social network perspective, we argue that the role of social influence as a driver of policy learning has been overlooked in the literature. Network research has shown that normatively laden belief change is likely to occur through complex contagion—a process in which an actor receives social reinforcement from more than one contact in its social network. We test the applicability of this idea to policy learning using node-level network regression models on a unique longitudinal policy network survey dataset concerning the Reducing Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) initiative in Brazil, Indonesia, and Vietnam. We find that network connections explain policy learning in Indonesia and Vietnam, where the policy subsystems are collaborative, but not in Brazil, where the level of conflict is higher and the subsystem is more established. The results suggest that policy learning is more likely to result from social influence and complex contagion in collaborative than in conflictual settings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 1711-1728
Author(s):  
Diana Cruz Rodrigues ◽  
Mário Vasconcellos Sobrinho ◽  
Ana Maria de Albuquerque Vasconcellos

Abstract The article discusses advocacy coalition formation and the roles of key actors in science, technology and innovation (ST&I) policies for social inclusion in a subnational context. The policy subsystem category and concept of advocacy coalition are used in the context of the advocacy coalition framework and address the need to understand the influences of key actors (policy broker and policy entrepreneur) on it. The policy subsystem was outlined using case-oriented research and the discourse was analyzed in order to understand the policy actors’ beliefs. The analysis of two cases of ST&I policy processes for social inclusion (assistive technology and social technology) highlighted policy broker and policy entrepreneur key roles in the emergence of policy subsystems, but had different effects on advocacy coalition formation. The policy entrepreneur had a closer relationship with advocacy coalition building when setting up regular mechanisms to share beliefs and policy-oriented learning, as well as taking initiatives to coordinate the collective action of members in the early advocacy coalition. Although relevant in agenda setting and maintaining a specific social inclusion agenda in the policy process, the policy broker did not achieve a positive relationship with advocacy coalition building. The article corroborates the possibility of incorporating the concept of policy entrepreneur in analyses of the advocacy coalition framework and highlights this actor’s characteristics through this analytical model.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 1711-1728
Author(s):  
Diana Cruz Rodrigues ◽  
Mário Vasconcellos Sobrinho ◽  
Ana Maria de Albuquerque Vasconcellos

Abstract The article discusses advocacy coalition formation and the roles of key actors in science, technology and innovation (ST&I) policies for social inclusion in a subnational context. The policy subsystem category and concept of advocacy coalition are used in the context of the advocacy coalition framework and address the need to understand the influences of key actors (policy broker and policy entrepreneur) on it. The policy subsystem was outlined using case-oriented research and the discourse was analyzed in order to understand the policy actors’ beliefs. The analysis of two cases of ST&I policy processes for social inclusion (assistive technology and social technology) highlighted policy broker and policy entrepreneur key roles in the emergence of policy subsystems, but had different effects on advocacy coalition formation. The policy entrepreneur had a closer relationship with advocacy coalition building when setting up regular mechanisms to share beliefs and policy-oriented learning, as well as taking initiatives to coordinate the collective action of members in the early advocacy coalition. Although relevant in agenda setting and maintaining a specific social inclusion agenda in the policy process, the policy broker did not achieve a positive relationship with advocacy coalition building. The article corroborates the possibility of incorporating the concept of policy entrepreneur in analyses of the advocacy coalition framework and highlights this actor’s characteristics through this analytical model.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document