The defining elements of advocacy coalitions: Continuing the search for explanations for coordination and coalition structures

Review of Policy Research

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 240-257

  Matti, Simon ^a   Sandström, Annica ^a,b  

^a LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Advocacy coalition framework; Beliefs; Carnivore management; Collaborative management; Governance; Natural resource management; Policy analysis; Policy networks; Social network analysis; Social networks

Indexed keywords

CARNIVORE; COLLECTIVE ACTION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; POLICY ANALYSIS; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL NETWORK;

SWEDEN;

EID: 84874687602     PISSN: 1541132X     EISSN: 15411338     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12011     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Baland, J.-M., & Platteau, J. P. (2006). Halting degradation of natural resources: Is there a role for rural communities? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Bill (2000/01:57). Sammanhållen rovdjurspolitik [A coherent system for carnivore management]. Stockholm: Swedish Parliamentary Record.
3. Bill (2008/09:210). En ny rovdjursförvaltning [A new system for carnivore management]. Stockholm; Swedish Parliamentary Record.
4. Borgatti, S. P. (2002). Netdraw. Included in UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
5. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
6. Bromley, D. W. (1992). Making the commons work. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.
7. Caprara, G. V., Schwartz, S. H., Capanna, C., Veccione, M., & Barbanelli, C. (2006). Personality and politics: Values, traits, and personal choice. Political Psychology, 27(1), 1-28.
8. Carlsson, L. (2000). Policy networks as collective action. Policy Studies Journal, 28(3), 502-520.
9. Carlsson, L., & Berkes, F. (2005). Co-management: Concepts and methodological implications. Journal of Environmental Management, 75, 65-76.
10. Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: Free Press.
11. deLeon, P. (1999). The stages approach to the policy process: What has it done? Where is it going? In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 19-34). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
12. Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The "new" environmental paradigm. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10-19.
13. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. The Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442.
14. Hall, P. M., & McGinty, P. (1997). Policy as the transformation of intentions: Producing program from statute. The Sociological Quarterly, 38(3), 439-467.
15. Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system (pp. 87-124). Washington, DC: American Enterprise.
16. Henry, A. D. (2011). Power and the structure of policy networks. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 361-383.
17. Henry, A. D., Lubell, M., & McCoy, M. (2010). Belief systems and social capital as drivers of policy network structure: The case of California regional planning. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(3), 419-444.
18. Hjern, B., & Porter, D. O. (1993). Implementation structures. A new unit of administrative analysis. In M. Hill (Ed.), The policy process. A reader (pp. 248-265). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
19. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
20. Hysing, E., & Olsson, J. (2008). Contextualising the advocacy coalition framework: Theorising change in Swedish forest policy. Environmental Politics, 17(5), 730-748.
21. Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. (2000). Modernization, cultural change and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65, 19-51.
22. Ingold, K. (2011). Network structures within policy processes: Coalitions, power, and brokerage in Swiss climate policy. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 435-459.
23. Jordan, G. (1990). Sub-governments, policy communities and networks: Refilling old bottles? Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(3), 319-338.
24. Jordan, G., & Schubert, K. (1992). A preliminary ordering of policy network labels. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1-2), 7-27.
25. Kickert, J. M., Klijn, E.-H., & Koopenjan, J. F. M. (1997). Managing complex networks. Strategies for the public sector. London: Sage Publications.
26. Matti, S., & Sandström, A. (2011). The rationale determining advocacy coalitions: Examining coordination networks and corresponding beliefs. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 385-410.
27. Olsson, P., Folke, C., & Berkes, F. (2004). Adaptive co-management for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Journal of Environmental Management, 34(1), 63-72.
28. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Parkinson, J. (2003). Legitimacy problems in deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 51, 180-196.
30. Parsons, W. (1995). Public policy. An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
31. Peffley, M., & Hurwitz, J. (1985). A hierarchical model of attitude constraint. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 871-890.
32. Pinkerton, E. (Ed.). (1989). Co-operative management of local fisheries. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
33. Putnam, R. (1976). The comparative study of political elites. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34. Regulation (2009:1474). Regulation on Game Management Delegations [Förordning om Viltförvaltningsdelegationer]. Stockholm: Swedish Parliamentary Record.
35. Rein, M., & Schön, D. (1993). Reframing policy discourse. In F. Fisher & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 145-166). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
36. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1990). Policy networks: A British perspective. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(3), 293-317.
37. Rohan, M. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1996). Value transmissions in families. In C. Seligman, J. P. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 253-276). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
38. Rohan, M. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1998). The products of socialization: A discussion of self-regulatory strategies and value systems. In J. Cooper & J. M. Darley (Eds.), Attribution and social interaction: The legacy of Edward E. Jones (pp. 279-292). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
39. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
40. Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129-168.
41. Sabatier, P. A., & Hunter, S. (1989). The incorporation of causal perceptions into models of elite belief systems. The Western Political Quarterly, 42(3), 229-261.
42. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds.). (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
43. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 117-166). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
44. Sabatier, P. A., Leach, W. D., Lubell, M., & Pelkey, N. W. (2005). Theoretical frameworks explaining partnership success. In P. A. Sabatier, W. Focht, M. Lubell, Z. Trachtenberg, A. Vedlitz, & M. Matlock (Eds.), Swimming upstream: Collaborative approaches to watershed management (pp. 173-200). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45. Sandström, C., & Eriksson, G. (2009). Om svenskars inställning till rovdjursfrågor [Swedes' attitudes toward carnivores]. (Rapport 2009:2). Umeå, Sweden: Umeå universitet.
46. Schlager, E. (1995). Policy making and collective action: Defining coalitions within the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Sciences, 28(2), 243-270.
47. Schlager, E., & Blomquist, W. (1996). A comparison of three emerging theories of the policy process. Political Research Quarterly, 49(3), 631-650.
48. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
49. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? The Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45.
50. Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 23-47.
51. Schwartz, S. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2-3), 137-182.
52. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmental concern. Human Ecology Review, 6, 81-97.
53. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Guagnano, G. A. (1995). Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(18), 1611-1636.
54. Stokman, F. N., & Berveling, J. (1998). Dynamic modeling of policy networks in Amsterdam. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(October), 577-601.
55. Stokman, F. N., & Zeggelink, E. P. H. (1996). Is politics power or policy driven? A comparative analysis of dynamic access models in policy networks. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 21, 77-111.
56. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57. Weible, C. M. (2005). Beliefs and policy influence: An advocacy coalition approach to policy networks. Political Research Quarterly, 58(3), 461-477.
58. Weible, C. M. (2007). An advocacy coalition framework approach to stakeholder analysis: Understanding the political context of California marine protected area policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 95-117.
59. Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2005). Comparing policy networks: Marine protected areas in California. Policy Studies Journal, 33(2), 181-201.
60. Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2009). Coalitions, science, and belief change: Comparing adversarial and collaborative policy subsystems. Policy Studies Journal, 37(2), 195-212.
61. Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 121-140.
62. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research, design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.