The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe

ABSTRACT The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) has generated considerable interest among European policy scholars. This article summarizes some of the more important findings concerning, and changes to, the ACF since the last major revision in 1993. These include: (1) a much clearer model of the individual; (2) a clearer, more integrated concept of ‘policy subsystem;’ (3) much greater attention to the problematic nature of collective behavior among people who share policy beliefs; and (4) some suggestions concerning methods of ascertaining the existence and membership of advocacy coalitions. The article also briefly addresses the ACF's applicability to parliamentary systems, to the countries of Eastern Europe, and to the dynamic politics of the European Union.

[1]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  Shared Beliefs and Imposed Interdependencies as Determinants of Ally Networks in Overlapping Subsystems , 1998 .

[2]  B. Wendon.  The Commission as image-venue entrepreneur in EU social policy , 1998 .

[3]  S. Mazey.  The European Union and women's rights: from the Europeanization of national agendas to the nationalization of a European agenda? , 1998 .

[4]  F. Scharpf.  Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centered Institutionalism In Policy Research , 1997 .

[5]  Marie Hojnacki,et al.  Interest Groups' Decisions to Join Alliances or Work Alone , 1997 .

[6]  David Coen,et al.  The evolution of the large firm as a political actor in the European Union , 1997 .

[7]  E. Lawlor.  Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach, edited by Paul Sabatier and Hank C. Jenkins-Smith. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993, 290 pp., $65.00 cloth, $24.95 paper , 1996 .

[8]  M. Mintrom,et al.  Advocacy Coalitions, Policy Entrepreneurs, and Policy Change , 1996 .

[9]  D. Josselin.  Domestic policy networks and European negotiations: Evidence from British and French financial services , 1996 .

[10]  Edella Schlager,et al.  A Comparison of Three Emerging Theories of the Policy Process , 1996 .

[11]  Political science and the comparative study of policy change in higher education: theoretico-methodological notes from a policy perspective , 1996 .

[12]  K. Lertzman,et al.  Learning and Change in the British Columbia Forest Policy Sector: A Consideration of Sabatier's Advocacy Coalition Framework , 1996, Canadian Journal of Political Science.

[13]  J. Richardson,et al.  Why does policy change over time? Adversarial policy communities, alternative policy arenas, and British trunk roads policy 1945–95 , 1996 .

[14]  D. Lowery,et al.  A Niche Theory of Interest Representation , 1996, The Journal of Politics.

[15]  C. Martin.  Nature or Nurture? Sources of Firm Preference for National Health Reform , 1995, American Political Science Review.

[16]  Edella Schlager,et al.  Policy making and collective action: Defining coalitions within the advocacy coalition framework , 1995 .

[17]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  The role of knowledge in the policy process , 1995 .

[18]  Comparing Lenses in Comparative Public Policy , 1995 .

[19]  John T. Scholz,et al.  Duty, Fear, and Tax Compliance: The Heuristic Basis of Citizenship Behavior , 1995 .

[20]  C. Radaelli.  Corporate Direct Taxation in the European Union: Explaining the Policy Process , 1995, Journal of Public Policy.

[21]  J. Peterson.  Decision‐making in the European Union: Towards a framework for analysis , 1995 .

[22]  Keith Dowding,et al.  Model or Metaphor? A Critical Review of the Policy Network Approach , 1995 .

[23]  P. Sabatier,et al.  The Views of Bay/Delta Water Policy Activists on Endangered Species Issues , 1995 .

[24]  J. Richardson.  EU water policy: Uncertain agendas, shifting networks and complex coalitions , 1994 .

[25]  Hank C. Jenkins-Smith,et al.  Evaluating the Advocacy Coalition Framework , 1994, Journal of Public Policy.

[26]  P. Deleon.  The Policy Sciences Redux: New Roads to Post‐positivism , 1994 .

[27]  Elisabeth R. Gerber,et al.  Endogenous Preferences and the Study of Institutions , 1993, American Political Science Review.

[28]  R P Barke,et al.  Politics and scientific expertise: scientists, risk perception, and nuclear waste policy. , 1993, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[29]  M. Petracca.  Response to Martin Shefter , 1993, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[30]  P. Hall.  Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain , 1993 .

[31]  P. Haas.  Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination , 1992, International Organization.

[32]  Colin J. Bennett,et al.  The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change , 1992 .

[33]  E. Lindquist.  Public managers and policy communities: learning to meet new challenges , 1992 .

[34]  Richard W. Waterman,et al.  The Dynamics of Political Control of the Bureaucracy , 1991, American Political Science Review.

[35]  J. Stewart.  Policy Models and Equal Educational Opportunity , 1991, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[36]  H. Jenkins-Smith.  Alternative Theories of the Policy Process: Reflections on Research Strategy for the Study of Nuclear Waste Policy , 1991, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[37]  S. Iyengar.  Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. , 1991 .

[38]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  Governing the commons , 1990 .

[39]  Paul J. Quirk,et al.  Democratic Politics and Policy Analysis , 1990 .

[40]  Terry M. Moe,et al.  Political Institutions: The Neglected Side of the Story , 1990 .

[41]  B. Guy Peters,et al.  Policy Paradox and Political Reason , 1988, American Political Science Review.

[42]  P. Sabatier,et al.  "Great Expectations and Mixed Performance. The Implementation of Higher Education Reforms in Europe", Ladislav Cerych, Paul Sabatier, 1986 : [recenzja] / Czesław Kupisiewicz. , 1988, American Political Science Review.

[43]  A. Tversky,et al.  Contrasting Rational and Psychological Analyses of Political Choice , 1988, American Political Science Review.

[44]  C. Davis,et al.  ANALYZING CHANGE IN PUBLIC LANDS POLICYMAKING: FROM SUBSYSTEMS TO ADVOCACY COALITIONS , 1988 .

[45]  H. T. HeintzJr..  Advocacy coalitions and the OCS leasing debate: A case study in policy evolution , 1988 .

[46]  P. Sabatier.  An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein , 1988 .

[47]  Is there policy-oriented learning in the analysis of natural gas policy issues? , 1988 .

[48]  Hank C. Jenkins-Smith,et al.  Symposium editors' introduction , 1988 .

[49]  H. Jenkins-Smith,et al.  Analytical debates and policy learning: analysis and change in the federal bureaucracy , 1988 .

[50]  D. Brady.  Critical Elections and Congressional Policy Making , 1988 .

[51]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  The Devil Shift: Perceptions and Misperceptions of Opponents , 1987 .

[52]  P. Sabatier.  Knowledge, Policy-Oriented Learning, and Policy Change , 1987 .

[53]  Stanley Rothman,et al.  Elite Ideology and Risk Perception in Nuclear Energy Policy , 1987, American Political Science Review.

[54]  Dorothy L. Robyn.  Braking the special interests: Trucking deregulation and the politics of policy reform , 1987 .

[55]  Alfred A. Marcus,et al.  AIRLINE DEREGULATION FACTORS AFFECTING THE CHOICE OF FIRM POLITICAL STRATEGY , 1986 .

[56]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis , 1986, Journal of Public Policy.

[57]  T. L. Schwartz.  The Logic of Collective Action , 1986 .

[58]  Jon Hurwitz,et al.  A Hierarchical Model of Attitude Constraint , 1985 .

[59]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science , 1985, American Political Science Review.

[60]  Keith T. Poole,et al.  Ideology, Party, and Voting in the U.S. Congress, 1959–1980 , 1985, American Political Science Review.

[61]  Daniel A. Mazmanian,et al.  Implementation and public policy , 1983 .

[62]  G. Majone,et al.  Policies as theories , 1980 .

[63]  L. Ross,et al.  Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence , 1979 .

[64]  Carl E. Van Horn,et al.  Policy implementation in the Federal system , 1979 .

[65]  A. Tesser.  Self-Generated Attitude Change , 1978 .

[66]  J. Berry.  Lobbying for the people , 1978 .

[67]  Charles O. Jones.  An introduction to the study of public policy , 1977 .

[68]  J. March,et al.  An introduction to models in the social sciences , 1975 .

[69]  Charles O. Jones,et al.  Clean Air: The Policies and Politics of Pollution Control. , 1975 .

[70]  A. Downs.  Up and Down with Ecology--The Issue Attention Cycle , 1972 .

[71]  Walter Dean Burnham,et al.  Critical Elections: And the Mainsprings of American Politics , 1970 .

[72]  COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY AND THE PERCEPTION OF OTHERS' OPINIONS , 1968 .

[73]  M. Olson,et al.  The Logic of Collective Action , 1965 .

[74]  Ashley L. Schiff.  Fire and Water: Scientific Heresy in the Forest Service , 1962 .