| 来源类型 | Article
|
| 规范类型 | 其他
|
| DOI | 10.1068/c9810j
|
| ISBN | 0263-774X
|
| ISSN | 0263-774X
|
| Policy networks and advocacy coalitions: explaining policy change and stability in UK industrial pollution policy? |
| Smith, Adrian
|
| 发表日期 | 2000-01
|
| 出处 | Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
|
| 出版者 | Pion
|
| 出版年 | 2000
|
| 页码 | 95-114
|
| 语种 | 英语
|
| 摘要 | Policy network analysis (PNA) and the advocacy coalition framework (ACF) are relatively recent additions to the toolbox of policy analysis. The author explores the strengths and limitations of each through comparative application. The two frameworks are used to analyse policy change and stability in the UK industrial pollution sector over a period of more than twenty-five years. Innovations derived from policy-oriented learning generated in the 1970s were initially rejected before being implemented fourteen years later. The case study illustrates the limits of both theories. Change was not an open competition between advocates of different core policy beliefs. Nevertheless the ACF analysis of contrasting, broadly defined, beliefs can help explain some events beyond policy networks. Resource interdependencies in the policy network provide a good explanation for the stabilities exhibited in the case study. PNA can also explain why some actors were excluded from the policy process whereas others exercised decisionmaking and nondecisionmaking power. In combination, the more fundamental agency-oriented and structure-oriented emphases on beliefs and resources associated with the ACF and PNA, respectively, can enrich policy analysis |
| URL | http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/15860/
|
| 来源智库 | Science Policy Research Unit (United Kingdom)
|
| 引用统计 |
|
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物
|
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/466945
|
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714 |
Smith, Adrian. Policy networks and advocacy coalitions: explaining policy change and stability in UK industrial pollution policy?. 2000.
|
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
