LIST OF PANELS

One long-standing theme in policy process research is how policymaking evolves in different political-institutional contexts and policy subsystems. This work has been guided by theories and frameworks of the policy process, among them the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). Recent work on the ACF has identified areas where more empirical research is needed to further increase our understanding about how institutional factors influence the formation, development, and behavior of advocacy coalitions in the policy process. Relevant areas of inquiry include, but are not limited to, the role and importance of specific institutional features such as veto players, the level of consensus, and system openness. These attributes have been added to the ACF within the notion of “coalition opportunity structures” in an effort to clarify the terms for application of the framework outside American pluralism. Yet, more work remains to clarify how stable system parameters translate into more specific constraints and resources affecting policymaking in the long run. This panel collects empirical papers addressing the interplay between coalition opportunity structures and advocacy coalition behavior in different policy subsystems and countries. Papers can cover methodological and theoretical issues related to the relationship between political opportunity structures, advocacy coalition formation and maintenance, learning, policy change and stability. Questions the papers could address include, for example: (i) How do political institutions condition advocacy coalitions’ membership structure? (ii) How does the level of consensus and system openness influence advocacy coalitions’ resources and strategies? (iii) How do political institutions enable and constrain policy change? The panel welcomes empirical research based on a variety of methods for data collection and analysis.

One long-standing theme in policy process research is how policymaking evolves in different political-institutional contexts and systems. This work has been guided by theories and frameworks of the policy process, among them the Multiple Streams framework, the Punctuated Equilibrium framework, the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Each one of these frameworks is founded on a set of basic premises regarding the interplay between actors and their surrounding institutional contexts. The common assumption is that institutions in different ways enable and constrain policy action, which contributes to a broader understanding of policy change and stability. But even though prior research has advanced our knowledge about the role of these institutional properties, more empirical research is needed to clarify how political institutions condition policy change and stability. This panel seeks to address this problem through the lens of the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). Recent work on the ACF has identified areas where more empirical research is needed to further advance knowledge about the formation, development, and behavior of advocacy coalitions in the policy process (Jenkins-Smith, Nohrstedt, Weible and Sabatier 2014). This includes – but is not limited to – examination of the role and importance of specific institutional variables such as veto players, the level of consensus, and system openness. These attributes have been added to the ACF (within the notion of “coalition opportunity structures”) in an effort to clarify the terms for application of the framework outside American pluralism (Kübler 2001; Sabatier and Weible 2007). Since then, however, relatively few studies have empirically explored the importance and meaning of these institutional properties in policy subsystems. The panel collects empirical papers addressing the interplay between these institutional variables and advocacy coalition behavior in different policy subsystems and countries. Papers can cover methodological and theoretical issues related to the relationship between political opportunity structures, advocacy coalition formation and maintenance, learning, policy change and stability. Questions the papers could address include, for example: (i) How do political institutions condition advocacy coalitions’ membership structure? (ii) How does the level of consensus and system openness influence advocacy coalitions’ resources and strategies? (iii) How do political institutions enable and constrain policy change? Overall, by offering answers to these questions from different political systems and subsystem contexts, this panel will inform the broader literature on the relationship between institutional constraints and the politics of policy change and stability (e.g. Bennett and Howlett 1992; Béland 2009; Swank 2002; Goldstein and Keohane 1993).