Identifying causal mechanisms of unexpected policy change: Accumulated punctuation in the field of lobbying transparency in Germany

IF 2.7 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Policy Analysis Pub Date : 2024-02-28 DOI:10.1002/epa2.1205
Maximilian Schiffers, Sandra Plümer
{"title":"Identifying causal mechanisms of unexpected policy change: Accumulated punctuation in the field of lobbying transparency in Germany","authors":"Maximilian Schiffers,&nbsp;Sandra Plümer","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent trends toward mechanistic approaches offer a new perspective in understanding policy change and stability. This paper analyzes causal mechanisms leading to unexpected policy change by using punctuated equilibrium theory. As empirical illustration, the paper presents a case study on the introduction of the German mandatory lobbying register in 2021 after a 16-year-long debate. Methodologically, the paper employs process tracing and qualitative content analysis to examine policy documents. We identify a combination of three mechanisms: end of a de-thematization of the policy issue, growing dominance of the issue network favoring stricter transparency regulations, and issue validation through the accumulation of scandals. Thus, policy change results from the descend of policy actors defending the status quo while those advocating for change ascend to an influential position, and actively exploit focusing events as fertile ground for reform. The paper contributes to a refined theoretical understanding of the causal mechanisms of policy change.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1205","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/epa2.1205","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent trends toward mechanistic approaches offer a new perspective in understanding policy change and stability. This paper analyzes causal mechanisms leading to unexpected policy change by using punctuated equilibrium theory. As empirical illustration, the paper presents a case study on the introduction of the German mandatory lobbying register in 2021 after a 16-year-long debate. Methodologically, the paper employs process tracing and qualitative content analysis to examine policy documents. We identify a combination of three mechanisms: end of a de-thematization of the policy issue, growing dominance of the issue network favoring stricter transparency regulations, and issue validation through the accumulation of scandals. Thus, policy change results from the descend of policy actors defending the status quo while those advocating for change ascend to an influential position, and actively exploit focusing events as fertile ground for reform. The paper contributes to a refined theoretical understanding of the causal mechanisms of policy change.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
识别意外政策变化的因果机制:德国游说透明度领域的累积标点符号
最近的趋势是采用机械论方法,这为理解政策的变化和稳定提供了一个新的视角。本文利用标点均衡理论分析了导致意外政策变化的因果机制。本文以德国经过长达 16 年的辩论于 2021 年引入强制性游说登记制度为例,进行了实证研究。在方法论上,本文采用过程追踪和定性内容分析来研究政策文件。我们发现了三种机制的结合:政策问题去主题化的终结、支持更严格透明度法规的问题网络的主导地位日益增强,以及通过丑闻的积累对问题进行验证。因此,政策变革源于维护现状的政策行动者的下台,而主张变革的政策行动者则上升到有影响力的位置,并积极利用焦点事件作为改革的沃土。本文有助于从理论上完善对政策变革因果机制的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Policy Analysis
European Policy Analysis Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Networks and perception in European policymaking Assessing policy capacity and policy effectiveness: A comparative study using sustainable governance indicators Is who they are, what they prefer? Understanding bureaucratic elites' policy preferences for European integration of government accounting Explaining differences in policy learning in the EU "Fit for 55” climate policy package
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1