The Multiple Streams Framework and Non-Politicized Issues: The Case of Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide

IF 1.5 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics & Policy Pub Date : 2025-03-10 DOI:10.1111/polp.70016
Ian Bache
{"title":"The Multiple Streams Framework and Non-Politicized Issues: The Case of Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide","authors":"Ian Bache","doi":"10.1111/polp.70016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>This article applies agenda-setting theory, and the multiple streams framework in particular, to consider why assisted dying/assisted suicide (AD/AS) has not been legalized in the United Kingdom, and also what the prospects are for policy change. AD/AS provides an interesting test case for agenda-setting theory, which tends to focus on governmental agendas (Kingdon 2011, 3) and has thus been said to ‘say less about the policy outcomes of such nonpoliticized policy processes’ (Green-Pedersen 2007, 286) that generally characterize morality polices. Agenda-setting theory provides valuable insights into this case, which reveals an important role for government even on this free vote matter of conscience. However, the case highlights aspects of agenda-setting theory relating to assumptions on legitimacy and the power of persuasion that fare less well, and which have implications for the future study of morality policies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Related Articles</h3>\n \n <p>Angervil, G. 2021. “A Comprehensive Application of Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework: An Analysis of the Obama Administration's No Child Left Behind Waiver Policy.” <i>Politics &amp; Policy</i> 49, no. 5: 980–1020. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12432.</p>\n \n <p>Knackmuhs, E., Farmer, J., and Knapp, D. 2020. “The Interaction of Policy Narratives, Moral Politics, and Criminal Justice Policy Beliefs.” <i>Politics &amp; Policy</i> 48, no. 2: 288–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12343.</p>\n \n <p>Silagadze, N. 2021. “Abortion Referendums: Is There a Recipe for Success?” <i>Politics &amp; Policy</i> 49, no. 2: 352–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12398.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51679,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Policy","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/polp.70016","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.70016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article applies agenda-setting theory, and the multiple streams framework in particular, to consider why assisted dying/assisted suicide (AD/AS) has not been legalized in the United Kingdom, and also what the prospects are for policy change. AD/AS provides an interesting test case for agenda-setting theory, which tends to focus on governmental agendas (Kingdon 2011, 3) and has thus been said to ‘say less about the policy outcomes of such nonpoliticized policy processes’ (Green-Pedersen 2007, 286) that generally characterize morality polices. Agenda-setting theory provides valuable insights into this case, which reveals an important role for government even on this free vote matter of conscience. However, the case highlights aspects of agenda-setting theory relating to assumptions on legitimacy and the power of persuasion that fare less well, and which have implications for the future study of morality policies.

Related Articles

Angervil, G. 2021. “A Comprehensive Application of Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework: An Analysis of the Obama Administration's No Child Left Behind Waiver Policy.” Politics & Policy 49, no. 5: 980–1020. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12432.

Knackmuhs, E., Farmer, J., and Knapp, D. 2020. “The Interaction of Policy Narratives, Moral Politics, and Criminal Justice Policy Beliefs.” Politics & Policy 48, no. 2: 288–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12343.

Silagadze, N. 2021. “Abortion Referendums: Is There a Recipe for Success?” Politics & Policy 49, no. 2: 352–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12398.

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
多流框架和非政治化问题:协助死亡/协助自杀的情况
本文运用议程设置理论,特别是多流框架,来考虑为什么协助死亡/协助自杀(AD/AS)在英国没有合法化,以及政策变化的前景。AD/AS为议程设置理论提供了一个有趣的测试案例,该理论倾向于关注政府议程(Kingdon 2011, 3),因此被认为“对这种非政治化政策过程的政策结果说得较少”(Green-Pedersen 2007, 286),这通常是道德政策的特征。议程设置理论为这个案例提供了有价值的见解,它揭示了政府在这个自由投票的良心问题上的重要作用。然而,该案例突出了议程设置理论的一些方面,这些方面与合法性和说服力的假设有关,效果不太好,这对未来的道德政策研究有影响。相关文章:杨建军,杨建军。“金登多流框架的综合应用:对奥巴马政府“不让一个孩子掉队”豁免政策的分析”政治,政策49,不。5: 980 - 1020。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12432。Knackmuhs, E., Farmer, J.和Knapp, D. 2020。政策叙事、道德政治与刑事司法政策信念的互动政治,48号政策,不。2: 288 - 313。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12343。Silagadze, N. 2021。“堕胎公投:有成功的秘诀吗?”政治,政策49,不。2: 352 - 389。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12398。
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
Politics & Policy
Politics & Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
23.10%
发文量
61
期刊最新文献
Historical Institutionalism and Transnational Influence: Social Policy Responses to the Great Depression in the United States and Canada Terrorism and the Shadow Economy: A Panel Analysis for Africa The Conditions for Emissions: Exploring the Dynamics of Carbon Policy Emissions Across the United States Policy Innovation in Barcelona and Utrecht: The Role of Advocacy Coalitions in Multilevel Contexts Why We Cannot Separate Evidence From Values in Public Policy
×
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:604180095
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