Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder
The first issue of European Policy Analysis (EPA) in 2025 demonstrates how the various political crises can act as a magnifying glass to further emphasize the explanatory power and relevance of policy process research. This applies both to the long-term economic and social challenges in Europe and to short-term and temporary crises, although they have to be treated very differently (Mavrot et al., 2024). With regard to lessons learned and future resilience, it is important to systematically analyze the experiences of past crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy process research can make an important contribution here, particularly with regard to the role of science in the policy process (Capano et al., 2024; Chen & Zhang, 2024; Hadorn et al., 2022; Weible et al., 2020). One of the important lessons learned was the special role of scientists not only in advising politicians but also in political communication. Here, Switzerland's small federal democracy, with its special direct democratic elements offers a special environment. Ksinsik (2025) combines concepts of science communication with the Narrative Policy Framework in a paper that has won the Best Paper Award of the ECPR Standing Group of Public Policy. The study looks at the special way Swiss scientists worked with policy discussions during the pandemic. It uses an index from NPF research to measure the devil-angel shift (Chang & Koebele, 2020). By analyzing Swiss newspaper articles, the research reveals that scientists employed narratives more frequently when providing problem advice compared to policy advice.
Equally focusing on the domestic impact of the COVID-19 crisis, Demler (2025) investigates changing party competition and political actors' positions in Germany as a result of the crisis. Just as the first article in this issue, she ties in with similar analyses of COVID-19 discourses across countries (Lemor & Montpetit, 2024; Persson et al., 2022) and looks at the discourse in German newspapers to extract information on the positions of political actors and measures their centrality in the discourse network. The findings indicate that those actors that are central in the discourse are characterized by being part of the executive branch of the Länder and federal level and having candidate status. Hence, the polarization of discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic was less an issue of government versus opposition but between legislative and executive branch, whereby crisis communication apparently was also actively used for personal profile-building.
In the third contribution to this issue, Cantó et al. (2025) examine how and why macroeconomic factors such as economic development moderate the relationship between European Structural and Investment Funds and EU Support. The empirical basis of this study consists of Eu
《欧洲政策分析》(EPA)在2025年的第一期展示了各种政治危机如何作为放大镜,进一步强调政策过程研究的解释力和相关性。这既适用于欧洲的长期经济和社会挑战,也适用于短期和暂时的危机,尽管它们必须得到非常不同的对待(Mavrot et al., 2024)。关于吸取的教训和未来的复原力,重要的是系统分析过去危机的经验,如COVID-19大流行。政策过程研究可以在这方面做出重要贡献,特别是关于科学在政策过程中的作用(Capano et al., 2024;陈,张,2024;Hadorn et al., 2022;Weible et al., 2020)。从中得到的一个重要教训是,科学家不仅在向政治家提供建议方面,而且在政治传播方面发挥着特殊作用。在这里,瑞士的小型联邦民主,以其特殊的直接民主因素提供了特殊的环境。Ksinsik(2025)在一篇论文中结合了科学传播与叙事政策框架的概念,该论文获得了ECPR公共政策常设小组的最佳论文奖。这项研究着眼于瑞士科学家在大流行期间参与政策讨论的特殊方式。它使用了NPF研究中的一个指数来衡量魔鬼-天使转换(Chang &;Koebele, 2020)。通过分析瑞士报纸上的文章,这项研究表明,与提供政策建议相比,科学家在提供问题建议时更频繁地使用叙述。Demler(2025)同样关注COVID-19危机对国内的影响,调查了危机导致德国政党竞争和政治角色立场的变化。正如本期的第一篇文章一样,她与各国对COVID-19话语的类似分析联系在一起(Lemor &;Montpetit, 2024;Persson et al., 2022),并查看德国报纸的话语,以提取有关政治行为者立场的信息,并衡量其在话语网络中的中心性。研究结果表明,在话语中处于中心地位的行为者的特点是他们是Länder和联邦一级行政部门的一部分,并且具有候选人身份。因此,在新冠肺炎大流行期间,话语的两极分化与其说是政府与反对派之间的问题,不如说是立法部门与行政部门之间的问题,危机沟通显然也被积极用于个人形象的建立。在本问题的第三篇文章中,Cantó等人(2025)研究了经济发展等宏观经济因素如何以及为什么会调节欧洲结构和投资基金与欧盟支持之间的关系。本研究的实证基础包括1990 - 2019年西班牙的欧洲晴雨表波和区域经济指标。本文实证验证了功利主义理论,该理论认为通过欧盟资助的经济再分配可以增强公众对欧盟的支持,特别是在经济落后地区。研究结果强调了区域经济背景在塑造个体对欧盟干预的反应方面的重要作用。它强调需要提高区域治理质量,以提高esf的有效性,表明治理结构在决定欧盟政策的结果方面发挥着至关重要的作用。这种对政策对个人的长期影响的调查,考虑到诸如欧洲身份和就业状况等控制变量,可以与政策过程研究的各种概念联系起来。其中包括政策反馈理论(Mettler &;SoRelle, 2023)和社会身份(b郁闷,2017;Daneri et al., 2021)。从国际比较的角度继续研究,考虑到不同类型的资本主义(Hall &;Soskice, 2001),福利国家(Esping-Andersen, 1996),或民主(Lijphart, 2012),例如。本期的第四篇文章也讨论了欧盟政策的影响,即欧盟蓝卡指令。该立法框架于2009年建立,并于2021年进行了修订,以吸引和留住来自非欧盟国家的高技能工人。蓝卡受到了广泛的批评,在一些(前)成员国(英国、爱尔兰和丹麦)从未应用过。Bešić等人(2025)使用政策翻译的概念(Freeman, 2009;Stone, 2012)强调,政策在跨司法管辖区移动时,通过模仿、中介和编辑的过程进行重塑。他们认为,蓝卡最初是作为技术移民的协调工具,但在国家偏好和制度框架的影响下,它经历了不断的转变。 通过强调翻译的迭代性,该研究展示了欧盟层面的政策和国家计划如何相互影响和适应,提供了对线性扩散模型之外的政策协调的细致理解。这些发现强调了实现欧盟范围内政策一致性的复杂性,为公共政策研究多层次治理和制度相互作用的动态提供了有价值的见解。在进一步的讨论中,这一特定于欧盟的发现可以为政策设计的重要研究做出贡献(Howlett &;雷纳,2007)。同样关注欧盟层面,Fernández-Pasarín和Lanaia(2025)在本期的第五篇文章中提到了恢复和复原力基金(RRF),该基金是作为缓冲2019冠状病毒病危机负面经济影响的额外工具而通过和实施的。欧洲稳定机制基于政府间协调的理念,而区域稳定机制则允许超国家层面设定条件并评估各国的表现。在这种情况下,超国家层面的代表是欧盟委员会,而不是欧洲议会,它没有设法维护自己作为预算当局(Gianna, 2025)。这两种工具遵循不同的逻辑,本文将其追溯到制度主义和基于行为者的解释。它强调了路径依赖是设计支出条件制度和形成参与者战略行为偏好的关键因素。除了在危机发生时进行应对外,政府还应该为未来的危机做好准备。这样做的方法之一是让“普通公民”做好应对此类危机的准备。Friede(2025)比较了芬兰、拉脱维亚和德国在对公众负责的危机准备方面所做的努力,特别关注了所针对的道德准则,并以战争风险为例。芬兰以团结和团结应对危机为中心,拉脱维亚强调一体化力量,而德国的特点是在警告和保证之间传递出相当不一致的信息。这篇文章提醒我们,虽然研究对危机的反应和反应以及危机管理很重要,但我们也不应该忘记为未来的危机做好准备。然而,有一种强烈的风险风险沟通和危机纠缠的制备与军事化。”欧洲政策分析”(EPA) 2025年第一期内容展示了不同政治危机如何能充当放大镜,进一步强调政策过程研究的解释力和相关性。这既适用于欧洲的长期经济挑战和社会挑战,也适用于短期危机和临时危机,尽管必须以非常不同的方式应对这些挑战与危机(Mavrot et al ., 2024)。至于经验教训和未来的复原力, 重要的是系统分析以往危机 (例如新冠肺炎大流行) 的经历。政策过程研究能对此作重要贡献,特别是关于科学在政策过程中的作用(Capano et al ., 2024;陈,张,2024;Hadorn et al., 2022;Weible et al., 2020)。重要的经验之一则是, 科学家不仅在为政治家提供建议方面发挥着特殊作用, 而且在政治传播中也发挥着特殊作用。对此,瑞士的小联邦民主及其特殊的直接民主要素提供了一个特殊环境.Ksinsik(2025)在一篇论文中将科学传播的概念与叙事政策框架(NPF)相结合,该论文获得了ECPR公共政策常设小组的最佳论文奖。该研究考察了瑞士科学家在大流行期间处理政策讨论的特殊方式。“Koebele, 2020)。通过分析瑞士报纸文章,该研究表明,与政策建议相比,科学家在提供问题建议时更频繁地使用叙事.Demler(2025)同样聚焦于新冠疫情对国内的影响,她研究了危机导致的德国政党竞争变化以及政治行动者地位的变化。莱莫尔&;Montpetit, 2024;佩尔松et al ., 2022),研究了德国报纸的话语,以提取有关政治行动者地位的信息,并衡量
{"title":"Crisis management across Europe","authors":"Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1238","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1238","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The first issue of European Policy Analysis (EPA) in 2025 demonstrates how the various political crises can act as a magnifying glass to further emphasize the explanatory power and relevance of policy process research. This applies both to the long-term economic and social challenges in Europe and to short-term and temporary crises, although they have to be treated very differently (Mavrot et al., <span>2024</span>). With regard to lessons learned and future resilience, it is important to systematically analyze the experiences of past crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy process research can make an important contribution here, particularly with regard to the role of science in the policy process (Capano et al., <span>2024</span>; Chen & Zhang, <span>2024</span>; Hadorn et al., <span>2022</span>; Weible et al., <span>2020</span>). One of the important lessons learned was the special role of scientists not only in advising politicians but also in political communication. Here, Switzerland's small federal democracy, with its special direct democratic elements offers a special environment. Ksinsik (<span>2025</span>) combines concepts of science communication with the Narrative Policy Framework in a paper that has won the Best Paper Award of the ECPR Standing Group of Public Policy. The study looks at the special way Swiss scientists worked with policy discussions during the pandemic. It uses an index from NPF research to measure the devil-angel shift (Chang & Koebele, <span>2020</span>). By analyzing Swiss newspaper articles, the research reveals that scientists employed narratives more frequently when providing problem advice compared to policy advice.</p><p>Equally focusing on the domestic impact of the COVID-19 crisis, Demler (<span>2025</span>) investigates changing party competition and political actors' positions in Germany as a result of the crisis. Just as the first article in this issue, she ties in with similar analyses of COVID-19 discourses across countries (Lemor & Montpetit, <span>2024</span>; Persson et al., <span>2022</span>) and looks at the discourse in German newspapers to extract information on the positions of political actors and measures their centrality in the discourse network. The findings indicate that those actors that are central in the discourse are characterized by being part of the executive branch of the Länder and federal level and having candidate status. Hence, the polarization of discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic was less an issue of government versus opposition but between legislative and executive branch, whereby crisis communication apparently was also actively used for personal profile-building.</p><p>In the third contribution to this issue, Cantó et al. (<span>2025</span>) examine how and why macroeconomic factors such as economic development moderate the relationship between European Structural and Investment Funds and EU Support. The empirical basis of this study consists of Eu","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":"6-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1238","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431293","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Paul Cairney, Allegra H. Fullerton, Emily St. Denny, Christopher M. Weible
Many US policy process theories have been applied as much in Europe as in the US. We assess this journey in three ways. First, we use published reviews of the field to identify the high quantity of applications and their concentration in Western European liberal democracies. Second, we identify the absence of a typical European country experience and our expectation of finding variability across European countries when applying US theories. Third, we survey policy scholars in Europe on how and why they apply US theories to European contexts. Our survey establishes what theories they applied, why, and to what effect. It takes forward a new research agenda on the international application of mainstream policy theories.
{"title":"Policy process theories in Europe: A survey of who uses them, where, and why","authors":"Paul Cairney, Allegra H. Fullerton, Emily St. Denny, Christopher M. Weible","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1237","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Many US policy process theories have been applied as much in Europe as in the US. We assess this journey in three ways. First, we use published reviews of the field to identify the high quantity of applications and their concentration in Western European liberal democracies. Second, we identify the absence of a typical European country experience and our expectation of finding variability across European countries when applying US theories. Third, we survey policy scholars in Europe on how and why they apply US theories to European contexts. Our survey establishes what theories they applied, why, and to what effect. It takes forward a new research agenda on the international application of mainstream policy theories.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 2","pages":"168-190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1237","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144135654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Almina Bešić, Andreas Diedrich, Dženeta Karabegović
This study introduces a translation perspective to analyze the policy harmonization process, highlighting imitation, brokering, and editing in shaping policy dynamics at EU and national levels. The translation perspective emphasizes that while policy development is ongoing, the protracted process signals a shift in EU-wide coordination of skilled labor migration. We show how ongoing translation efforts have transformed the coordination of skilled labor migration across the EU, as labor migration policies have translated into each other, resulting in mutual transformation. The study provides insights into the complex processes of policy harmonization via the Blue Card, enhancing understanding of EU labor migration policy. The findings demonstrate the continuous nature of policy translation between multiple contexts. The article traces developments surrounding the EU Blue Card Directive, including a parallel scheme in Austria, offering insights into skilled migration policy dynamics beyond linear diffusion models.
{"title":"Translating policy harmonization into practice—The case of the EU Blue Card Directive","authors":"Almina Bešić, Andreas Diedrich, Dženeta Karabegović","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1234","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study introduces a translation perspective to analyze the policy harmonization process, highlighting imitation, brokering, and editing in shaping policy dynamics at EU and national levels. The translation perspective emphasizes that while policy development is ongoing, the protracted process signals a shift in EU-wide coordination of skilled labor migration. We show how ongoing translation efforts have transformed the coordination of skilled labor migration across the EU, as labor migration policies have translated into each other, resulting in mutual transformation. The study provides insights into the complex processes of policy harmonization via the Blue Card, enhancing understanding of EU labor migration policy. The findings demonstrate the continuous nature of policy translation between multiple contexts. The article traces developments surrounding the EU Blue Card Directive, including a parallel scheme in Austria, offering insights into skilled migration policy dynamics beyond linear diffusion models.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":"94-113"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1234","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The fifth edition of “Theories of the Policy Process” represents a further step in consolidating these theories. However, four of them—Advocacy Coalition Framework, Multiple Streams Framework, Narrative Policy Framework, and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory—exhibit a few limitations in light of the characteristics of implementation and policy instruments due to their founding principles, the central role of pluralism and the will to abandon the original normativism of the policy sciences. Thus, these four theories seem to be framed to capture the politics of policy-making in a dynamic way rather than to understand how policies are able to deliver results to society. This affects the relevance and applicability of these theories from a Western European perspective but probably also from other cultural and geopolitical perspectives. After a discussion of these limitations, the paper outlines a number of suggestions for overcoming them.
{"title":"Policy implementation and policy instruments: The underdeveloped dimensions of the four “political” American policy process theories. A Western European perspective","authors":"Giliberto Capano","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1235","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1235","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The fifth edition of “Theories of the Policy Process” represents a further step in consolidating these theories. However, four of them—Advocacy Coalition Framework, Multiple Streams Framework, Narrative Policy Framework, and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory—exhibit a few limitations in light of the characteristics of implementation and policy instruments due to their founding principles, the central role of pluralism and the will to abandon the original normativism of the policy sciences. Thus, these four theories seem to be framed to capture the politics of policy-making in a dynamic way rather than to understand how policies are able to deliver results to society. This affects the relevance and applicability of these theories from a Western European perspective but probably also from other cultural and geopolitical perspectives. After a discussion of these limitations, the paper outlines a number of suggestions for overcoming them.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 2","pages":"230-253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1235","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144135728","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Most policy process frameworks were developed in the US but are also applied to (Western) Europe. However, policy processes, the relevant actors, and the institutional setting differ substantially. Hence, the question arises if certain concepts that are important in the European context are missing from the frameworks and if the frameworks have been adapted to take these concepts into account. We discuss the three frameworks most widely applied to Europe, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Multiple Streams Framework, and the Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, and focus on three concepts that seem particularly relevant in shaping European policy processes, namely political parties, macro-level institutions, and Europeanization. It turns out that all three frameworks have something to say about all three concepts, although some voids remain. Nonetheless, the adaptations that have been suggested make all three frameworks applicable to European countries and promise substantial explanatory capacity also in these contexts.
{"title":"Don't you forget about me! Concepts missing from policy process frameworks when applied to Europe","authors":"Reimut Zohlnhöfer, Nicole Herweg","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1236","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Most policy process frameworks were developed in the US but are also applied to (Western) Europe. However, policy processes, the relevant actors, and the institutional setting differ substantially. Hence, the question arises if certain concepts that are important in the European context are missing from the frameworks and if the frameworks have been adapted to take these concepts into account. We discuss the three frameworks most widely applied to Europe, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Multiple Streams Framework, and the Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, and focus on three concepts that seem particularly relevant in shaping European policy processes, namely political parties, macro-level institutions, and Europeanization. It turns out that all three frameworks have something to say about all three concepts, although some voids remain. Nonetheless, the adaptations that have been suggested make all three frameworks applicable to European countries and promise substantial explanatory capacity also in these contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 2","pages":"207-229"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1236","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144135651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) engender European Union (EU) support in generating economic growth, but their effect is conditional on individual European identity and educational background. This study investigates whether the positive impact of ESIF spending on EU attitudes also depends on the alignment of funding with the economic needs of recipient regions. We examine this issue with the Spanish case (1990–2019), employing a unique combined data set of Eurobarometer waves and regional NUTS-2 economic indicators. Our findings indicate that EU funds manage to decrease Euroscepticism only in laggard regions, which receive the lion's share of funds and allocate them to public goods easily perceived and communicated to the local population. Conversely, the effect of ESIF on transforming attitudes is absent in middle and high-income regions. The findings suggest a more complicated relationship between ESIF and EU support, which necessitates taking both individual and contextual factors into account.
{"title":"Same money, different impact? The curving effect of European Structural and Investment Funds on EU support in Spain (1990–2019)","authors":"Joel Cantó, Javier Baraibar, Javier Arregui","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1232","url":null,"abstract":"<p>European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) engender European Union (EU) support in generating economic growth, but their effect is conditional on individual European identity and educational background. This study investigates whether the positive impact of ESIF spending on EU attitudes also depends on the alignment of funding with the economic needs of recipient regions. We examine this issue with the Spanish case (1990–2019), employing a unique combined data set of Eurobarometer waves and regional NUTS-2 economic indicators. Our findings indicate that EU funds manage to decrease Euroscepticism only in laggard regions, which receive the lion's share of funds and allocate them to public goods easily perceived and communicated to the local population. Conversely, the effect of ESIF on transforming attitudes is absent in middle and high-income regions. The findings suggest a more complicated relationship between ESIF and EU support, which necessitates taking both individual and contextual factors into account.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":"54-74"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1232","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper presents a methodological framework to study situated and relational policy practices in the context of the policy transaction perspective. Building on policy ethnography, it addresses the entanglements of researching policy transactions through triangulation of methods to explore how practices emerge, and how they are “seen,” “talked about,” and “read.” The paper aims to contribute to the policy transaction framework in three ways. First, it discusses how the policy transaction framework furthers the shifting of focus from policy systems to policy worlds, to address the complexities enclosed in policy processes. Second, it advances the framework along the discussion of relationality and situatedness, to highlight the reciprocal mode of transactions. Third, it proposes a methodological exemplar for the analysis of policy transactions, by looking at transactions as practices. With these steps, the paper aims to contribute to a methodological framework for undertaking research in the context of the policy transaction perspective.
{"title":"Navigating policy in (trans)action: A methodological framework for situated and relational policy practices","authors":"Szilvia Nagy","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1233","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1233","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents a methodological framework to study situated and relational policy practices in the context of the policy transaction perspective. Building on policy ethnography, it addresses the entanglements of researching policy transactions through triangulation of methods to explore how practices emerge, and how they are “seen,” “talked about,” and “read.” The paper aims to contribute to the policy transaction framework in three ways. First, it discusses how the policy transaction framework furthers the shifting of focus from policy systems to policy worlds, to address the complexities enclosed in policy processes. Second, it advances the framework along the discussion of relationality and situatedness, to highlight the reciprocal mode of transactions. Third, it proposes a methodological exemplar for the analysis of policy transactions, by looking at transactions as practices. With these steps, the paper aims to contribute to a methodological framework for undertaking research in the context of the policy transaction perspective.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 4","pages":"505-523"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1233","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145887494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Europe, and specifically in countries bordering the Baltic Sea, preparedness issues have moved up the policy agenda since Russia's 2014 and 2022 invasions of Ukraine. “Ordinary people” are encouraged to prepare for crises—be it through stockpiling food at home, fact-checking information, or signing up for military training. This article unpacks the process through which individual subjects are “responsibilized.” More specifically, it analyses how the risk of war is communicated to make targets act responsibly, drawing on empirical evidence from Finland, Latvia, and Germany. A main tenet is that policy actors appeal to nationally distinct sets of moral codes to responsibilize publics. The Finnish war experience attests to the value of being united, willing and capable of fighting back. Latvia's defence is framed as an integrative force—with the ultimate aim to deter aggressors and ensure national survival. In Germany, inconsistent messaging prevails, simultaneously reassuring and alerting the public.
{"title":"“Security, first of all, begins at home”: How Finland, Latvia, and Germany prepare “ordinary people” for crises","authors":"Alexandra M. Friede","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1229","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In Europe, and specifically in countries bordering the Baltic Sea, preparedness issues have moved up the policy agenda since Russia's 2014 and 2022 invasions of Ukraine. “Ordinary people” are encouraged to prepare for crises—be it through stockpiling food at home, fact-checking information, or signing up for military training. This article unpacks the process through which individual subjects are “responsibilized.” More specifically, it analyses how the risk of war is communicated to make targets act responsibly, drawing on empirical evidence from Finland, Latvia, and Germany. A main tenet is that policy actors appeal to nationally distinct sets of moral codes to responsibilize publics. The Finnish war experience attests to the value of being united, willing and capable of fighting back. Latvia's defence is framed as an integrative force—with the ultimate aim to deter aggressors and ensure national survival. In Germany, inconsistent messaging prevails, simultaneously reassuring and alerting the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":"114-137"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1229","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article applies the concept of transaction to the process of policy transfer, through the case of conflict of interest regulation in France, using archives, documentary sources, and interviews with stakeholders. It contributes to the literature on policy translation by clarifying the role of contingency, which remains underspecified. It shows that timing matters in two ways: it affects actors' ability to open a policy window, and it ultimately affects problem definition and future implementation instruments and practices. It explores the construction of the situation as a scandal, making it necessary to adapt transferred ideas to the political context, where a “shock of moralization” was seen as necessary. It also offers an opportunity to enrich the scholarship on policy transaction with an application to transnational policymaking, where problem definitions and policy solutions are imported from elsewhere and where foreign or transnational actors contribute to the co-construction of actors and issues.
{"title":"Constructing the “moralization shock”: The role of contingency in the translation of anticorruption policy in France","authors":"Sofia Wickberg","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1231","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article applies the concept of transaction to the process of policy transfer, through the case of conflict of interest regulation in France, using archives, documentary sources, and interviews with stakeholders. It contributes to the literature on policy translation by clarifying the role of <i>contingency</i>, which remains underspecified. It shows that timing matters in two ways: it affects actors' ability to open a policy window, and it ultimately affects problem definition and future implementation instruments and practices. It explores the construction of the situation as a scandal, making it necessary to adapt transferred ideas to the political context, where a “shock of moralization” was seen as necessary. It also offers an opportunity to enrich the scholarship on policy transaction with an application to transnational policymaking, where problem definitions and policy solutions are imported from elsewhere and where foreign or transnational actors contribute to the co-construction of actors and issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"11 4","pages":"475-492"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1231","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145887218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder
<p>Public policies should ideally be formulated to address a societal problem and being effective in solving it, both in what regards the effectiveness of the process of their development and in their effect on the target population (Bali et al., <span>2019</span>; Huber et al., <span>2020</span>; Knill et al., <span>2020</span>). Thereby, effectiveness can concern different aspects: It can be related to the coordination or collaboration between policy actors, it can refer to the effectiveness of the policy itself, or the subsequent governance arrangements that result from it (Lubell, <span>2003</span>; Mei, <span>2020</span>; Mizrahi et al., <span>2021</span>; Navarro et al., <span>2012</span>; Nicholson-Crotty & Carley, <span>2016</span>; Peters et al., <span>2018</span>; Steinebach, <span>2019</span>, <span>2022</span>; Visintin et al., <span>2021</span>; Wagner et al., <span>2023</span>). This issue of European Policy Analysis (EPA) brings together research articles that deal—one way or the other—with effectiveness, but from different perspectives.</p><p>Wiget (<span>2024</span>) investigates how beliefs shape the formation of advocacy coalitions among key stakeholders using the example of Swiss pesticide policy. The research is grounded in a survey conducted with 54 key actors, achieving a high response rate of 85%. The survey assessed both core beliefs—related to problem perceptions and policy objectives—and secondary beliefs—concerning support for specific policy measures. The findings reveal that actors’ beliefs significantly influence their positions and interactions, suggesting that agreement and disagreement among stakeholders often reflect deeper ideological divides. Wiget's analysis aligns with previous studies that emphasize the importance of shared beliefs in coalition formation. For instance, Weible and Sabatier (<span>2005</span>) highlighted how policy networks are shaped by the beliefs of actors in marine protected areas, demonstrating that shared values can facilitate collaboration. Similarly, Zafonte and Sabatier (<span>1998</span>) discussed how shared beliefs and imposed interdependencies influence ally networks in overlapping subsystems, reinforcing the notion that belief systems are crucial in understanding policy dynamics. It will be interesting to see, how this study will relate to the rising body of research on emotions in advocacy coalitions (Fullerton et al., <span>2024</span>; Gabehart et al., <span>2023</span>) The study also contributes to the broader literature on environmental policy, echoing findings from Ingold and Varone (<span>2011</span>) who argued that policy brokers play a significant role in mediating conflicts and fostering cooperation among diverse stakeholders. By situating the Swiss pesticide policy debate within this framework, Wiget underscores the necessity of recognizing the ideological underpinnings of policy disagreements, which can inform more effective governance strategies.</p><p>Focusi
他们以比利时的一个城市为例,从三种理论方法的角度研究了作为创新公共政策的智慧城市计划的发展:行动者网络理论(ANT)认为创新政策是行动者相互联系的结果;叙事政策框架(NPF)认为叙事和话语在政策变革中发挥着核心作用(Bertrand et al、2023;Blum,2019;Chang & Koebele,2020;Crow & Jones,2018;Jones,2018),以及机构语法工具(IGT),该工具侧重于机构和治理安排的语法反映(Deslatte 等人,2021;Frantz & Siddiki,2021;Siddiki & Frantz,2023;Siddiki 等人,2019)。在他们最初的研究中,根据 ANT,在网络稳定的每个阶段,作者基于对参与该政策过程的行为者进行的 24 次访谈,确定了影响行为者行动的叙事要素和制度规则。因此,他们还将智慧城市计划的人文维度视为这些创新转型中的一个关键方面(Lee 等人,2024 年;Paskaleva 等人,2015 年)。这些研究结果证明,叙事与制度相结合,具有塑造行为者网络的一致性和有效性的潜力。然而,在公共政策过程中,尤其是在危机时期,经常会出现反应过度和反应不足的现象(Charron 等人,2019 年;Maor,2020 年)。Maor (2024) 通过考虑受众范围和政策与实际目标群体的(不)匹配程度,为评估政策工具与目标群体之间的不匹配提供了概念基础。这种区分的理论基础是关于政策设计和目标群体的文献,他将其与政策参与者可以上下攀爬的不相称性阶梯的表述联系起来,并在阶梯的各个维度之间进行移动。Khan 和 Hussain(2024 年)研究了 2014 年至 2020 年 41 个国家的政策能力和政策有效性之间的相互作用。作者利用可持续治理指标(SGI)作为衡量执行能力的替代指标,其中包括有效治理所需的分析、管理和政治层面(Croissant & Pelke, 2022; Schiller & Hellmann, 2022; Tosun & Howlett, 2022)。研究强调,芬兰、瑞典和丹麦等政策能力强的国家(Cameron & Evans, 2024; Wu et al.这些国家在利益相关者参与、循证决策、部际合作和政策目标的透明沟通方面表现突出。相比之下,政策能力较低的国家在中央规划、战略能力和政策执行方面面临挑战,往往导致治理效率低下。Ilgenstein 等人(2024 年)将重点从传统的政策参与者转移到了公私混合组织(PPHs),并以一项关于开放战略在公私混合组织中适用性的研究结束了去年的这一期。开放战略有别于作为秘密高层管理活动的战略,它强调包容性和透明度,这是在公共服务和私人盈利的双重需求下实现目标一致的关键(Hansen 等人,2024 年)。为了对开放式战略的使用进行实证评估,作者制定了 PIE 框架,强调在制定 PPH 早期发展计划时,明确组织使命(目的)、确定关键战略参与者(包容性)以及确定必要的知识和技能(专业性)的重要性。该框架适用于对瑞士转化与创业医学研究所(Sitem)的定性案例研究。研究结果表明,在包容性和透明度与运行速度之间存在固有的权衡。PPH可以采取包容和透明的战略,促进更广泛的利益相关者参与,但进展缓慢;也可以采取更加排他性和保密的方法,为了快速决策而牺牲利益相关者的广泛性。最后,本研究主张有针对性地应用开放战略,强调战略选择必须考虑混合组织的独特背景和挑战,以有效提高决策和治理成果。
{"title":"What determines effectiveness in the policy process?","authors":"Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1227","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Public policies should ideally be formulated to address a societal problem and being effective in solving it, both in what regards the effectiveness of the process of their development and in their effect on the target population (Bali et al., <span>2019</span>; Huber et al., <span>2020</span>; Knill et al., <span>2020</span>). Thereby, effectiveness can concern different aspects: It can be related to the coordination or collaboration between policy actors, it can refer to the effectiveness of the policy itself, or the subsequent governance arrangements that result from it (Lubell, <span>2003</span>; Mei, <span>2020</span>; Mizrahi et al., <span>2021</span>; Navarro et al., <span>2012</span>; Nicholson-Crotty & Carley, <span>2016</span>; Peters et al., <span>2018</span>; Steinebach, <span>2019</span>, <span>2022</span>; Visintin et al., <span>2021</span>; Wagner et al., <span>2023</span>). This issue of European Policy Analysis (EPA) brings together research articles that deal—one way or the other—with effectiveness, but from different perspectives.</p><p>Wiget (<span>2024</span>) investigates how beliefs shape the formation of advocacy coalitions among key stakeholders using the example of Swiss pesticide policy. The research is grounded in a survey conducted with 54 key actors, achieving a high response rate of 85%. The survey assessed both core beliefs—related to problem perceptions and policy objectives—and secondary beliefs—concerning support for specific policy measures. The findings reveal that actors’ beliefs significantly influence their positions and interactions, suggesting that agreement and disagreement among stakeholders often reflect deeper ideological divides. Wiget's analysis aligns with previous studies that emphasize the importance of shared beliefs in coalition formation. For instance, Weible and Sabatier (<span>2005</span>) highlighted how policy networks are shaped by the beliefs of actors in marine protected areas, demonstrating that shared values can facilitate collaboration. Similarly, Zafonte and Sabatier (<span>1998</span>) discussed how shared beliefs and imposed interdependencies influence ally networks in overlapping subsystems, reinforcing the notion that belief systems are crucial in understanding policy dynamics. It will be interesting to see, how this study will relate to the rising body of research on emotions in advocacy coalitions (Fullerton et al., <span>2024</span>; Gabehart et al., <span>2023</span>) The study also contributes to the broader literature on environmental policy, echoing findings from Ingold and Varone (<span>2011</span>) who argued that policy brokers play a significant role in mediating conflicts and fostering cooperation among diverse stakeholders. By situating the Swiss pesticide policy debate within this framework, Wiget underscores the necessity of recognizing the ideological underpinnings of policy disagreements, which can inform more effective governance strategies.</p><p>Focusi","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 4","pages":"482-487"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1227","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}