Search results

On-premise trading hours are generally decided at the local level. The purpose of this paper is to identify relevant advocacy coalitions and to assess to what extent and how these coalitions used research in the alcohol policy-making process concerning changes in on-premise trading hours in Norway.

Theory-driven content analyses were conducted, applying data from city council documents (24 Norwegian cities) and Norwegian newspaper articles and broadcast interviews (n=138) in 2011-2012.

Two advocacy coalitions with conflicting views and values were identified. Both coalitions used research quite extensively – in the public debate and in the formal decision-making process – but in different ways. The restrictive coalition, favouring restricted trading hours and emphasising public health/safety, included the police and temperance movements and embraced research demonstrating the beneficial health/safety effects of restricting trading hours. The liberal coalition of conservative politicians and hospitality industry emphasised individual freedom and industry interests and promoted research demonstrating negative effects on hospitality industry turnover. This coalition also actively discredited the research demonstrating the beneficial health/safety effects of restricting trading hours.

Little is known about how local alcohol policy-making processes are informed by research-based knowledge. This study is the first to analyse how advocacy coalitions use research to influence local alcohol policy-making.

The Orphan Drug Act has provided the pharmaceutical industry with incentives to research and develop drugs for orphan diseases: rare diseases with little profit potential. It is considered very successful legislation by legal scholars, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and orphan drug activists. The policy process of the Act provides an important model of the policy process for future incentive-based pharmaceutical legislation. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the important incentives of the Act and the historical events leading up to the Act. The paper applies three different theoretical models of the public policy process to understand the emergence of the Orphan Drug Act: Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Model, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, and Social Constructionism Theory. The paper then synthesizes the public policy process lessons from each perspective and provides four recommendations for other social activists seeking to propel incentive-based pharmaceutical legislation for under-researched diseases.

The author analyzes the history of the Orphan Drug Act based on publicly available scholarly research, government documents, and interest group publications. The author then applies three public policy theories to the history of the Orphan Drug Act to explain the emergence of the Act and to extract policy process lessons for future disease activists.

Regardless of which theoretical perspective the Orphan Drug Act is analyzed from, some common themes of the policy process emerge. First, focussing events are instrumental in capturing the public’s sympathy and Congress’s attention. Second, in its activities and proposed legislation, a coalition should provide a role for all relevant and important actors. Third, the target groups of the legislation were construed positively, increasing the pressure for Congressmen to pass some kind of bill. Finally, the proper construction of “the problem” is instrumental to passing effective legislation as a “solution.”

The Orphan Drug Act is widely considered successful incentive-based pharmaceutical legislation. However, because it was originally passed in 1983 and has not had public attention since the early 1990s (when it was amended), it has rarely been written about in recent years. However, its lessons are still highly relevant to policy activists, especially disease activists. Furthermore, existing articles focus on the impact of the legislation and ways to amend it, rather than on the passage of the Act.

Community coalitions are an important part of the public milieu and subject to similar external pressures as other publicly funded organizations – including changes in required strategic orientation. Many US government agencies that fund efforts such as community-based social marketing initiatives have shifted their funding agenda from program development to policy development. The Florida Prevention Research Center at the University of South Florida (Tampa, Florida, USA) created community-based prevention marketing (CBPM) for policy development framework to teach community coalitions how to apply social marketing to policy development. This paper aims to explicate the framework’s theory of change.

The research question was: “How does implementing the CBPM for Policy Development framework improve coalition performance over time?” The authors implemented a case study design, with the “case” being a normative community coalition. The study adhered to a well-developed series of steps for system dynamics modeling.

Results from computer model simulations show that gains in community coalition performance depend on a coalition’s initial culture and initial efficiency, and that only the most efficient coalitions’ performance might improve from implementing the CBPM framework.

Practical implications for CBPM’s developers and users are discussed, namely, the importance of managing the early expectations of academic-community partnerships seeking to shift their orientation from downstream (e.g. program development) to upstream social marketing strategies (e.g. policy change).

The study aims to unpack the role of Malawi Library Association (MALA) in developing librarianship in Malawi. It also explores an array of opportunities and challenges that are present for MALA.

The study applies the interpretivist paradigm for the research design. Qualitative data were collected from a purposeful sample totaling 24 practicing librarians and paraprofessionals in different work environments to inform the study phenomenon.

The study gathers that the role of MALA has been in its infancy stage for a long time. However, the apparent developments of MALA manifest in its pro-educational initiatives. Overall, MALA is impeded by a litany of obstacles such as financial constraints and a lack of advocacy strategy.

The study theorizes the role of MALA by triangulating the advocacy coalition framework, institutional theory and professionalization theory in the library and information practice.

Democracy can be viewed as an end state (structure) or as a process. In the 20th century, theories of the democratic structure and process (and thus the end state to be achieved and the structures necessary to achieve it) were highly contested. Some argued that only by freeing markets from state control could democracy materialize. Others argued that getting policies right would promote democracy – and a free market. A third group argued that the state was the problem, and that only by relying on civil society could democracy emerge and be maintained. We can classify differing approaches to democracy under three ideal types that drove debate and practice, depending on the sector seen as critical to the process. Stemming from 19th century theorists, three sectoral approaches were in conflict: those that stressed the market (neoliberalism), those that stressed the state (statism), and those that stressed “the people” or civil society (the populist approach).

This study examines the stakeholder’s experiences of two key groups: donors and donor-volunteers. The goals of this study are to (1) determine how donor experience affects organization–public relationships (OPRs) and its antecedents for these two groups and (2) extend the OPR model by considering new potential supportive behavioral intentions arising from OPR outcomes.

Using data from a survey of self-identified donors and donor-volunteers, multiple regressions were performed to establish the possible effects of experience and advocacy on OPRs.

Findings of this study support the idea that donation experience can be considered a potential antecedent for the OPR. The findings also support the idea that advocacy can be a valuable behavioral outcome resulting from OPR.

Nonprofits are ever seeking to better connect with their donor and volunteer supporters. This study helps to show the value of donation experience and the importance of cultivating advocacy behaviors among these supporters.

The study seeks to merge extant theory in communications and public policy to better understand the OPR model. Specifically, connecting OPR to the antecedent of donor experience and behavioral intentions like advocacy will help paint a stronger picture of donor–volunteer relationships with nonprofits.

Considers why different explanations of the same event can be produced and discusses the characteristics of a good explanation. It identifies and analyses a wide range of different published explanations of a seminal public administration policy‐change. It separates those accounts of that event into families of explanations and describes their common underlying presuppositions. These shared presuppositions are used to construct four models of public policy‐making: sovereign policy‐makers; policy‐makers as relays; policy‐making as the personal; and the discursive construction of policy. Each explanation (and its conceptual model) is challenged by historically grounded counter‐evidence. Based on this analysis the paper suggest ways in which analysis of public management changes might be more fruitfully orientated.

The focus on local-level policy initiatives in US anti-fracking movements presents unique opportunities to explore interactions between professional advocacy organizations with regional/national constituencies and grassroots organizations with constituencies who will directly experience changes in local landscapes resulting from unconventional oil and gas development (UOGD). However, research on anti-fracking movements in the US has considered dynamics of interorganizational cooperation only peripherally. This chapter examines factors that motivate coalition building, sources of coalition fragmentation, and the progressive polarization of grassroots anti-fracking and countermovement activists using qualitative research on an anti-fracking movement in Illinois. While grassroots groups may experience some strategic advantages by collaborating with extra-local, professionalized advocacy organizations, these relationships involve navigating considerable inequalities. In the case presented here, I find that coalition building was important for putting UOGD on the policy agenda. However, when anti-fracking activists began experiencing success, institutionalization rapidly produced fragmentation in the coalition, and a countermovement of UOGD supporters was formed. I highlight how ordinary movement dynamics are particularly susceptible to polarization in the context of local land use disputes that “scale-up” to involve broader movement constituencies as perceptions of distributive injustice collide with perceptions of procedural injustice.

This paper analyses the radical reorganisation of English school sport by the coalition government, a move that led to the emergence of a significant discourse of dissatisfaction amongst school sport advocacy coalition groups.

This paper utilises Sabatier’s (Sabatier & Jenkins-Smith, 1999) Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to identify how the coalition government’s decision to abolish the successful Physical Education School Sport and Club Links (PESSCL) programme has specifically weakened the power of formerly influential advocacy coalitions within the school sport arena. Weber’s (1947) conceptualisation of charisma, in particular, the concept of charismatic rhetoric, is used to explain how these historically extensive policy changes were communicated by the coalition government, and particularly, by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State.

Locating the government’s rhetoric within the charismatic literature allowed the exploration of how a disempowerment of advocacy coalition groups and centralisation of power towards the state might have been partly achieved via the use of charismatic rhetoric (Weber, 1947).

Javidan and Waldman (2003) identified a lack of rigorous empirical study of the role of charismatic leadership and its consequences in public sector leadership, a critique that has been addressed by this paper.

This study aims to analyze the use of discourse to solve issues related to coordination between advocacy coalitions in processes of gradual and transformative institutional change related to public policies.

Theoretical background is based on the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), new discursive institutionalism and critical discourse analysis theories. The research examines shorthand notes of public hearings held in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate between 1999 and 2012, carrying out a case study on Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant. The speech extracts were categorized according to the modes of operation of ideology and typical strategies of symbolic construction proposed by Thompson (1995).

The results suggest that the discourse can be an instrument of internal coordination and between coalitions that share beliefs about a policy, as in the case of Belo Monte. Potentially existing coalitions define their identities and set positions on controversial issues, aligning interests and expectations. In the case studied, the modes of operation of ideology verified as instruments of the coalitions were dissimulation, reification, fragmentation, unification and legitimation.

The paper represents a unique analysis of the modes of operation of ideology (Thompson, 1999) in the case of Belo Monte. In addition, the paper aims to contribute to the New Discursive Institutionalism and to the ACF when it uses the critical discourse analysis to articulate a method to analyze the use of the Discourse by the coalitions. In fact, such an approach integrating the ACF, the New Discursive Institutionalism and the critical discourse analysis is something original. Finally, it also addresses a gap in ACF: issues related to advocacy coalition coordination.

Attentive readers linked to organizations working on infrastructure and environmental policies can benefit from the results by envisaging the deliberate manipulation of typical symbolic construction strategies and general modes of operation of ideology.

The study sheds light on the daily and behind-the-scenes disputes among stakeholders who are interested in a certain public policy. It may draw attention to the access and professional use of the shorthand notes of the hearings held at the National Congress.

This paper aims to fill a gap pointed out by Jenkins-Smith et al. (2014) regarding problems of coordination of advocacy coalitions. In addition, it innovates by using critical discourse analysis as a methodological reference in ACF empirical studies. In addition, this work continues a trajectory of two other previously published studies dealing with the same phenomenon: a theoretical essay and a case study.