Can policy conflict be productive? Insights from a systematic review 

policypressblogLeave a comment


by Ilana Schröder & Eva E.A. Wolf

In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, Ilana Schröder & Eva Wolf examine a topic that is central to policymaking but often receives less explicit attention than it deserves: policy conflict. While conflicts are an inherent feature of policy processes, the authors argue that research on what policy conflicts are, how they unfold, and what consequences they produce remains fragmented across different research traditions. 

Through a systematic review of 85 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2024, the article brings together insights that are currently dispersed across policy process theories, interpretive policy studies, collaborative governance research, implementation studies, and conflict scholarship. In doing so, it offers a more integrated understanding of how conflicts shape policy processes and produce different kinds of consequences. 

Continue reading →

How policy beliefs shape advocacy coalitions in energy policy  

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Aerang Nam


In a recent article Extending the Advocacy Coalition Framework: Measuring Within-Coalition Belief Variation in Offshore Wind Policy Conflicts author Aerang Nam advances the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) by developing a more precise account of how belief expression varies within coalitions and how this variation is structured by organisational affiliation. Rather than treating beliefs as latent positions inferred from actor behaviour, the article shifts attention to observable expressions of belief in public discourse and how these expressions differ in both scope and intensity across actors within the same coalition space. 

Reconceptualising constraint in belief expression 

A central theoretical contribution lies in the reconceptualisation of constraint in belief expression. While ACF scholarship has long acknowledged that actors do not express beliefs in fully unconstrained ways, constraint is often treated in general or implicit terms. The article advances this debate by conceptualising constraint as measurable variation in the breadth and intensity of beliefs articulated by actors within coalitions. 

This reframing shifts analysis away from binary assumptions about whether belief expression is constrained and toward a more graded understanding of how it is constrained. In doing so, it strengthens the ACF’s capacity to analyse discourse in a way that is both theoretically consistent and empirically operationalisable. 

Continue reading →

How Crisis Discourse Shapes UK Asylum Governance: From Framing to Administrative Practice 

policypressblogLeave a comment

By Nasar Meer and Emma Hill

In their recent article, Nasar Meer and Emma Hill examine how narratives of “crisis” have become embedded within the everyday governance of asylum in the United Kingdom. Bringing Teun A. van Dijk’s concept of the ideological square into conversation with framing and political communication scholarship, the article argues that crisis discourse is not simply rhetorical. Rather, it has become administratively productive, shaping procurement systems, evidentiary practices, and the lived experience of asylum accommodation itself. 

From crisis discourse to crisis ordinariness 

The article begins from a core insight in policy studies: before governments can act on a policy “problem”, they must first frame it as such. In the field of asylum governance, this increasingly occurs through narratives of emergency, invasion, and loss of control. While concepts such as the Overton window help explain shifts in political possibility, Meer and Hill argue that they can understate the communicative power through which migration is continually reproduced as crisis. 

To address this, the article turns to van Dijk’s ideological square, which foregrounds how discourse systematically emphasises “our” virtues and “their” failings, while minimising countervailing evidence. The authors extend this beyond discourse analysis to show how evaluative asymmetries become embedded within the epistemic and administrative architecture of governance. The result is what they term “crisis ordinariness”: a condition in which emergency becomes the routine operating logic of asylum governance. 

Continue reading →

Policy & Politics journal’s most highly cited articles of 2025 

policypressblogLeave a comment

By Sarah Brown

In celebration of Policy & Politics‘ new 2-year Impact Factor of 3.5 in the 2025 Journal Citation Reports (JCR), and its continued position in the top quartile of journals in both Public Administration and Political Science, we’ve made this collection of highly cited articles free to access until 31 July. Together, these articles celebrate the achievements of our authors while showcasing the breadth of scholarship published in Policy & Politics and its contribution to advancing understanding of policy processes and policymaking.

Continue reading →

Smokefree Public Places Policy in Scotland: Rethinking Policy Work in Multiple Streams and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Katherine E. Smith

In this article, author Katherine E. Smith revisits Scotland’s landmark smokefree public places legislation to ask not only how policy change occurred, but how it was actively made. Drawing on a 2024 witness seminar with ministers, civil servants, advocates and researchers, the article builds a collectively constructed, retrospective account of how this major reform was developed, designed and implemented.  

Existing analyses, particularly those based on Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, are broadly supported. As Smith shows, a policy window opened as problem, policy and political streams aligned, while wider shifts in policy image and venue helped enable a significant punctuation in tobacco policy. However, the article’s central contribution lies in demonstrating that these theories under-specify the policy work through which such conditions are produced and translated into outcomes. 

Continue reading →

Interpretive process tracing themed section article on ‘Interpretive Process Tracing? How Process Tracing Can Become Amenable to Interpretive Research 

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Hilde van Meegdenburg

In Interpretive Process Tracing? How PT Can Become Amenable to Interpretive Research, Hilde van Meegdenburg advances an analyticist approach to PT and explores how process tracing can be made amenable to interpretive research. In this important research article in our new themed section advancing an interpretive approach to process tracing, the author addresses a key methodological tension: while process tracing is widely used in policy research and foreign policy analysis, it has largely been developed within a regularity-oriented, broadly positivist framework. 

Continue reading →

Interpretive process tracing themed section article on “Interpretive process tracing and policy feedback theory: how social reporting put poverty on the agenda in Germany”

policypressblogLeave a comment

Christopher Smith Ochoa

In a strong contribution to our new themed section on Interpretive Process Tracing, this article examines how poverty became recognised as a legitimate policy issue in Germany, bringing interpretive process tracing into dialogue with policy feedback theory to explain how a political system that long denied poverty came to embed it within federal policy reporting.

Continue reading →

Policy & Politics Impact Factor announcement 2025

policypressblogLeave a comment
Editorial team of Policy & Politics from left to right: Christopher M. Weible, Allegra Fullerton, Oscar Berglund, Elizabeth Koebele, Kristin Taylor, Claire Dunlop, Sarah Brown

Co-Editors of Policy & Politics

To all our authors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, readers, friends and supporters,
We’re delighted to announce that Policy & Politics (P&P) has achieved a 2-year Impact Factor of 3.5 in the 2025 Journal Citation Reports, maintaining its position in the top quartile of journals in both Public Administration and Political Science.

Continue reading →

Call for papers on Power and Politics in the Policy Process – A Special Issue of Policy & Politics

policypressblogLeave a comment
Editorial team of Policy & Politics from left to right: Christopher M. Weible, Allegra Fullerton, Oscar Berglund, Elizabeth Koebele, Kristin Taylor, Claire Dunlop, Sarah Brown

Co-Editors of Policy & Politics

The co-editors invite abstracts for a special issue on Power and Politics in the Policy Process.

Abstract submission (500-750 words) deadline: 1 September 2026

From our perspective as editors of Policy & Politics, there is a clear gap in the literature: politics is either not explicitly addressed or under-integrated in policy process studies. The implication is that if politics is missing, then so is power. Our concern is theoretical, empirical and fundamentally practical: not enough has been done to advance knowledge about how politics influences policy responses to public problems. This is to the field’s detriment, given the increasing tendency toward illiberalism in democratic systems that fractures the pluralist norms that policy process research has long relied on.

Continue reading →

Interpretive process tracing themed section article on “Policy diffusion and interpretive process tracing: explaining the spread of assisted voluntary return policies”

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Sybille Münch

This article examines how assisted voluntary return (AVR) policies diffuse across European and national contexts, focusing on Germany within the multi-level governance system of the European Union. Developing an interpretive, mechanism-based account of policy diffusion, author Sybille Münch argues that understanding how policies travel requires close attention to how actors construct meaning, rather than relying solely on abstract diffusion models. 

Moving beyond single diffusion mechanisms 

Policy diffusion research often seeks to identify a dominant mechanism—such as learning, emulation, or competition—to explain how policies spread. Münch instead proposes a more fine-grained approach, drawing on interpretive process tracing and the concept of complex causal mechanisms. These mechanisms operate as sequences of actor-driven actions and interpretations, rather than as singular explanatory forces. 

This approach challenges assumptions that policies are simply transferred intact between contexts. Rather, policies are actively interpreted, adapted, and sometimes contested as they move across governance levels.  

Continue reading →