Policy & Politics Journal Blog

by Johanna Kuenzler, Bettina Stauffer, Caroline Schlaufer, Geoboo Song, Aaron Smith-Walter and Michael D. Jones

The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) has become instrumental in understanding how policy narratives impact public policy processes.  In their recent article published in Policy & Politics, Johanna Kuenzler, Bettina Stauffer, Caroline Schlaufer, Geoboo Song, Aaron Smith-Walter and Michael D. Jones offer a systematic review and analysis of the historical development of the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF). Drawing on a review of 189 studies published between 2005 and 2022, they identify key trends, challenges and opportunities that shaped the trajectory of this influential framework and derive insights into its key challenges to help define a future research agenda.

The authors argue that while the NPF has become an increasingly prominent approach for studying the role of narratives in public policy, it is time to take stock. Their systematic review identifies five phases in the development of the framework—spanning from its early foundations through to its international expansion—and assesses how consistently core elements of the NPF have been operationalised over time. Despite being developed to straddle both positivist and interpretivist paradigms, they find that empirical work continues to lean heavily towards positivist applications.

A key contribution of this review is its attention to how researchers have used the NPF’s core theoretical components—such as narrative characters, setting, plot and moral. Some elements, like characters, appear consistently, while others, such as belief systems and plot, remain underused or conceptually ambiguous. The review also highlights promising areas for future development, including clarifications of those narrative elements that have remained understudied, in particular plots and belief systems, as well as encouraging research that combines the NPF with interpretivist approaches.

While a handful of studies have attempted the integration of interpretivist and positivist traditions, the authors suggest that more explicit engagement across paradigms could sharpen both theoretical insights and empirical findings. For example, combining NPF with qualitative interviews might yield richer understanding of how policy actors construct and deploy narratives in real-world settings.

Another emerging frontier identified in the review is the application of computational methods, including natural language processing and sentiment analysis. These techniques, the authors argue, hold promise for scaling up NPF research—especially in the age of ‘big data’ and Artificial Intelligence. But they also caution that such developments must not come at the expense of theoretical coherence or sensitivity to context.

Finally, the authors highlight the importance of engaging with the practical relevance of the NPF. While the framework has generated a rich body of scholarship, it remains unclear to what extent policymakers or civil society actors are drawing on NPF insights to shape their communication strategies. Future research might investigate how, and whether, the findings of NPF studies are being translated into action on the ground.

…

You can read the original research in Policy & Politics at

Kuenzler, J., Stauffer, B., Schlaufer, C., Song, G., Smith-Walter, A., and Jones, M. D. (2025). A systematic review of the Narrative Policy Framework: a future research agenda. Policy & Politics 53, 1, 129-151, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000046>

If you enjoyed this blog post, you may also be interested in reading

Liu, L., and Yen, W. (2024). Why do individuals in democratic societies support stringent policies? A narrative policy framework analysis. Policy & Politics 52, 3, 453-476, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/030557324X17049690476008>

Kaplan, Y. R., Merry, M. K., and Jones, M. D. (2025). The relationship between national identity and the United Nations General Assembly voting patterns: a Narrative Policy Framework analysis. Policy & Politics 53, 2, 224-248, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000054>