Author: policypressblog

The relationship between national identity and the United Nations General Assembly voting patterns: a Narrative Policy Framework analysis

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Yael R. Kaplan, Melissa K. Merry and Michael D. Jones

Three portrait photos two women and one man, authors of the article

In our recent article published in Policy & Politics, we explore how narratives shape the way countries behave in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), focusing on their voting behaviour. We argue that the big stories a nation tells about itself – termed “macro narratives” – play a crucial role in how that country votes. Essentially, these macro narratives help form a country’s identity and influence its political decisions in the global arena.

Through our analysis, we explain that narratives are not just random tales; they are powerful tools that help people make sense of complex situations. In politics, leaders and interest groups use these stories to shape public opinion and rally support for their goals. Our research emphasises that, while we know a lot about how narratives work at smaller levels – like within groups or communities – there’s still a lot to learn about how these stories operate on a larger, national scale.

Continue reading →

How Can Political Conflict in Adversarial Policy Networks Promote their Coordination?

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Jeongyoon Lee and David Lee

Policy actors often clash during policy processes, especially in contentious areas like climate change, gun control, and healthcare reform. These actors—including government agencies, private companies, and interest groups—frequently vie for influence, and political rivalries can lead to gridlock or policy failure. Understanding the drivers of these conflicts and how to manage them is crucial in order to propose strategies that can mitigate their effects, and enhance network coordination.

In our recent article published in Policy & Politics, we explore the causes of political competition and propose strategies for reducing it, using the case of local fracking policy processes in New York as an example. The fracking debate involves a wide range of actors, such as landowners, media organisations, oil and gas associations, environmental groups, city agencies, local governments, and legal organisations—all competing over whether fracking should be permitted in the state. But what drives these actors to clash so intensely? We explore the underlying reasons for these clashes, investigating whether competition arises from shared struggles for scarce resources, similar structural positions in resource-sharing relationships, differing policy beliefs or all three.

Continue reading →

How Policy Advisors Construct Legitimacy in Challenging Times

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Andrea Krizsán and Dorottya Fekete

Two photographs of women, both of European heritage, both smiling: the authors of the article.

In our recent article in Policy & Politics, we delve into the changing context of policy advice in autocratising Hungary. In this context, the legitimacy of policy expertise is closely linked to the experts’ relationship with the political regime. As experts are increasingly clustered on opposite sides of the political divide – some with limited or no access to policy processes; others too close to the government, undermining their professional credibility – they rely on a series of practices to construct legitimacy. 

Policy advisors use various strategies to construct legitimacy. They balance scientific rigour with political relevance. Our analysis demonstrates that even if the main bases of legitimacy (policy relevance and scientific robustness) continue to be seen as benchmarks for constructing legitimacy, they gain new meanings in the context of polarised, autocratising Hungary. This balancing involves distinctive discursive, individual and organisational practices.

Continue reading →

Improving support for postgraduate researchers’ wellbeing

policypressblogLeave a comment

by John Turnpenny

There has been concern in many countries for decades about poor wellbeing and mental health among students and staff in Higher Education institutions, including universities. In response, there is no shortage of recent initiatives to support wellbeing. In the UK, for example, there are research programmes, evidence hubs, charters, and strategies. There are also many different interventions, from direct support for people with wellbeing or mental health issues, to more indirect preventative measures such as improving supervision training.

However, why does such support sometimes struggle to have the desired impact? In my recent article in Policy & Politics, I examine some of the political and operational challenges of supporting wellbeing of postgraduate researchers (PGRs[1]), and the interactions between these challenges. In the UK there is an ongoing debate about PGRs’ status: they are often seen as neither, or confusingly both, staff and students. While PGRs pay fees to their institution, they contribute significantly to research and teaching, often while on casual contracts. I show how and why this status ambiguity has profound and complex implications for the capacity to design, steer, implement, engage with or benefit from support.

Continue reading →

Policy feedback and the politics of trade agreements

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Rodrigo Fagundes Cezar

Why do interest groups mobilise to change the design of international institutions? The existing research on this topic expects moments when there is a peak in political action, but generally does not consider how such peaks might impact future mobilisations. To fill this gap, my recent article published in Policy & Politics entitled Policy feedback and the politics of trade agreements, seeks to provide an explanation for the conditions under which interest groups mobilise around trade policies using a policy feedback framework.

In particular, I argue that interest groups are more likely to mobilise around polarising (aspects of) trade policy when they have had bad experiences with them before. In other words—organisations are more likely to take action when they have reason to believe that a particular policy will harm their constituents or goals because they have engaged in political learning.

Continue reading →

When crises become the new normal: eroding expert influence during the COVID-19 Pandemic

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Eric Montpetit, Antoine Claude Lemor, Maria Alejandra Costa, and Louis-Robert Beaulieu-Guay

4 individual portrait photographs of the 4 authors of the article: Eric Montpetit (male), Antoine Claude Lemore (male), Alejandra Maria Costa (female) and Louis-Robert Beaulieu-Guay (male).

Some might say that people can grow accustomed to almost anything—even the worst crises. Indeed, human beings learn to cope with disruptions that initially provoke serious fears, but over time become a “new normal.” This capacity to adapt can be so strong that it undermines the influence of expert knowledge guiding decisions in times of crisis. That is precisely what we observed in Quebec (Canada) during the COVID-19 pandemic, as discussed in our recent article published in Policy & Politics.

Experts often believe that raising alarms about an impending catastrophe is an effective way to heighten awareness among both the public and policymakers regarding the risks of inaction. While fear-based strategies can yield results early in a crisis, they may become counterproductive later on.

In March 2020, many epidemiologists warned decision-makers that, without the swift implementation of strict lockdown measures, COVID-19 would spread exponentially—leading to a horrific number of casualties. In several countries, immediate lockdowns followed, with little consideration for the associated economic costs or unprecedented restrictions on individual freedoms. By highlighting the gravity of the threat, epidemiologists initially exerted considerable influence on both the public and policymakers.

Continue reading →

Policy & Politics Highlights collection on Democratic Innovations: free to access from 1 February – 30 April 2025

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Sarah Brown and Allegra Fullerton

Welcome to our first themed collection of 2025, featuring our most popular, recent research published in Policy & Politics! Our first collection centres around themes of Democracy. Whether you’re preparing to teach a unit on democracy or doing research in that area, or are just interested in keeping up to date with the latest concepts in democratic innovations, we hope you will find these highlighted articles interesting!

Our first article in this collection, is a conceptual article which presents a new theory of robust democracy. In this powerhouse of an article, authors Sørensen and Warren argue that such a theory is needed to strengthen the capacity of liberal democracies to adapt and innovate in response to change. While many democratic theorists recognise the necessity of reforming liberal democracies to keep pace with social change, the authors argue that  what enables such reform is rarely considered. The authors posit that liberal democracies are politically robust when they are able to continuously adapt and innovate in ways that enable them to serve their core democratic functions, even in the face of disruptive political demands and events. These functions include securing the empowered inclusion of those affected, collective agenda setting and will formation, and the making of joint decisions. This theorising becomes all the more urgent in response to three current challenges that the authors highlight which urgently demand the adaptation and innovation of liberal democracies to become more politically robust: an increasingly assertive political culture, the digitalisation of political communication and increasing global interdependencies. The new theory suggests that when a political system serves these three core democratic functions, this not only deepens democracy, which is justifiable on its own terms, but it also increases political robustness.

Continue reading →

Unlocking Collaborative Innovation: Practical Tips for Policymakers to Drive Policy Change

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Carla Cordoncillo Acosta and Mireia Borrell

Collaborative innovation is gaining recognition as a critical strategy for public organisations, especially when addressing complex “wicked” problems. These challenges demand fresh thinking, and collaboration—particularly in diverse teams—can make all the difference. By bringing together varied perspectives, policymakers can unlock creative solutions that might not emerge in isolated decision-making. Working collaboratively not only expands the range of options but also makes thinking “outside the box” more productive and impactful.

Despite its promise, the concept of “collaborative innovation” is still mostly grounded in theory. Empirical studies are limited, and when they do exist, they often rely on case studies that lump all forms of collaboration together. This approach overlooks the nuances of different collaborative arrangements and makes it difficult to understand how specific types of collaboration contribute to innovation. Some research hints at distinctions among setups, linking them to innovation in theory, but no one has systematically compared their actual impact.

This is where our study steps in. For policymakers to truly harness the potential of collaboration, they need clear evidence about which actors to involve and how. In our recent article published in Policy & Politics entitled “Fostering innovation through collaboration: A comparison of collaborative approaches to policy design”— we examine the innovative potential of different collaborative arrangements. As expected, we find that collaboration—whether within government or with non-public actors—is a game-changer. But there’s a catch: not all contributors bring equal value to the table. Some actors possess greater capacity to innovate than others.

Continue reading →

When is a law not a law? And why does that matter to long-term care?  

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Catherine Needham and Emily Burn

When is a law not a law? When it gets passed into statute but never enacted. Lord Norton (a Conservative peer and expert on UK parliament) calls these cases ‘law but not law’. Such cases have been missed in the policy literature to date. Existing literature looks at the difficult process of policy design and policy making, taking it to the moment of legislative approval. Other literature takes it from the point of enactment to see how well the implementation fares. But there has been a failure to acknowledge a slim but important set of cases in which policies which gain legislative endorsement but are never enacted. A review by the UK House of Lords library found 480 such examples in the UK parliament between 1960 and 2020. In a system where the executive usually controls the legislative agenda and is not required to implement legislative mandates that it did not instigate (eg. Westminster in the UK), non-enactment represents a particular puzzle.

In our recent article in Policy and Politics, we explore the phenomenon of non-enacted policy through the example of long-term care funding in England. Two legislative interventions to reform long-term care funding in England have been abandoned prior to enactment. A package of reforms – including a cap on private liability for care costs and an increase in the means-test threshold – was passed into law in the Care Act 2014, but enactment was first delayed and then abandoned. A very similar reform package was then passed into law again in the Health and Care Act 2022, with implementation scheduled for 2023. This too was delayed and then abandoned.

Continue reading →

How should deliberative mini-publics be governed?

policypressblogLeave a comment

by Lucy J. Parry, Nicole Curato and John S. Dryzek


Proponents of deliberative mini-publics (DMPs) highlight their ability to break political deadlock, provide informed citizen input into policymaking, and bring diverse, considered perspectives into decision-making. DMPs are composed of randomly selected citizens convened to deliberate upon and yield policy recommendations.  

Some suggest that DMPs face risks of being used instrumentally by decisionmakers to bolster popularity or legitimacy. This is exacerbated because governance decisions around DMPs are often opaque or ad hoc. As their popularity increases, so too do these risks. Unlike other forms of political participation, such as elections, there are no generally accepted standards to uphold integrity of DMPs. To what extent can challenges in their ethics and governance be monitored and mitigated? 

In our recent article published in Policy & Politics, we found divergent views on this question. We used Q methodology to map shared viewpoints on the integrity and governance of DMPs, with members of the DMPs community: practitioners, researchers, advocates and policymakers involved in their study, design, implementation and promotion. Our study identified five viewpoints on the integrity and governance of deliberative mini-publics as follows. 

Continue reading →