Advocacy Coalition Framework, self-interest and policy change in German munitions policy

by Alexander Pechmann & Jochen Hinkel


In their recent article Self-interest within the Advocacy Coalition Framework: how material beliefs affect change in German munitions policy, authors Alexander Pechmann and Jochen Hinkel, examine how self-interest shapes coalition dynamics and policy change. Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), the authors introduce the concept of material beliefs to better explain how actors motivated by self-interest interact with those driven by broader societal goals.  

The article addresses a longstanding critique of the ACF. While the framework recognises that policy actors may be motivated by both societal goals and self-interest, empirical studies often focus primarily on purposive beliefs—those linked to wider societal objectives such as environmental protection or public health. Pechmann and Hinkel argue that this emphasis risks overlooking how actors’ material interests—such as financial gain or political influence—shape coalition behaviour and policy outcomes. 

To address this gap, the authors conceptualise material beliefs as beliefs oriented towards short-term benefits for the actor or their affiliated group, while purposive beliefs concern longer-term goals that benefit society more broadly. By integrating material beliefs directly into the ACF belief hierarchy, the article offers a clearer framework for analysing how self-interest operates within policy subsystems. 

Continue reading

Calibration in Policy Design: Rethinking Targets of Energy Efficiency Rebates

By Ryan P. Scott, Chris M. Messer, Adam Mayer and Tami C. Bond 


In this article, the authors explore the concept of calibration in policy design, highlighting how policymakers adjust the scope and design policy interventions to match political, social, and administrative realities. Building on previous work, the authors argue that policies designed with multiple targets might have mechanisms of change quite different from the obvious mechanism of the most visible policy instrument. 

Continue reading

COPPR collection on Policy Process Research from Policy & Politics journal 

by Sarah Brown & Allegra Fullerton

Policy process theories have long provided scholars with conceptual tools for explaining how policy change occurs or stalls, and how actors, ideas, interests, and institutions interact over time. In celebration of being a sponsor of the Conference on Policy Process Research, we present this Virtual Issue featuring seven articles recently published in Policy & Politics that engage directly with leading policy process frameworks. Read on to see the latest from the Narrative Policy Framework, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, and the Multiple Streams Framework, alongside critical perspectives on policy implementation. Read together, these contributions show how policy process theories are continuously refined through empirical testing, conceptual development, and application across diverse political and institutional contexts. 

Continue reading

Applying collective action frameworks to analyse local-level collaboration for electric vehicle-related policies

by Aaron Deslatte, Michael D Siciliano and Rachel M. Krause

Black and white photos of two men and a woman; the authors of blog. From left to right: Aaron Deslatte, Michael D Siciliano and Rachel M. Krause

In their recent article published in Policy & Politics, Aaron Deslatte, Michael D. Siciliano and Rachel M. Krause offer a new perspective on how local governments manage collaboration when implementing climate-related infrastructure—particularly electric vehicle (EV) policy. Drawing on the Institutional Collective Action (ICA) framework, they argue that successful coordination depends not only on external partnerships between governments, but also on the internal organisation of responsibility across departments within a single authority.

Continue reading

Updating your course reading lists? Check out our essential reading recommendations for Public Policy and Politics courses on emotions in public policy, the politics of environmental policy, and governance networks

by Sarah Brown and Allegra H. Fullerton

As you plan reading lists for the coming academic year, this collection of recent articles offers fresh insights for units on emotions in public policy, the politics of environmental policy, and governance networks. Each article draws on cutting-edge empirical research combined with conceptual innovation, making them ideal for both undergraduate and postgraduate modules exploring the politics of policymaking.

We hope these suggestions save you time and effort in mining recent articles while ensuring your course materials reflect the latest research from the frontiers of the discipline.

Continue reading

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

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

Thank you to all our authors, reviewers, board members, readers and friends of Policy & Politics for another great year in 2024 


We are delighted to be ending the year on a high note. Submissions are at their highest level for over a decade, we’ve published more diverse scholarship from a far broader range of countries than ever before, and we’ve maintained our top quartile rankings in both Public Administration and Political Science with an impact factor of 4.3, thanks to the huge support of our loyal community. Congratulations to you all!   

To celebrate, we have made our top 10 most highly cited articles published in 2024 free to access until 31 January 2025. Happy holiday reading! 


Top 10 most highly cited articles published in 2024 – free to access until 31 January 2025 

1. Policy learning governance: a new perspective on agency across policy learning theories Bishoy Zaki 

2. Types of learning and varieties of innovation: how does policy learning enable policy innovation? Nihit Goyal and Michael Howlett 

3. Crisis management in English local government: the limits of resilience Tania Arrieta and Jonathan S. Davies 

4. Expert perspectives on the changing dynamics of policy advisory systems: the COVID-19 crisis and policy learning in Belgium and Australia Marleen Easton, Jennifer Yarnold, Valerie Vervaenen, Jasper De Paepe, and Brian W. Head 

5. Social identities, emotions and policy preferences Johanna Hornung  and Nils C. Bandelow 

6. The democratising capacity of new municipalism: beyond direct democracy in public- common partnerships Iolanda Bianchi 

7. The politics of anger: emotional appraisal mechanisms and the French pension reform protests Johanna Kuhlmann and Peter Starke 

8. Emotions and anti-carceral advocacy in Canada: ‘All of the anger this creates in our bodies is also a tool to kill us’ Jennifer M. Kilty and Michael Orsini
 
9. The challenges experts face during creeping crises: the curse of complacency Ahmad Wesal Zaman, Olivier Rubin, and Reidar Staupe-Delgado

10. Identifying proactive and reactive policy entrepreneurs in collaborative networks in flood risk management Per Becker, Jörgen Sparf, and Evangelia Petridou 

Testing the Multiple Streams Framework in US State Legislatures 

by Rob DeLeo & Clifton Chow


The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) was originally developed to explain agenda setting within national government institutions and the United States Congress in particular. However, the last decade plus has seen an explosion of research applying the theory to new governing contexts (e.g., authoritarian states, transnational institutions, local governments) while extending it to the latter stages of the policy process (e.g. policy formulation and implementation). Yet few studies have applied the framework to subnational governments—and U.S. states in particular—a curious omission given the critical role they play in driving policy change within federal systems.  

Our recent article just published in Policy & Politics fills this gap by applying the MSF to the case of climate change adaptation policymaking in the State of Massachusetts. We specifically rely on a mixed methods research design combining a negative binomial regression analysis with process tracing to assess the effect of all three streams as well as policy entrepreneurship on agenda change.  

One of the biggest barriers to conducting agenda setting research at the subnational level is the dearth of granular data documenting changes in issue attention across time. We overcome this by using data from State House News Service, an independent wire service that provides “gavel-to-gavel” coverage of policymaking within the Massachusetts State government. Although our study focuses specifically on Massachusetts, a cursory review of the public record suggests similar news agencies exist in other states as well, although it is unclear whether their coverage is as a comprehensive as State House News Service Massachusetts.  

Continue reading

How Young People can Shape Environmental Policy in Urban Spaces

by James Sloam & Matt Henn


The United Nations Development Programme has described 2024 as a global elections “Super year”.  However, while that may be the case, younger generations across many established democracies remain deeply disillusioned with mainstream electoral politics. This is hardly a revelation, but reflects the findings from a large body of existing research identifying low levels of youth voter turnout.  By way of contrast, very little attention has been paid to how young people can – and occasionally do – engage with politicians and officials between elections on issues of importance to them. Even when parties attract overwhelming youth support, such as the Labour Party in 4 July UK General Election, they often have little idea of how to govern for - let alone with - young people. In our recent article for Policy & Politics, we argue that youth engagement with local policy-communities on issues that have meaning for their everyday lives offers a potential antidote to this democratic malaise.   

So first the good news.  Our research points to an increasing willingness of policymakers to engage with young people – particularly in the area of environmental policy.  Less positively, policymakers struggle to provide opportunities for meaningful and sustained engagement. Our article explores where the problems lie and suggests how these might be resolved. 

Continue reading

Policy & Politics Highlights collection on new Special Issue on Policy Learning and Policy Innovation: Interactions and Intersections by Claire Dunlop, Claudio Radaelli, Ellen Wayenberg and Bishoy Zaki

by Sarah Brown, Journals Manager


The idea of innovation has become one of the most persistent and sought-after today. While too conceptually elusive to pin down to a single statement, innovation can be broadly understood as a process whereby new elements and approaches are introduced to existing ones, in an attempt to solve problems, add value, and contribute to knowledge. Being a problem-solving, value-oriented process, it is no surprise that the concept of innovation is increasingly finding footholds in different theoretical spaces within policy and political sciences, from collaborative arrangements, democratic practices, policy design and experimentation, to behavioural and cognitive theories. Within the public sector, innovation can be understood as the creation of new policies, services, advisory, governance and political arrangements, often leading to the development of novel shared views of what is acceptable and expected by the public as beneficiaries.  

Intuitively, policy learning has a family resemblance to policy innovation. It seems almost self-evident that they should be considered together in the explanation of policy dynamics. Yet the two literatures have developed independently of each other. Studies which put them in conversation are few.  

Our motivation then is simple.  

Continue reading