ECPR2016

Theroleofdialogue-orientedpar:cipa:oninthepolicyformula:onprocess

Presenta(onatthePanel“The‘Macro’ImpactsofDelibera(veDemocra(cInnova(ons”oftheECPRGeneralConference,Prague,7-10September2016ClaudiaThomsandUweRemer-Bollow

oneRelevanceandAssump:ons

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

(Poten:al)PolicyImpactandLegi:macyasPointsofReferenceThecommonrelevance§  Par(cipatoryproceduresasacure-all

–  Democra(cqualifica(on–  Knowledge–  Transparency

–  BeTerdecisions–  Lessdemocra(cdeficit

Theseareonlyprecondi(onsfor…

Theactualrelevance§  Par(cipatoryprocedurescontributetothelegi(macyofgreaterthe

policyprocessesandimplementedpolicesbyenabelingeffec(vepar(cipa(on(influence/poten(alinfluenceondecision)

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Butthereisamissinglink...

…sinceinformalpar(cipatoryproceduresdonotendinauthorita(vedecisions:

§  Howdotheydevelopimpactwithinthemacropoli(calprocessinwhichthedecisionisul(matelylocated?

§  Howdotheycontributetothelegi(macyofpoli(caldecisions(Michels2011;Michels,Binnema2015;Pogrebinschi,Ryan2014)?

Causalmechanismsthatexplainhowcertaincondi(onswithinandaroundthepar(cipatoryprocess(micro)contributetotheprocessingof

poli(calissuesonasocietallevel(macro)?

twoTheAdvocacyCoali:onFramework

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

TheAdvocacyCoali:onFramework

Theadvocacycoali(onframework(ACF)datesbackonworkofSaba(erandJenkins-Smith(Jenkins-Smithetal.2014;Saba(er,Weible2014).§  Policiesrestonimplicitassump:onsonhowtorealisetargeted

outcomes.§  Theseassump(onscanbeconceptualisedasakindofbeliefsystem§  Actorsinpolicy-subsystemsgroupintoalimitednumberofadvocacy

coali:ons–  sharecommonbeliefs–  makestrategicandcoordinateduseofresources

§  3levelsofbeliefs–  Deep-corebeliefs/policy-corebelief/secondarybeliefs

.

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Whendoesitcometopolicy-change?

Fourcondi(onsforpolicy-change

§  Policy-systemexternalevents§  Policy-systeminternalevents§  Policylearning§  Cross-coali(onlearning

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Applica:onofACFonpar:cipatoryprocedures

Par(cipatoryproceduresarepartofthepolicyprocess.

Howdopar(cipatoryproceduresaffectthepolicyprocessatstages,wheredecisionsarefinalymade?§  policymakersneedtobeinfluenced§  ACFisabletolinkparicipatoryarenaanddecisionarena:

–  Policymakersaredirectlyorindirectlypartofadvocacycolai(ons–  Advocacycoali(onsnego(ateanddeliberatetochangethebeliefsystemsof

theoppositecoali(ons(succesfullyornot)–  sincepolicymakersareoffice-seekers,theyareresponsivetotheiradvocacy

coali(on

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Applica:onofACFonpar:cipatoryprocedures

Par(cipatoryproceduresmayfacilitatecross-coali(onlearningTheyprovide§  arenasfornego(a(on§  withsuppor(veproper(es(e.g.moderatorsthatserveaspolicy-

broker,jointlyappointedexperts,etc.)

Ø beliefsystemsofadvocacycoali:onsmaybealtered

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Whendoesitcometopolicy-change?

§  Toanalysepar(cipatoryproceduresasembeddedinabroaderpolicyprocesswithrespecttoadvocacycoali(onsyieldstwomajoradvantages:

§  First,theACFallowsderivingpossibleexplana(onsontheeffec(venessofpar(cipatoryprocedures.

§  Second,itclosestheexis(nggaponhowpar(cipatoryprocedurescontributetothelegi(macyofpoli(caldecisions,measures,andprojects.

threeDataandAnalysis

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Objec:ves

Followingtheassump(onsoftheACF,twothema:cobjec:ves:1.  Explorewhetheradvocacycoali(onscanbefoundinadiversesetof

par(cipatoryprocedures.2.  Exploreifactorsen(tledtomakeasubsequentdecisionontheissuein

ques(onarepartoftheadvocacycoali(ons.…andtwomethodologicalobjec:ves:3.  Determinewhetherourmethodofcollec(ngdataisgenerallysuitableforthis

purpose.4.  Explorepossibleweaknessesinthedesignofdatacollec(ontoimproveour

approach.

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

DataandMeasures

DataSource§  Expertonlinesurvey§  Conveniencesample

–  n=24–  ResearchersandstudentsfrommasterprogramsfromtheUniversi(esofHohenheimandStuTgart–  Concernedwiththeevalua(onofapar(cipatoryprocedure

§  Fieldperiod:JuneandJuly2016§  Totalresponses:

–  n=10–  Par(cipatoryproceduresconcerningconflictuousinfrastructureprojectsandques(onsabout

futurelivingtogether–  Mostlywithadiscursiveelement–  Poli(calactorsinvolvedinvaryingintensity

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

DataandMeasures

Asanapproxima(ontothecongruenceofbeliefsystems,measureofthealtogethercongruenceofposi:onsontheissuebetweendyadsofpar(cipa(ngactors:1.  Iden(fyandnamerelevantpar(cipants2.  Indicatethedegreeofoverlapbetweentheposi(onsoftwoactors

Now, please just consider the issue onwhich the par4cipa4on takesplace.Howcloseare#actor_1and#actor_2concerningtheirposi4ononthatissue?Pleaseusetheslider.0meansthatbothactorsdivergetotheextentpossible.100meansthatbothactorssharean iden4calposi4on.0 100

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Analysis

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

actorsrepresentedbynodes

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Analysis

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

degreeofcongruencerepresentedbyedgewidth

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Analysis

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

denseclusters(coali(ons)withgreatercongruencebetweenactorsinthesameclusterthanbetweenactorsindifferentclusters

actorsthatareindecisiveorholdaneutral/media(ngposi(on

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Analysis

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

17

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases

fourDiscussionandConclusion

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Conclusion

Inshort:§  Advocacycoali(onframeworkseemsappropriate,asitnamesthemechanism

thatconnectspar(cipatoryprocedurestothewiderprocessofpolicyformula(on

§  Advocacycoali(onscanbefoundinthesenngofpar(cipatoryprocedures(objec(ve1)

§  Poli(calactorsandotheractorsen(tledtomakeasubsequentdecisionooentendtobepartofacoali(on,butalsoseemtotakeamedia(ngposi(oninsomecases(objec(ve2)

§  Measureofoverallposi(onalcongruenceasanapproxima(ontocongruenceofbeliefsystemsofactorswithinapolicysubsystemisabletorevealcoali(ons(objec(ve3)

sharedbeliefsàissue-specificadvocacycoali(ons

àconnec(onbetweenactorsfromdifferentarenas

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Limita:onsandOutlook

Weaknesses:§  Interpreta(onofposi(onofactorsdependsontheassump(onthatgroupsof

actors(e.g.districtcouncilwithdifferentpar(es)arehomogeneousintheirbeliefs

§  Furtheraspectsoftheadvocacycoali(onframework(e.g.resourcesandtheirstrategicuse)areignored

Outlook:§  Combina(onwithadetailedmeasureofthedegreeofdelibera(oninthe

par(cipatoryproceduretoassessitsimpactontheevolu(onofcoali(ons§  Observa(onoftherela(onbetweendifferentcongruencestructures(incl.

presence/absenceofstrongpoli(calactors/decisionmakersinthecoali(ons)andtheimpactofpar(cipatoryproceduresonpoliciesandtheirlegi(macy

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Contact

Claudia Thoms, M.Sc. Universität Hohenheim Ins(tutfürKommunika(onswissenschaoKommunika(onswissenschaoinsb.Kommunika(onstheorie(540C) Fruwirthstraße 46 70599 Stuttgart claudia.thoms@uni-hohenheim.de

Uwe Remer-Bollow, M.A. Universität Stuttgart Ins(tutfürSozialwissenschaoenAbteilungfürPoli(scheSystemeundPoli(scheSoziologie(I)Breitscheidstraße270174StuTgart uwe.remer-bollow@sowi.uni-stuttgart.de

ThankyouforyouraTen(on.Commentsarealwayswelcome!

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

References

Csardi,Gabor,andTamasNepusz.2006.Theigraphsoowarepackageforcomplexnetworkresearch.InterJournal1695.Jenkins-Smith,HankC.DanielNohrstedt,ChristopherM.Weible,andPaulA.Saba(er.2014.TheAdvocacyCoali(onFramework:Founda(ons,Evolu(on,andOngoingResearch.InTheoriesofthePolicyProcess,editedbyPaulA.Saba(er,andChristopherM.Weible,183-223.NewYork:WestviewPress.Michels,Ank.2011.Innova(onsindemocra(cgovernance:howdoesci(zenpar(cipa(oncontributetoabeTerdemocracy?Interna4onalReviewofAdministra4veSciences77:275-293.Michels,Ank,andHarmenBinnema.2015.Theimpactofci4zenpar4cipa4ononpublicpolicies:Evidencefromtwolocalmini-publicsintheNetherlands.PaperpresentedattheInterna(onalConferenceonPublicPolicy,Milan,1-4July2015.Pogrebinschi,Thamy,andMaTRyan.2014.DesigningImpact:Howdemocra4cinnova4onsmay(ornot)achieveeffec4veness?PaperpresentedattheAnnualMee(ngoftheAmericanPoli(calScienceAssocia(on(APSA),28-31August2014andattheECPRGeneralConference,Glasgow,3-6September2014.

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

References

Saba(er,PaulA.,andChristopherM.Weible(Eds.).2014.TheoriesofthePolicyProcess.NewYork:WestviewPress.Suchman,MarkC.1995.ManagingLegi(macy:StrategicandIns(tu(onalApproaches.TheAcademyofManagementReview20:571-610.

Appendix

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Networkstructuresofthecases

17

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Networkstructuresofthecases

17

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Networkstructuresofthecases

17

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Networkstructuresofthecases

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).

18

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases (continued)

Note: investors (INV), interest groups (IG), environmental groups (EG), actors from the political-administrative system (PAS), and others (OTH).

Besides the identification of at least implied advocacy coalitions, we can also see that PAS actors and actors with the right to make a subsequent decision on the issue in question are present in all networks (though this can not least be due to our sample). Although we are talking about citizen participation, political-administrative actors or actors provided with the right to actually decide in a (political) question are often involved in participatory processes in different roles: as sponsors, organizers, observers, or as addressees, just to name the most common roles. Even in cases where political actors are deliberately excluded from participatory processes, it would be naive to think that they do not take sides, above all if we take into account that participatory processes are one arena among others that process societal conflicts and try to influence a (political) decision. So it is natural to expect political actors to be involved in some way or another in the discussion of the issue. In our cases, we can often see that they tend to be inclined to the position of certain actors involved in

ClaudiaThoms,M.Sc.UweRemer-Bollow,M.A.

Networkstructuresofthecases

18

Figure 1: Network structures of the cases (continued)

Note: investors (INV), interest groups (IG), environmental groups (EG), actors from the political-administrative system (PAS), and others (OTH).

Besides the identification of at least implied advocacy coalitions, we can also see that PAS actors and actors with the right to make a subsequent decision on the issue in question are present in all networks (though this can not least be due to our sample). Although we are talking about citizen participation, political-administrative actors or actors provided with the right to actually decide in a (political) question are often involved in participatory processes in different roles: as sponsors, organizers, observers, or as addressees, just to name the most common roles. Even in cases where political actors are deliberately excluded from participatory processes, it would be naive to think that they do not take sides, above all if we take into account that participatory processes are one arena among others that process societal conflicts and try to influence a (political) decision. So it is natural to expect political actors to be involved in some way or another in the discussion of the issue. In our cases, we can often see that they tend to be inclined to the position of certain actors involved in

Note:investors(INV),interestgroups(IG),environmentalgroups(EG),actorsfromthepoli(cal-administra(vesystem(PAS),andothers(OTH).