Policy Narratives and Policy Processes

The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) has influenced a generation of policy scholars with its emphasis on causal drivers, testable hypotheses, and falsification. Until recently, the role of policy narratives has been largely neglected in ACF literature partially because much of that work has operated outside of traditional social science principles, such as falsification. Yet emerging literature under the rubric of Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) demonstrates how the role of policy narratives in policy processes is studied using the same rigorous social science standards initially set forth by Paul A. Sabatier. The NPF identifies theories specifying narrative elements and strategies that are likely useful to ACF researchers as classes of variables that have yet to be integrated. Examining this proposition, we provide seven hypotheses related to critical ACF concepts including advocacy coalitions and policy beliefs, policy learning, public opinion, and strategy. Our goal is to stay within the scientific, theoretical, and methodological tradition of the ACF and show how NPF's empirical, hypotheses, and causal driven work on policy narratives identifies theories applicable to ACF research while also offering an independent framework capable of explaining the policy process through the power of policy narratives. In doing so, we believe both ACF and NPF scholarship can contribute to the advancement of our understanding of the policy process.     

Hizbullah as a regional brand: not all parties are equal

Although the term Hizbullah (Party of God) has become synonymous with the Lebanese group that bears its name, the reality is that many more groups have, and currently do use the term. Sharing the same generic name however, is not necessarily indicative of ideological affinity let alone operational cooperation. This paper discusses the origins of the term and the groups that have adopted the name, as well as the links between them and with Iran. Besides some outlier Sunni groups who use the name, the best way to view the groups’ ideological leanings is to think of them as either intellectually supporting the Iranian concept of governance (khat al-Imam) or as more actively and practically advancing Iranian interests in the region (khat al-Hizbullah).