Are All Policy Decisions Equal? Explaining the Variation in Media Coverage of the UK Budget

A country's budget is one of the most important public policy instruments, as it establishes the government's policy priorities and has the potential to determine winners and losers. The budget, however, is a mixture of different components and these get varying degrees of attention in the media. Drawing on sociology of news research, this paper seeks to explain this heterogeneous coverage of a budget's policy decisions. To do so, it uses a unique data set of over 5,000 articles of press coverage of six UK budgets (2008–2012). These articles are coded for the presence/absence of each of the budget's policy decision, via automated content analysis. On the basis of a multivariate negative binomial model, we find that the salience of a policy decision in the coverage is determined by its cost, whether it is negative (i.e., tax hikes and spending cuts) or positive, the income group that is the most affected by it, and the level of attention given to it by the government.     

Whom Do Bureaucrats Believe? A Randomized Controlled Experiment Testing Perceptions of Credibility of Policy Research

More than ever before, analysts in government have access to policy‐relevant research and advocacy, which they consume and apply in their role in the policy process. Academics have historically occupied a privileged position of authority and legitimacy, but some argue this is changing with the rapid growth of think tanks and research‐based advocacy organizations. This article documents the findings from a randomized controlled survey experiment using policy analysts from the British Columbia provincial government in Canada to systematically test the source effects of policy research in two subject areas: minimum wage and income‐splitting tax policy. Subjects were asked to read research summaries of these topics and then assess the credibility of each article, but for half of the survey respondents the affiliation/authorship of the content was randomly reassigned. The experimental findings lend evidence to the hypothesis that academic research is perceived to be substantially more credible than think tank or advocacy organization research, regardless of its content. That increasingly externalized policy advice systems are not a pluralistic arena of policy research and advice, but instead subject to powerful heuristics that bureaucrats use to sift through policy‐relevant information and advice, demands added nuance to both location and content‐based policy advisory system models.     

Drivers for Policy Agreement in Nascent Subsystems: An Application of the Advocacy Coalition Framework to Fracking Policy in Switzerland and the UK

The study of public policy deals with subsystems in which actors cooperate or compete to turn their beliefs into policy solutions. Yet, most studies concern mature subsystems in which the main actors and their allies and enemies can easily be identified. This paper tackles the challenge of studying nascent subsystems, in which actors have begun to engage in politics but are uncertain about other actors’ beliefs. Actors therefore find it relatively difficult to identify their allies and opponents. Focusing on the Advocacy Coalition Framework, we examine three main ways in which actors might agree to support the same policy design before they decide whether or not to form long‐term relationships within advocacy coalitions: they see the issue through the same lenses, they follow leaders, or they know each other from earlier cooperation. We use the case of fracking policy in Switzerland and the UK as a key example, in which actors have begun to agree with each other, but where final policy outputs were not yet defined, and long‐term relationships not yet observable. We find that, when dealing with new issues, actors strongly rely on former contacts rather than shared ideologies or leadership.     

Government's Unequal Attentiveness to Citizens' Political Priorities

An accumulation of evidence suggests citizens with low incomes have relatively little influence over the policy decisions made by lawmakers in the United States. However, long before elected officials are asked to cast a final vote on a bill's passage, an equally important decision has already been made: the decision for government to focus its limited attention and agenda space on the issue at all. Therefore, it is possible that political inequality is infused earlier in the policymaking process at the agenda‐setting stage if the issues held important by some citizens are given attention while the issues held important by others are not. To investigate this question, we develop novel state‐level measures of citizens' issue priorities and find sizable differences in which issues poor and rich citizens think are most important and deserving of government attention. We then use bill introduction data from state legislatures to measure government attention and uncover evidence that state legislators are less likely to act on an issue when it is prioritized by low‐income citizens as compared to affluent citizens. These findings have important implications for our understanding of political equality and the functioning of American democracy.     

A flawed perspective: the limitations inherent within the study of Chinese nationalism1

ABSTRACT. Is nationalism in China on the rise? Is it making China more combative in the international arena? More fundamentally: Is a focus on nationalism the most effective intellectual framework for understanding how those living within the People's Republic of China (PRC) are defining their position in contemporary world politics? This article briefly answers each of these questions. It argues that, despite forwarding some compelling insights, previous work on Chinese nationalism has been undermined by a number of major flaws. It then finds that such shortcomings are in no small part a product of the narrowing gaze that a focus on nationalism alone imposes on the study of identity politics. The article then advocates that in place of the nationalism rubric, a turn to the broader question of national identity formation is merited. Utilising this perspective, it concludes by cautioning that incipient splits within contemporary Chinese national identity may portend a more tumultuous relationship between China and the rest of the world in the years to come.     

试析尼克松政府对外政策决策机制、过程及主要人员

现已出版的关于尼克松政府的著作,大多试图破译尼克松和基辛格这两位历史人物的思维方式以及他们的个性缺陷。根据新解密的尼克松总统档案和现已发表的英文研究成果,通过研究尼克松政府对外政策决策新机制的确立及其特点,透视尼克松政府对外政策决策机制、过程及涉及的主要人员相关特点,能够加强人们对尼克松政府对外政策决策的认识和理解。从理论上讲,尼克松政府的对外政策决策机制,目的是保证总统的工作日程和时间;总统得到的是经过认真研究、分析和过滤后的情报信息。尼克松任内,确实取得了外交方面的重大成功。然而,这一机制是将美国对外政策决策的千斤重担压到了尼克松和基辛格两人的肩上,违背了美国政府决策民主程序的理念。     

旅游景区一票制及其效率——基于产品捆绑定价模型的经济学分析

旅游景区一票制的理论基础是产品捆绑定价模型,但因为景区产品区别于其它一般产品,对景区进行捆绑定价时,不仅要考虑游客对景区的保留价格,还要考虑游客对景区时间消费量的预期（即保留时间）。本文通过只包含两个景区的保留价格一保留时间模型,对游客闲暇时间约束下的景区一票制定价及其绩效进行了分析,并推出了以下结论：（1）除了游客保留价格和保留时间,套票有效期的长短、参与一票制的景区数量的多少等也会影响一票制效率;（2）混合票制会增加效益,而纯一票制的效益不如非一票制的效益好。笔者在此基础上提出了一些建议。     

“We Seem to Have Always Spoken in Prose . . .” Policy Analysis Is a Clinical Profession: Implications for Policy Analysis Practice and Instruction

The purpose of this article is (i) to propose the concept of policy analysis as a clinical profession, (ii) to relate to the clinical intellectual processes involved in policy analysis, and (iii) following studies in other clinical disciplines, to infer implications for policy analysis and policy analysis instruction. The article will highlight notions of clinical reasoning and clinical cognitive processes relevant to policy analysis and will address reasoning errors associated with bounded rationality and uncertainty in the clinical analytic process. The article seeks to promote awareness of clinical notions and of their relevance for policy analysis practice and instruction.     

Stability and Change in Public Policy: A Longitudinal Study of Comparative Subsystem Dynamics

Using the theoretical framework formulated by Baumgartner and Jones in a most similar systems study of Danish civil defense and Danish national home guard policy from 1949 to 2003, this article shows how particular subsystem characteristics affect the magnitude and frequency of policy punctuations. Despite very similar starting points, the two subsystems have experienced radically different policy evolutions since they were created back in 1948 and 1949. The explanation, it is argued, is to be found in a combination of Baumgartner and Jones’ model of issue definitions and conflict expansion on the one hand, and some particular institutional differences in the foundation of the two subsystems on the other. Hence, the aim of the article is to demonstrate that in a long‐term perspective, certain institutional choices not only enhance stability but also increase the likelihood of future conflict expansions and policy punctuations, given the dynamic model of the policymaking process provided by Baumgartner and Jones.