Christopher M. Weible

Beliefs and Perceived Influence in a Natural Resource Conflict: An Advocacy Coalition Approach to Policy Networks

To what extent do stakeholders in a conflict over natural resources interact with actors of congruent policy core beliefs or with actors who have perceived influence? The response to this question is structured principally by the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) using questionnaire and interview data collected from stakeholders involved in California Marine Protected Area policy. The findings indicate that shared beliefs are the best predictor for policy network relationships, supporting the ACF. Perceived influence, while less important than shared beliefs, is another significant predictor.

The Logic of Policy Change after Crisis : Proximity and Subsystem Interaction

What mechanisms link external events to policy change in a policy subsystem? This paper responds to this question by offering a nuanced re-conceptualization of external events and by identifying the mechanisms that link disruptive crises to policy change. Building from the tenets of the advocacy coalition framework and a synthesis of the crisis management and policy change literatures, this paper (1) introduces the concept of policy and geographical proximity as a means to show how different types of crises alter the incentives for policy action within policy subsystems; (2) discusses an integrated set of proposals on how geographical and policy proximity affects the prospects of change in a policy subsystem; and (3) presents hypothesized scenarios outlining plausible intervening pathways linking a crisis to changes as contingent on policy subsystem structures.

A Social‐Ecological‐Infrastructural Systems Framework for Interdisciplinary Study of Sustainable City Systems

Summary Cities are embedded within larger-scale engineered infrastructures (e.g., electric power, water supply, and transportation networks) that convey natural resources over large distances for use by people in cities. The sustainability of city systems therefore depends upon complex, cross-scale interactions between the natural system, the transboundary engineered infrastructures, and the multiple social actors and institutions that govern these infrastructures. These elements, we argue, are best studied in an integrated manner using a novel social-ecological-infrastructural systems (SEIS) framework. In the biophysical subsystem, the SEIS framework integrates urban metabolism with life cycle assessment to articulate transboundary infrastructure supply chain water, energy, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission footprints of cities. These infrastructure footprints make visible multiple resources (water, energy, materials) used directly or indirectly (embodied) to support human activities in cities. They inform cross-scale and cross-infrastructure sector strategies for mitigating environmental pollution, public health risks and supply chain risks posed to cities. In the social subsystem, multiple theories drawn from the social sciences explore interactions between three actor categories—individual resource users, infrastructure designers and operators, and policy actors—who interact with each other and with infrastructures to shape cities toward sustainability outcomes. Linking of the two subsystems occurs by integrating concepts, theories, laws, and models across environmental sciences/climatology, infrastructure engineering, industrial ecology, architecture, urban planning, behavioral sciences, public health, and public affairs. Such integration identifies high-impact leverage points in the urban SEIS. An interdisciplinary SEIS-based curriculum on sustainable cities is described and evaluated for its efficacy in promoting systems thinking and interdisciplinary vocabulary development, both of which are measures of effective frameworks.

A Systematic Approach to Institutional Analysis: Applying Crawford and Ostrom’s Grammar:

In 1995, Crawford and Ostrom proposed a grammatical syntax for examining institutional statements (i.e., rules, norms, and strategies) as part of the institutional analysis and development framework. This article constitutes the first attempt at applying the grammatical syntax to code institutional statements using two pieces of U.S. legislation. The authors illustrate how the grammatical syntax can serve as a basis for collecting, presenting, and analyzing data in a way that is reliable and conveys valid and substantive meaning for the researcher. The article concludes by describing some implementation challenges and ideas for future theoretical and field research.

Caught in a Maelstrom: Implementing California Marine Protected Areas

The first attempt to implement the 1999 California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) to establish marine protected areas (MPAs) ended contentiously in 2002. The initial MLPA process is examined by a statutory analysis and an analysis of stakeholder network relationships and beliefs. The failure of the initial MLPA process can be understood by a combination of factors: (i) Insufficient financial support from the California State government; (ii) Unclear, unranked and inconsistent statutory objectives; (iii) The application of a science-based process that excluded affected stakeholders; (iv) Implementing officials who lacked expertise in designing and managing political processes; and (v) A community of stakeholders who were polarized into coalitions of proponents and opponents of MPAs. The article concludes by discussing limitations of its methods and analysis and by offering strategies for learning from policy failures.

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America

Abstract The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) is one of the most frequently applied theories of the policy process. Most applications have been in Western Europe and North America. This article provides an overview of the ACF, summarizes existing applications outside of Western Europe and North America, and introduces the special issue that features applications of the ACF in the Philippines, China, India, and Kenya. This article concludes with an argument for the continued application of the ACF outside of Western Europe and North America and a research agenda for overcoming challenges in using the ACF in comparative public policy research.

Foes to Friends: Changing Contexts and Changing Intergroup Perceptions

Abstract To advance the study of comparative public policy there must be stronger methodological and theoretical descriptions and explanations of the development of policies and the actors, events, and contexts surrounding their development. Using the social construction and advocacy coalition frameworks, this study compares intergroup perceptions in adversarial and collaborative contexts in the Lake Tahoe Basin, United States. The results suggest one of the benefits of collaborative compared to adversarial contexts is improved intergroup perceptions. However, years may be needed for improved intergroup perceptions to take effect, and these effects may indicate the continuation of relative group positions.

Political-Administrative Relations in Collaborative Environmental Management

Do local elected and staff officials play different roles in collaborative environmental management? Local elected officials express more concern about threats to property rights and excessive government taxes and are more likely to participate in watershed partnerships to head off state and federal regulations. In contrast, local staff officials express more concern about excessive population growth, impaired water quality, and threats to species. Local elected officials associate more with resource users and local districts whereas local staff officials associate more with federal and state government officials, environmentalists, and scientists. The conclusion extends the findings into an exploration into the respective roles of elected and staff officials in sustainable politics.

Obstacles and disaster risk reduction: Survey of Memphis organizations

The disaster management literature is replete with surveys at the community and household levels. However, few exist at the organizational level. This study attempts to fill this void by examining the effect of organizational obstacles on disaster risk reduction. The data come from a survey of 227 organizations in Memphis, Tennessee. This study investigates three obstacles to disaster risk reduction: lack of organizational support, lack of information, and lack of financial resources. The findings show that organizations are more likely to engage in low-effort activities indirectly related to risk reduction and are less likely to engage in high-effort activities directly related to risk reduction. The most important obstacle is lack of information about the frequency of disasters, magnitude of disasters, or organizational benefits of reducing disaster risks. Lack of financial resources and lack of organizational support are sometimes positively associated with risk-reducing activities, suggesting that, when organizations engage in risk-reducing activities, some obstacles become more apparent. The study concludes with implications, limitations, and future research strategies.

Exploring the Policy Narratives and Politics of Hydraulic Fracturing in New York

David Fenton, the founder of Fenton Communications, in an interview with the Grist online, recently suggested that in order for environmental organizations to successfully influence public opinion or policy, they need to pay closer attention to the “marketing” and communication of their concerns and interests (Smith 2014). He notes that people trained in marketing know the importance of “moral narratives and imagery” for influencing public opinion. Fenton, whose company managed a campaign by Yoko Ono in New York to oppose the issue of hydraulic fracturing, indicates in the interview that relating the issues to people, rather than the “environment,” may be key to the success of the environmental movement. However, whether that is the case on the issue of hydraulic fracturing is an empirical question. Hydraulic fracturing is arguably one of the most contentious policy issues on many state and local agendas today, and perhaps one of the most widely debated environmental issues in recent history. Yet, how the policy narratives surrounding hydraulic fracturing are being developed is an understudied area of research. Moreover, such research can provide valuable insights on how the political opinions and policy dialogue are being shaped around this issue.