Kuhika Gupta

A Comparative Policy Analysis of Coalition Strategies: Case Studies of Nuclear Energy and Forest Management in India

Abstract The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) has long argued that the choice of coalition strategies in pursuit of additional allies and resources to influence policy change is a crucial part of the policy process. However, scholars are only beginning to understand the underlying forces that impact on coalition behavior. Using case studies of nuclear energy and forest management subsystems in India, this article explores how coalition opportunity structures (COS) at the subsystem level impact on coalition strategies. It analyzes how coalitions function within different institutional and policy contexts and why they choose one strategy over another. Findings indicate that centralized policy subsystems with restricted access to decision-making venues lead coalitions to adopt confrontational strategies designed to disrupt the subsystem status quo, whereas decentralized policy subsystems with increased access to decision-making lead coalitions to adopt assimilative strategies designed to work within the subsystem status quo.

The Strategic Use of Policy Narratives: Jaitapur and the Politics of Siting a Nuclear Power Plant in India

Policy theorists have long argued that policy making occurs within “subsystems” or “issue networks” wherein competing groups fight with one another to enact their preferred solutions to a given problem (e.g., Heclo 1978; Kingdon 1984; Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1993; Baumgartner and Jones 1993). For example, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) contends that policy making is the end result of a long struggle between conflicting groups (coalitions) that are trying to advance their beliefs about how the world should work (Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1993). The coalition that is able to amass the maximum amount of resources (i.e., legal authority, public opinion, information, financial resources, skillful leadership, and mobilizable troops) will be the most successful in achieving their preferred outcomes (Sabatier and Weible 2007). As a result, coalitions are constantly pursuing strategies that are designed to maximize the amount of resources they have vis-a-vis their opponents. If and when the balance of power (resources) within a subsystem is altered, policy change is likely to follow.

The Oklahoma Meso-Scale Integrated Socio-Geographic Network: A Technical Overview

AbstractEstablished as a social companion to the Oklahoma Mesonet, the Oklahoma Meso-Scale Integrated Socio-Geographic Network (M-SISNet) is a network of approximately 1500 “social monitoring stations” (geolocated households) across the state of Oklahoma that provide data on household perceptions and responses to signals that are sent from agricultural, hydrological, and meteorological systems. This paper outlines the purpose and nature of the M-SISNet, with specific focus on the sample frame, protocols for recruitment, retention, and survey implementation. It concludes with example survey questions, analyses, and directions for accessing the data.

Insight from Public Surveys Related to Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities: An Overview of Findings from a 2015 Nationwide Survey of US Residents

The results described in this report are an analysis of nationwide surveys, administered between 2006 and 2015, which measure preferences of US residents concerning the environment and energy sources. The Energy & Environment (EE) survey series is conducted annually by the Center for Energy, Security & Society (CES&S), a joint research collaboration of the University of Oklahoma and Sandia National Laboratories. The annual EE survey series is designed to track evolving public views on nuclear materials management in the US. The 2015 wave of the Energy and Environment survey (EE15) was implemented using a web-based questionnaire, and was completed by 2,021 respondents using an Internet sample that matches the characteristics of the adult US population as estimated in the US Census. A special focus of the EE15 survey is how survey respondents understand and evaluate “consent” in the context of the storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). This report presents an overview of key results from analyses of questions related to consent-based siting and other elements of the nuclear energy fuel cycle.