Abstract
ABSTRACTWhen important public issues are debated, many options for government action should be subjected to serious reflection. Constrained discussions over policy options may hamper democratic legitimacy and accountability, and produce decisions that ignore relevant reasons and facts. Hence, constrained deliberation has important consequences for knowledge construction and utilization. We advance theory on ‘epistemic policy learning’ by showing mechanisms that promote expert consensus in external arenas, and that these can hamper deliberation on public policy. Government-appointed experts, in combination with mass media, can ‘freeze’ deliberation by presenting one unified front. Comparison of national print media coverage in Sweden and Denmark during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic offers support. The similar polities enacted different policies: Sweden sought to vaccinate its full population while neighbouring Denmark targeted small groups. Yet experts dominated both public discourses and echoed each other’s support of national policy. In turn, public policy debates were scant in both contexts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
