Policy Coalitions Research Articles

Embracing the politics of transformation: Policy action as “battle‐settlement events”

AbstractSocietal transformations for addressing climate change are intensely contested and at risk of resistance and backlash to ambitious policy action. But they are frequently modeled through heuristics such as S‐curves which abstract from such conflicts, assuming increasing returns to scale as a driver of transformations. This is the case even while scholars accept the presence of political conflict in transformation processes. Within political science and allied disciplines, the notions of policy feedback and policy coalitions have been deployed to understand how such political conflicts may be understood. But these approaches risk gravitating toward an instrumental design impulse that inadvertently downplays conflict. We argue that policy action for societal transformations should be re‐conceptualized as an unfolding series of battle‐settlement events whereby heated episodic political struggles over a certain policy object or issue play out and eventually settle in ways that structure future debates while nonetheless remaining indeterminate and open to challenge or reversal. Such an approach reflects the varied empirical experiences of climate policy action to date which include both accumulation and reversal. It also helps explain trajectories of change that are discontinuous and lurching in contrast to common images of transformation as progressive and cumulative. We illustrate this approach through two cases of unfolding societal transformation on climate change: coal phaseout in the United Kingdom and renewable energy uptake in Australia.

Smart mix politics: business actors in the formulation of global supply chain regulation

The European Union and other advanced economies are turning to mandatory due diligence regulation to address environmental and human rights risks in their global supply chains. This shift is accompanied by calls for ‘smart regulation’ that combines public legislation with private governance instruments and new supporting measures in the producer countries of the Global South. We study the smart regulation agenda in the case of the European Union Deforestation Regulation. We reveal how its progressive rhetoric masks a conservative undertone as business actors and their civil society partners aim to safeguard their vested interests in the age of public supply chain regulation. However, by tracing their lobbying efforts throughout the policy formulation process, we show how this does not imply en bloc support for voluntary, softer forms of regulation. Moreover, these actors exhibit varying motivations and preferences for involving Southern actors in such a mix. Consequently, rather than forming a cohesive policy coalition, their preferences span from conservative to progressive, resulting in new alliances and divisions in this time of regulatory change. By untangling the complexities of ‘smart mix politics’, this article advances critical research into the evolving role, positioning, and influence of business actors in global supply chain governance.

Forging a successful preschool policy coalition: The China experience

Forging a successful preschool policy coalition: The China experience

Conflicts in mangrove protected areas through the actor-centred power framework - Insights from China

Mangroves as a critical ecosystem in tropical and subtropical intertidal zones are undergoing accelerated degradation. Efforts to establish protected areas have been credited as a plausible way to protect mangroves. However, the rapid expansion of protected areas has severely eroded communities' livelihoods and power balance with local authorities, creating tensions between mangrove conservation and local aquaculture development. Based on the actor-centered power framework, we analyzed local residents' reactions and resistance to the highly politicized policies in the K Mangrove National Nature Reserve in China. By revealing power dynamics hidden in multi-actor conflicts under an authoritarian regime, our research sheds new light on how conflicts arise and escalate through the strategic use of power resources and imbalanced power configuration during structural change and policy implementation. Power relations between groups of actors are reshaped from tacit complicity to opposition between the policy coalition and the interest expression coalition. The deprivation by local authorities of community-owned soft power resources significantly exacerbates the power asymmetry between coalitions and triggers the adoption of stronger power strategies by the community and the escalation of resistance intensity. Our research has important implications for better conflict management and coastal resource management under authoritarianism.

The politics of ‘institutionalising’ social protection in Africa: The retrenchment of social cash transfers in Zambia, 2015–2021

AbstractSocial protection has expanded unevenly across Africa because of variations in both the initial adoption of programmes and their subsequent ‘institutionalisation’ through government-funded expansions in coverage. The case of Zambia illustrates how policy coalitions promoting the institutionalisation of social protection compete with other claimants over prioritisation in public spending. Even when faced with competitive elections, incumbent governments may prioritise other programmes over social protection. In Zambia, the incumbent government announced and budgeted for a massive government-funded expansion of social protection but failed to allocate the necessary funding – with the result that benefits were not paid to registered beneficiaries. If ‘institutionalisation’ is understood as entailing the political irreversibility of expansion, then the rhetoric of institutionalisation belied the reality (for several years) of retrenchment. The weakened policy coalition supporting social protection was unable to prevent government defunding as scarce government resources were allocated to competing programmes.

A policy analysis of how alkyl nitrites (poppers) became prescription-only in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Alkyl nitrites ('poppers') are a group of drugs that includes amyl nitrite, butyl nitrite, and isopropyl nitrite. Their use is prevalent among men who have sex with men (MSM), to enhance sexual comfort and pleasure. In Aotearoa New Zealand, all alkyl nitrites became prescription-only from March 2020. With alkyl nitrites no longer sold locally in stores, and no availability via pharmacies (even with a prescription), access has been significantly reduced. This decision was opposed by advocacy groups and people who use alkyl nitrites. This policy case study explores how this decision was made and impacts on MSM. We use policy formation theory; both policy framing and Multiple Streams Framework, to analyse factors that contributed to this regulatory decision. Analysis of issue framing by policy coalitions was undertaken through review of documents including submissions and committee minutes. Two policy coalitions emerged, which differed in their issue framing. The Medicines Classification Committee conveyed concerns about evidence limitations, and recommended reclassification. NGOs and people who use alkyl nitrites communicated that there was no evidence of harm from alkyl nitrite use in New Zealand, and thus, given that there was evidence of benefit, the status quo should be maintained and further regulatory responses were unnecessary. Pre-existing processes created a situation where alkyl nitrite scheduling came unexpectedly onto the New Zealand policy agenda, and set the issue onto a somewhat pre-determined pathway with limited policy choices available. As a drug policy case study, it appears that reclassification was initiated due to a policy process that did not enable or support plausible alternatives. While the purpose of the reclassification was to improve safety, there was no evidence of harm prior to reclassification, and the reduction in access is likely to have increased harm for MSM.

Coalition policy in multiparty governments: whose preferences prevail

AbstractIn coalition governments, parties need to agree on a common policy position. Whose preferences prevail? The proportionality hypothesis, the idea that coalition partners’ influence on policy is proportional to their share of seats, has been used widely in the literature on democratic representation, ideological congruence, and coalition politics. In my analysis of competing theories aimed at determining what influences policy compromise in multiparty governments, I reject the proportionality hypothesis. My results suggest instead that coalition partners exert equal influence on policy compromises, independent of their number of seats. More extensive analysis also provides evidence for increased party influence on policies when the party is the formateur or closer to the parliamentary median, ceteris paribus. As a by-product of my analysis, I provide a simple and better proxy for measuring a government's position when this position is not directly observable.

The 2010–15 coalition government and the legacy of free schools in England

Free schools were a flagship policy of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition (2010–15), aligned with the broader academisation programme, yet both consolidating and transcending New Labour’s educational narrative between 1997 and 2010. Driven by political ‘modernisers’ such as Prime Minister David Cameron and his Education Secretary Michael Gove, these schools were framed as an innovative and revitalised educational policy approach, aspiring to eclipse previous ‘failed’ policies of both left and right. They proposed greater autonomy and liberation from statist bureaucracy, incorporating non-state bodies as providers, while remaining within the broader state educational structure. Primarily exported from Scandinavia as ‘all-ability’ schools, and with a distinctive autonomous and communitarian element, yet analysis and measurement of the impact of free schools both internationally and domestically has since been mixed. The article seeks (with the benefit of added hindsight and perspective) to focus on the circumstances in which this policy was implemented from 2010, assessing various challenges it faced within a coalition government environment, while ultimately analysing its overall impact on the English educational system in subsequent years.

Implementation Challenges of Family Physician Program: A Systematic Review on Global Evidence.

The family physician program, as one of the core arms of health care systems, has faced various implementation challenges around the world. Experiences in the implementation of family physician program can be helpful for nations that seek to apply for similar programs. The aim of this study is to systematically review the implementation challenges of family physician program across the world. A systematic search was conducted from January 2000 to February 2022 across scientific databases of Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, EBSCO, and Google Scholar. The Framework approach was used to analyze the selected studies. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the McMaster Critical Review Form for qualitative studies. 35 studies upon the study inclusion criteria were included. Based on the Six Building Blocks frame, seven themes and 21 subthemes were developed as the implementation challenges of family physician program. 1) Governance: policy guidance, intelligence, coalition, regulation, system design, and accountability; 2) Financing: financing and payment system; 3) Health workforce: education, research, recruitment and motivation opportunities; 4) Service delivery: management of health services, service package, referral system, continuity of care; 5) Health information systems: production and evaluating the health information system; 6) Availability: provision basic health services, maintenance of facilities; and 7) Cultural considerations: behavior and social determinants of health. Scientific governance, financing, and payment mechanisms, workforce empowerment, designing a strong health information system, and providing access to services with cultural considerations can result in the successful implementation of the family physician program in communities.

Transformation of forest governance: policy concepts and actor changes in social forestry program implementation in Indonesia

In Indonesia, particularly in Java, forest governance has been taking place since the State Forest Corporation (SFC) came to power. The emergence of the Social Forestry Forest Utilization Permit (IPHPS) and Strengthening and Protection-Forestry Partnership (Kulin-KK) programs in the SFC area marked the start of an essential phase of social forestry (SF), in which forest access and management were transferred to community groups. The 2017 regulatory policy regarding SF programs in the SFC region significantly impacts governance and actor relations in Java. This study examines the transformation that is taking place using the concept of policy arrangement and analysis of changes in actors at the program implementation level. We find that policy coalitions are formed by government actors and civil society groups using forest and socioeconomic condition-based discourse. The rules of the game that are formed cannot be divorced from the interests of the actors who desire change. The findings at IPHPS indicate that SFC actors have less impact than they do in the Kulin-KK program, where they remain powerful because this program is regarded as a continuation of the PHBM concept that SFC introduced. Community group facilitators are influential actors in a network of community groups in Java that are mainly involved in promoting social forestry programs. This study proposes expanding community participation in the program so that previously powerful actors' interests do not exploit it.

The Microfoundations of Latin America's Social Policy Coalitions: The Insider/Outsider Labor Divide and Attitudes toward Different Welfare Programs in Mexico

The Microfoundations of Latin America's Social Policy Coalitions: The Insider/Outsider Labor Divide and Attitudes toward Different Welfare Programs in Mexico

Who Dislikes Whom? Affective Polarization between Pairs of Parties in Western Democracies

AbstractWhile dislike of opposing parties, that is, affective polarization, is a defining feature of contemporary politics, research on this topic largely centers on the United States. We introduce an approach that analyzes affective polarization between pairs of parties, bridging the US two-party system and multiparty systems in other democracies. Analyzing survey data from twenty Western democracies since the mid-1990s, first, we show that partisans' dislike of out-parties is linked to elite policy disagreements on economic issues and, increasingly over time, also to cultural issues. Secondly, we argue and empirically demonstrate that governing coalition partners in parliamentary democracies display much warmer feelings toward each other than we would expect based on elite policy (dis)agreements. Third, we show that radical right parties are disliked much more intensely than we would expect based on policy disputes and coalition arrangements. These findings highlight the policy-based and institutional underpinnings of affective polarization.

Protection forestall: Offshore firms against tariffs in their own industry

AbstractFirms that offshore final production should oppose trade barriers “protecting” their own industry. This pits them against onshore firms, especially when comparative disadvantage is most pronounced, and so fundamentally alters trade policy coalitions. The US-China trade war's exclusion process, where US firms could request that tariffs not be applied to a product, provides a golden opportunity to test this contention. We show that coverage by a tariff in the trade war and firm characteristics associated with offshoring—size, multinationality, and heavy imports from China—interacted to generate firm requests for exclusion from the trade war's tariffs. This finding is robust to input-sourcing and fears of export retaliation as alternative explanations, and across multiple measures of firm size, tariff coverage, and exclusion requests. We therefore test a key piece of the firm-centered model of trade politics and show its value in interpreting the US-China trade war.

Ethnicity is not public service destiny: The political logic of service distribution in South Africa

Millions of South Africans have protested the unequal allocation of public services in thousands of demonstrations. Despite the African National Congress’s (ANC) promise to reduce the disparities generated by apartheid, the level of public services remains highly uneven across the country. Most studies of service provision in Africa argue that politicians will target their coethnics; others support the “diversity deficit” hypothesis, which predicts that high levels of ethnic diversity undermines service provision. Instead, we argue that explanations of service provision should first examine how political institutions incentivize politicians to choose whether, what, and how to distribute services. Even in an ethnicized polity, ethnic targeting may not be a politician’s best strategy. We seek to explain the variation in service levels across South African municipalities and advance three hypotheses: 1) municipal councilors in more ethnically diverse municipalities will form policy coalitions that produce higher service levels; 2) South African mayors will decrease services when they enjoy electorally safety due to their extensive powers and the possibility of being a residual claimant to municipality resources, and; 3) the strategic interaction between councilors and their mayor helps to account for the variation in service provision across South Africa’s municipalities. We test our hypotheses with data from more than 1.37 million households and aggregated municipality level measures and find strong support for our hypotheses. Political institutions – not just ethnic demography – can influence policy choices and service outcomes.

The State of the UBI Debate: Mapping the Arguments for and against UBI

Abstract This article provides a map of the UBI debate, structured into the main themes that guide and group the arguments on both sides. It finds that UBI’s supporters and opponents both draw on core principles of justice and freedom, focusing on need and poverty, discrimination and inequality, growth, social opportunity, individuality, and self-development. From an economic perspective, they both appeal to business concerns about efficiency, risk, flexibility, and consumption, as well as labour interests on work fulfilment, working conditions, remuneration, and bargaining. Likewise, they focus on political questions around welfare state reforms, redistribution, taxation and funding sources, democratic citizenship, and the prospects for cross-party policy coalitions. By providing an overview of the thematic pillars of the UBI debate, this article helps researchers and activists locate and orient themselves within the wider spectrum of opinion on UBI.

The new hope of Chinese football? Youth football reforms and policy conflicts in the implementation process

ABSTRACT Research question This research focuses on the implementation of youth football policies in China following the 2015 national football reform. It asks the question ‘To what extent have contextual and organisational factors facilitated and/or constrained the effective implementation of Chinese youth football policies?’ Research methods Guided by a critical realist ontology, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders involved in the implementation process of the youth football policy including members of the national and local football associations, schools, and professional football clubs. Results and findings The findings reveal a number of policy conflicts that restricted an effective implementation of the youth football policies. The main conflict lay in the ambiguous intertwinement of two dominant policy coalitions (i.e. sport and education), which consequently led to confusion and conflicts among key implementers in the three pathways. Other factors such as the continuous mismatch of traditional values and beliefs held by actors towards youth football participation, as well as the emphasis on excellence over participation by some actors are also identified as having potentially inhibited effective implementation. Implications This paper contributes to the debate of the positioning of youth sport in an increasingly elite-driven sporting context. It argues that policymakers, implementers, and the overall society, even if they are willing to foster a positive youth sport development, can also generate an adverse effect if they do not work together.

Political regimes matter: Participation practices in the context of a competitive oligarchic policymaking in water management in Duque de Caxias, Brazil, 2007–2017

AbstractThis article covers all types of participation in water policy processes in the city of Duque de Caxias in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Even though open opposition to the government is legally permitted since Brazil's democratization process, barriers remain for activist leaders to formulate and signify their preferences toward the government. The current literature on direct participation practices in policy processes tends to leave out political regime variables. This case study aims to show that, in fact, political regime variables are crucial. The article reintroduces participation practices in power dynamics in local water policymaking, building a model based on competitive oligarchy, multilevel policy coalitions, and political capacity literature. It argues that the political regime matters in understanding participation practices and that, despite legal democratization that opened rights to organize opposition and participation in Brazil in 2007, local activist leaders are restrained by a particular kind of oligarchy—an oligarchic technical–political–productivist policy coalition that “owns” policy through direct participation in the political process. This case study shows that four decades after the policy shift in the 1980s, in some territories and sectors Brazilian democracy may be on the pathway of competitive oligarchy—very open to opposition rights, but still closed to the participation of this opposition in policy and decision‐making processes.

In the cradle of laws: resolving coalition controversies in the executive phase of law-making

AbstractLaw-making in most parliamentary democracies is dominated by the executive. Yet so far, all research has focused on the parliamentary stage of law-making. Studies suggest that the changes to bills submitted by coalition governments are the result of coalition policies dealing with the agency loss caused by ministerial drift. This is puzzling because it is already easier and more effective for coalition parties to attempt to change the bills in the executive phase than in the parliamentary one. The article aims to close the knowledge gap, and it quantitatively explores the factors that facilitate changes during the understudied executive phase on case study of the Czech Republic. Analysis reveals that government bills are altered more during the executive phase than the parliamentary phase. While we find no significant impact caused by the distance to coalition compromise, the saliency of a bill for coalition partners has a negative influence on the ratio of changes.

Explaining Morality Policy Coalitions in Spanish Parliamentary Votes: The Interaction of the Church-State Conflict and Territorial Politics

ABSTRACT In this article we empirically explore the impact of the state-Church conflict on progressive moral policies. Taking Spain as a case study, we analyse the parliamentary interaction of political parties in a number of policy domains that provoke a moral conflict. We examine the principal legislative acts relating to abortion, divorce, same-sex marriage, euthanasia and gender equality from the early 1980s to 2021. We look beyond the religious divide and argue that its interaction with territorial politics, which is in turn shaped by specific institutional features, explains the formation of political coalitions that are conducive to moral legislation. Furthermore, we show that political coalitions vary depending on how explicit or implicit a given morality conflict is.

Enhancing resilience through port coalitions in maritime freight networks

• Coalition strategies with capacity sharing/cross-port investment among ports are tested. • Provide equilibrium problem with equilibrium constraints conceptualization of problem. • Give evidence that coalitions can improve system resilience and demand fulfillment rates. • Found positive returns on investment for individual and network of ports via coalition. • Support policies that increase market share through increased reliability of service routes. Reliable port services are key to maritime freight transport system performance. These systems are vulnerable to disasters of anthropogenic or natural cause, which can significantly impact port capacity, handling times and overall system performance. To improve resilience of individual ports, strategies involving capacity sharing and protective cross-port investments through coalition formation are proposed. This collaborative port protection and investment approach to improve individual and system-level port resilience is formulated as an Equilibrium Problem with Equilibrium Constraints. That is, the program is bi-level with multiple players in the upper level and a common liner shipping problem in the lower level. Its solution is obtained at a Nash equilibrium wherein no port stakeholder can achieve better performance by unilaterally changing its investment plan. A Stackelberg equilibrium between upper and lower levels infers that best investment decisions are made given competition between ports and the market’s response to improvements. The benefits of regional coalitions in this co-opetitive (competitive and collaborative) environment in terms of port and system resilience, port- and system-level demand fulfilment rates and return on investment are investigated from multiple perspectives, including the perspectives of shippers, port owners and the larger shipping network. With insights gained through study of the proposed coalition policies, this work aims to facilitate port authorities in making decisions on port capacity expansion, infrastructure investment and forming strategic partnerships. Shipping companies may also take into consideration the ability of a port to provide service under disruption events when choosing which ports to include in their service loops.