Policy agenda trade‐offs for sustainability: The compositional change of attention about energy in legislative hearings

IF 1.4 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Hyodong Sohn
{"title":"Policy agenda trade‐offs for sustainability: The compositional change of attention about energy in legislative hearings","authors":"Hyodong Sohn","doi":"10.1111/polp.12563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The evaluation of relative changes in policy agenda composition using dynamic compositional models can offer a useful way to lead future studies of policy agenda trade‐offs for sustainability. As a specific empirical case, this study examines changes in the annual composition of legislative attention in the United States congressional hearings on energy as a substantive issue domain. Using the description texts of hearings, this article assesses the compositional energy topic changes of conventional agendas, other general agendas, and unconventional agendas, including environmental and social agendas. By focusing on how economic contextual shocks, along with political factors, shape the energy agenda attention mix, this study discovers that conventional agendas related to energy topics in U.S. congressional hearings are relatively less likely to be discussed when economic conditions are adverse under Democratic legislature controls. It illustrates example conditions under which policy agenda subtopics for sustainability are more likely to be pursued at the expense of which subtopics. Related Articles Heidbreder, Brianne. 2012. “Agenda Setting in the States: How Politics and Policy Needs Shape Gubernatorial Agendas.” Politics & Policy 40(2): 296–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00345.x . Morini, Marco, and Marco Cilento. 2020. “New Parties, Fractionalization, and the Increasing Duration of Government Formation Processes in the EU Member States.” Politics & Policy 48(6): 1202–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12381 . Steger, Wayne P. 2008. “The President's Legislative Program: An Issue of Sincere versus Strategic Behavior.” Politics & Policy 33(2): 312–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2005.tb00645.x .","PeriodicalId":51679,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Policy","volume":"59 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The evaluation of relative changes in policy agenda composition using dynamic compositional models can offer a useful way to lead future studies of policy agenda trade‐offs for sustainability. As a specific empirical case, this study examines changes in the annual composition of legislative attention in the United States congressional hearings on energy as a substantive issue domain. Using the description texts of hearings, this article assesses the compositional energy topic changes of conventional agendas, other general agendas, and unconventional agendas, including environmental and social agendas. By focusing on how economic contextual shocks, along with political factors, shape the energy agenda attention mix, this study discovers that conventional agendas related to energy topics in U.S. congressional hearings are relatively less likely to be discussed when economic conditions are adverse under Democratic legislature controls. It illustrates example conditions under which policy agenda subtopics for sustainability are more likely to be pursued at the expense of which subtopics. Related Articles Heidbreder, Brianne. 2012. “Agenda Setting in the States: How Politics and Policy Needs Shape Gubernatorial Agendas.” Politics & Policy 40(2): 296–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00345.x . Morini, Marco, and Marco Cilento. 2020. “New Parties, Fractionalization, and the Increasing Duration of Government Formation Processes in the EU Member States.” Politics & Policy 48(6): 1202–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12381 . Steger, Wayne P. 2008. “The President's Legislative Program: An Issue of Sincere versus Strategic Behavior.” Politics & Policy 33(2): 312–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2005.tb00645.x .
政策议程对可持续性的权衡:立法听证会中对能源关注的构成变化
利用动态构成模型评估政策议程构成的相对变化,可以为未来政策议程可持续性权衡的研究提供有用的方法。作为一个具体的实证案例,本研究考察了作为实质性问题领域的美国国会听证会中立法关注的年度构成的变化。本文利用听证会的描述文本,评估了常规议程、其他一般议程和非常规议程(包括环境和社会议程)的能源议题构成变化。通过关注经济背景冲击以及政治因素如何塑造能源议程的关注组合,本研究发现,当经济状况在民主党立法机构控制下不利时,美国国会听证会中与能源主题相关的传统议程相对不太可能被讨论。它举例说明了在哪些条件下更有可能以牺牲哪些分专题为代价来推行可持续性政策议程分专题。布里安。海德布莱德。2012。“各州的议程设置:政治和政策需求如何塑造州长议程”。政治,政策40(2):296-319。https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747 1346.2012.00345.x。莫里尼、马尔科和马尔科·奇伦托,2020。欧盟成员国的新党、党团化和政府组建过程持续时间的增加。政治,政策48(6):1202-32。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12381。Steger, Wayne P. 2008。“总统的立法计划:真诚与战略行为的问题。”政治,策略33(2):312-29。https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747 1346.2005.tb00645.x。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Politics & Policy
Politics & Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
23.10%
发文量
61
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信