The politics of China's policy processes: A comparative review of the Advocacy Coalition Framework's applications to mainland China

Abstract

Drawing on a review of 112 Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) applications to China published during 2006–2022, this article finds that, consistent with ACF assumptions, policy processes in China are complex processes of top-down decision making, horizontal negotiation, networked influence, and bottom-up initiation. The review finds policy processes in many subsystems of China inconsistent with one implicit assumption of the framework: the difficulty of reconciling conflicting beliefs between warring coalitions. Compared with the results from a review of the English ACF applications to countries around the globe, policy-oriented learning and imposition by a hierarchically superior jurisdiction were identified more frequently as pathways to policy change in reviewed applications to China. The Xi Jinping administration encourages between-coalition learning and negotiation to pursue the ideal of building a well-off and equitable society. At the same time, his top-level reforms have changed the long-time status quo in some subsystems by national policy reforms.

Related Articles

Nam, Aerang, and Christopher M. Weible. 2023. “Examining Experts' Discourse in South Korea's Nuclear Power Policy Making: An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Policy Knowledge.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 201–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12522.

Nwalie, Martin Ike. 2019. “Advocacy Coalition Framework and Policy Changes in a Third-World Country.” Politics & Policy 47(3): 545–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12302.

von Malmborg, Fredrik. 2023. “Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Argumentative Discourse Analysis: The Case of the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ Principle in EU Energy and Climate Policy.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 222–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525.