What Explains Collaboration in High and Low Conflict Contexts? Comparing Climate Change Policy Networks in Four Countries

IF 4.1 2区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Marlene Kammerer, Paul M. Wagner, A. Gronow, Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila, D. Fisher, Yun, Sun-Jin
{"title":"What Explains Collaboration in High and Low Conflict Contexts? Comparing Climate Change Policy Networks in Four Countries","authors":"Marlene Kammerer, Paul M. Wagner, A. Gronow, Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila, D. Fisher, Yun, Sun-Jin","doi":"10.1111/PSJ.12422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Explaining collaboration between actors involved in policy processes is crucial for understanding these processes and their outcomes. The policy science literature has advanced several hypotheses explicating what enables or hinders collaboration. However, only a handful of studies compare these factors across different policy contexts. This paper investigates the role of beliefs and influence in shaping collaboration under conditions of high and low conflict by estimating Exponential Random Graph Models using network survey data on the climate policy domains in four countries. Results show that both beliefs and influence are associated with the formation of collaboration ties in the high conflict contexts of South Korea and the United States, whereas neither are significant in the low conflict contexts of Sweden and Switzerland. By considering the level of conflict, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of when beliefs and influence shape collaboration patterns.","PeriodicalId":48154,"journal":{"name":"Policy Studies Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/PSJ.12422","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/PSJ.12422","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Explaining collaboration between actors involved in policy processes is crucial for understanding these processes and their outcomes. The policy science literature has advanced several hypotheses explicating what enables or hinders collaboration. However, only a handful of studies compare these factors across different policy contexts. This paper investigates the role of beliefs and influence in shaping collaboration under conditions of high and low conflict by estimating Exponential Random Graph Models using network survey data on the climate policy domains in four countries. Results show that both beliefs and influence are associated with the formation of collaboration ties in the high conflict contexts of South Korea and the United States, whereas neither are significant in the low conflict contexts of Sweden and Switzerland. By considering the level of conflict, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of when beliefs and influence shape collaboration patterns.
是什么解释了高冲突和低冲突背景下的合作?比较四个国家的气候变化政策网络
解释参与政策过程的行动者之间的合作对于理解这些过程及其结果至关重要。政策科学文献提出了几个假设,解释了是什么促成或阻碍了合作。然而,只有少数研究比较了不同政策背景下的这些因素。本文利用四个国家气候政策领域的网络调查数据,通过估计指数随机图模型,研究了信念和影响力在高冲突和低冲突条件下形成合作中的作用。结果表明,在韩国和美国的高冲突背景下,信念和影响力都与合作关系的形成有关,而在瑞典和瑞士的低冲突背景下两者都不显著。通过考虑冲突的程度,我们的发现对信念和影响何时形成合作模式提供了更细致的理解。
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
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: As the principal outlet for the Public Policy Section of the American Political Science Association and for the Policy Studies Organization (PSO), the Policy Studies Journal (PSJ) is the premier channel for the publication of public policy research. PSJ is best characterized as an outlet for theoretically and empirically grounded research on policy process and policy analysis. More specifically, we aim to publish articles that advance public policy theory, explicitly articulate its methods of data collection and analysis, and provide clear descriptions of how their work advances the literature.
×
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