制度语法工具符合叙事政策框架:在协商中叙述制度声明

IF 2.7 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Claire A. Dunlop, Jonathan C. Kamkhaji, Claudio M. Radaelli, Gaia Taffoni
{"title":"制度语法工具符合叙事政策框架:在协商中叙述制度声明","authors":"Claire A. Dunlop,&nbsp;Jonathan C. Kamkhaji,&nbsp;Claudio M. Radaelli,&nbsp;Gaia Taffoni","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We compare the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) and the Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT). Given the focus of this special issue on the NPF, we first theorize how the IGT can contribute to the development of NPF categories, but also how the former gains conceptual leverage from the latter. We argue that it is useful to consider jointly NPF and IGT as this expands the benefit of NPF usage for policy researchers—uncovering not only the stories policy actors tell but also what these stories mean in terms of institutional statements. We provide a demonstration of how the conversation between these two policy lenses may develop by analyzing original data on the design of consultation procedures in the European Union, Finland, Ireland, and Malta.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"7 S2","pages":"365-385"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/epa2.1126","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Institutional Grammar Tool meets the Narrative Policy Framework: Narrating institutional statements in consultation\",\"authors\":\"Claire A. Dunlop,&nbsp;Jonathan C. Kamkhaji,&nbsp;Claudio M. Radaelli,&nbsp;Gaia Taffoni\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/epa2.1126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We compare the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) and the Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT). Given the focus of this special issue on the NPF, we first theorize how the IGT can contribute to the development of NPF categories, but also how the former gains conceptual leverage from the latter. We argue that it is useful to consider jointly NPF and IGT as this expands the benefit of NPF usage for policy researchers—uncovering not only the stories policy actors tell but also what these stories mean in terms of institutional statements. We provide a demonstration of how the conversation between these two policy lenses may develop by analyzing original data on the design of consultation procedures in the European Union, Finland, Ireland, and Malta.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":\"7 S2\",\"pages\":\"365-385\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/epa2.1126\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/epa2.1126\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/epa2.1126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

我们比较了叙事政策框架(NPF)和制度语法工具(IGT)。鉴于本期特刊对NPF的关注,我们首先理论化IGT如何促进NPF类别的发展,以及前者如何从后者获得概念上的杠杆作用。我们认为,联合考虑NPF和IGT是有用的,因为这扩大了政策研究者使用NPF的好处——不仅揭示了政策参与者讲述的故事,还揭示了这些故事在制度陈述方面的意义。我们通过分析欧盟、芬兰、爱尔兰和马耳他磋商程序设计的原始数据,展示了这两个政策镜头之间的对话是如何发展的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Institutional Grammar Tool meets the Narrative Policy Framework: Narrating institutional statements in consultation

We compare the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) and the Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT). Given the focus of this special issue on the NPF, we first theorize how the IGT can contribute to the development of NPF categories, but also how the former gains conceptual leverage from the latter. We argue that it is useful to consider jointly NPF and IGT as this expands the benefit of NPF usage for policy researchers—uncovering not only the stories policy actors tell but also what these stories mean in terms of institutional statements. We provide a demonstration of how the conversation between these two policy lenses may develop by analyzing original data on the design of consultation procedures in the European Union, Finland, Ireland, and Malta.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Policy Analysis
European Policy Analysis Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
×
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