实施研究的新途径:烟草控制中的部门和党派斗争

IF 4.5 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
J. Pollex, Eva Ruffing
{"title":"实施研究的新途径:烟草控制中的部门和党派斗争","authors":"J. Pollex, Eva Ruffing","doi":"10.1080/01402382.2023.2184124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The European Union has developed an ambitious tobacco policy regime. However, this area shows striking differences in national implementation. Although existing research points to some explanations for member state differences, there is still only limited understanding regarding drivers of differentiated implementation. In this study, a method of difference is followed and the article investigates two cases of ‘high performers’ (United Kingdom, Ireland) and two cases of ‘laggards’ (Germany, Austria). In order to explain the differences regarding tobacco control strictness, three explanatory approaches are combined. First, taking a party differences approach, an in-depth analysis of the party positions is conducted, using Comparative Manifesto Data. Second, using a functional approach, policy implementation is assumed to be influenced by portfolio allocation. If the competence for implementing policy lies with economic or agricultural departments, a more liberal approach is expected than if it lies with the health department. Third, a turf approach is used: if the health department has the sole competence for the implementation, stricter (and also more dynamic) regulation is expected than if two or more departments must reach a consensus. Combining administrative science and politics approaches in an innovative way, the article provides novel insights on differentiated implementation.","PeriodicalId":48213,"journal":{"name":"West European Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New avenues in implementation research: departmental and partisan struggles in tobacco control\",\"authors\":\"J. Pollex, Eva Ruffing\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01402382.2023.2184124\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The European Union has developed an ambitious tobacco policy regime. However, this area shows striking differences in national implementation. Although existing research points to some explanations for member state differences, there is still only limited understanding regarding drivers of differentiated implementation. In this study, a method of difference is followed and the article investigates two cases of ‘high performers’ (United Kingdom, Ireland) and two cases of ‘laggards’ (Germany, Austria). In order to explain the differences regarding tobacco control strictness, three explanatory approaches are combined. First, taking a party differences approach, an in-depth analysis of the party positions is conducted, using Comparative Manifesto Data. Second, using a functional approach, policy implementation is assumed to be influenced by portfolio allocation. If the competence for implementing policy lies with economic or agricultural departments, a more liberal approach is expected than if it lies with the health department. Third, a turf approach is used: if the health department has the sole competence for the implementation, stricter (and also more dynamic) regulation is expected than if two or more departments must reach a consensus. Combining administrative science and politics approaches in an innovative way, the article provides novel insights on differentiated implementation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"West European Politics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"West European Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2023.2184124\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"West European Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2023.2184124","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New avenues in implementation research: departmental and partisan struggles in tobacco control
Abstract The European Union has developed an ambitious tobacco policy regime. However, this area shows striking differences in national implementation. Although existing research points to some explanations for member state differences, there is still only limited understanding regarding drivers of differentiated implementation. In this study, a method of difference is followed and the article investigates two cases of ‘high performers’ (United Kingdom, Ireland) and two cases of ‘laggards’ (Germany, Austria). In order to explain the differences regarding tobacco control strictness, three explanatory approaches are combined. First, taking a party differences approach, an in-depth analysis of the party positions is conducted, using Comparative Manifesto Data. Second, using a functional approach, policy implementation is assumed to be influenced by portfolio allocation. If the competence for implementing policy lies with economic or agricultural departments, a more liberal approach is expected than if it lies with the health department. Third, a turf approach is used: if the health department has the sole competence for the implementation, stricter (and also more dynamic) regulation is expected than if two or more departments must reach a consensus. Combining administrative science and politics approaches in an innovative way, the article provides novel insights on differentiated implementation.
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
West European Politics
West European Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: West European Politics (WEP)has established itself as one of the most authoritative journals covering political and social issues in Western Europe. It has a substantial reviews section and coverage of all national elections in Western Europe. Its comprehensive scope, embracing all the major political and social developments in all West European countries, including the European Union, makes it essential reading for both political practitioners and academics.
×
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