Introduction: Japanese experience of great disasters: Revisioning 3/11 and beyond
In: Japanese journal of sociology: JJS, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 3-6
ISSN: 2769-1357
21 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Japanese journal of sociology: JJS, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 3-6
ISSN: 2769-1357
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 41.3, Heft 0, S. 73-78
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 33, Heft 0, S. 355-360
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of comparative policy analysis: research and practice, Band 23, Heft 3, S. 291-309
ISSN: 1572-5448
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 40.3, Heft 0, S. 379-384
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 35, Heft 0, S. 475-480
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 33, Heft 0, S. 121-126
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 31, Heft 0, S. 373-378
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 29, Heft 0, S. 205-210
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 26, Heft 0, S. 241-246
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 20, Heft 0, S. 115-120
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Policy studies journal: the journal of the Policy Studies Organization, Band 51, Heft 1, S. 187-207
ISSN: 1541-0072
AbstractPolicy scholars have increasingly focused on collaborative and competitive relationships between stakeholder coalitions. The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) in particular has directed scholarly attention toward such relationships. The ACF defines advocacy coalitions as groups of actors who share beliefs and coordinate their action. However, previous research has been inconsistent in defining and measuring coalitions, which has hampered comparative research and theory building. We present a method called the Advocacy Coalition Index, which measures belief similarity and the coordination of action in a manner that makes it possible to assess the extent to which advocacy coalitions are found in policy subsystems, whether subgroups resemble coalitions, and how individual actors contribute to coalition formation. The index provides a standardized method for identifying coalitions that can be applied to comparative research. To illustrate the effectiveness of the index, we analyze two climate change policy subsystems, namely Finland and Sweden, which have been shown to differ in terms of the association of belief similarity with coordination. We demonstrate that the index performs well in identifying the different types of subsystems, coalitions, and actors that contribute the most to coalition formation, as well as those involved in cross‐coalition brokerage.
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 35, Heft 0, S. 529-534
ISSN: 2185-0593
In: Social movement studies: journal of social, cultural and political protest, Band 21, Heft 1-2, S. 79-102
ISSN: 1474-2837
In: Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Band 38.3, Heft 0, S. 541-546
ISSN: 2185-0593