首页> 外文期刊>Policy Studies >Discursive institutionalism and policy stasis in simple and compound polities: the cases of Estonian fiscal policy and United States climate change policy
【24h】

Discursive institutionalism and policy stasis in simple and compound polities: the cases of Estonian fiscal policy and United States climate change policy

机译:简单和复合政治中的话语制度主义和政策停滞:爱沙尼亚的财政政策和美国的气候变化政策

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Discursive institutionalism is the 'newest' of the new institutionalisms. The majority of work employing discursive institutionalism as a framework has so far focused on how it contributes to understanding policy change. Until now, however, little attention has been paid to how discursive institutionalism can help to explain the equally significant phenomenon of policy stasis. This imbalance is addressed here through a discursive institutionalist analysis of two cases of policy stasis: Estonian fiscal policy and United States climate change policy. It is argued that policy stasis - far from being a passive and inactive state - actually involves a large amount of discursive activity by multiple actors. This activity creates, legitimates and perpetuates policy discourses, which ultimately entrench governmental commitments to policy stasis. The article proceeds in three parts. First, a theoretical model is advanced which builds on existing discursive institutionalist literature to modify the theory towards explaining policy stasis. This model is then applied to the two case studies and it is shown how, and to what extent, 'discourse' operates as a causal factor. Finally, it is shown how different institutional contexts affect the causal processes whereby the policy discourse becomes streamlined or complexified depending on the 'simple' or 'compound' characteristics of the polity. It is concluded that discursive institutionalism is a useful theory for understanding policy stasis in its various forms in both simple and compound polities, and that the role of 'discourse' in explaining such situations is deserving of greater scholarly attention.
机译:话语制度主义是新制度主义中的“最新”。迄今为止,大多数以论述性制度主义为框架的工作都集中在如何促进理解政策变化上。但是,到目前为止,很少有人关注论述性制度主义如何帮助解释同样重要的政策停滞现象。这种不平衡是通过对政策停滞的两种情况进行的辩论性制度主义分析解决的:爱沙尼亚的财政政策和美国的气候变化政策。有人认为,政策停滞不只是一种消极和消极的状态,它实际上涉及多个参与者的大量话语活动。这项活动创造,合法化和延续了政策话语,从而最终巩固了政府对政策停滞的承诺。本文分为三个部分。首先,建立了一种理论模型,该模型建立在现有的论述性制度主义文献的基础上,以修改该理论以解释政策停滞。然后将此模型应用于两个案例研究,并显示“话语”如何以及在何种程度上作为因果关系起作用。最后,它表明了不同的制度环境如何影响因果过程,从而使政策话语根据政体的“简单”或“复合”特征而得以精简或复杂化。结论是,话语制度主义是理解简单政体和复合政体中各种形式的政策停滞的有用理论,“话语”在解释这种情况时的作用值得学术界的更多关注。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号