IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v39y2022i1p32-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The advocacy coalition framework in Japan: Contributions to policy process studies and the challenges involved

Author

Listed:
  • Tomohiko Ohno
  • Naoko Hirayama
  • Keito Mineo
  • Kengo Iwata
  • Izumi Inasawa

Abstract

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF), a unified framework for understanding the policy process, has been applied in various countries and regions; however, there are few contributions from Japan, despite seemingly favorable conditions for applying it. An exploration of what hinders ACF applications in Japan is worthwhile for developing the ACF as a framework for comparative policy process studies across various social and political settings. Therefore, this study aims to systematically review previous Japanese ACF studies. Our review found that Japanese ACF studies are fewer in number, have less coverage of policy fields, and have less methodological diversity and transparency than international trends. While most of the Japanese ACF studies supported the basic hypotheses of the ACF, we found a need to refine some hypotheses and research methods of the ACF studies. We also discuss the background factors in the inactivity of ACF studies in Japan and suggest solutions for it. 倡导联盟框架 (ACF) 作为理解政策过程的统一框架, 已在不同国家和地区得以应用; 不过, 日本在这方面的研究却很少, 尽管日本似乎具备应用该框架的适宜条件。是什么阻碍了ACF在日本的应用, 这是值得探究的问题, 借此能发展ACF框架, 用于比较分析不同社会背景和政治背景之间的政策过程研究。因此, 本文旨在对之前的日本ACF研究进行系统性综述。我们的综述发现, 比起国际趋势, 日本的ACF研究数量更少, 涵盖的政策领域更小, 并且方法论多样性更少且透明度更低。尽管大多数日本ACF研究支持ACF的基本假设, 但我们发现, 部分假设和研究方法需要改进。我们还探讨了ACF研究在日本的低活跃度的背景因素, 并提出相关解决措施。 El marco de coalición de defensa (ACF), un marco unificado para comprender el proceso de las políticas, se ha aplicado en varios países y regiones; sin embargo, hay pocas contribuciones de Japón, a pesar de las condiciones aparentemente favorables para su aplicación. Una exploración de lo que obstaculiza las aplicaciones de ACF en Japón vale la pena para desarrollar el ACF como un marco para estudios de procesos de políticas comparativas en varios entornos sociales y políticos. Por lo tanto, este estudio tiene como objetivo revisar sistemáticamente estudios anteriores de ACF japoneses. Nuestra revisión encontró que los estudios japoneses de ACF son menos numerosos, tienen menos cobertura de campos de políticas y tienen menos diversidad metodológica y transparencia que las tendencias internacionales. Si bien la mayoría de los estudios de ACF japoneses apoyaron las hipótesis básicas de ACF, encontramos la necesidad de refinar algunas hipótesis y métodos de investigación de los estudios de ACF. También discutimos los factores de fondo en la inactividad de los estudios de ACF en Japón y sugerimos soluciones para ello.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomohiko Ohno & Naoko Hirayama & Keito Mineo & Kengo Iwata & Izumi Inasawa, 2022. "The advocacy coalition framework in Japan: Contributions to policy process studies and the challenges involved," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 32-50, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:1:p:32-50
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12446
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12446?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiaoping Zhou & Xiaotian Li & Wei Song & Xiangbin Kong & Xiao Lu, 2021. "Farmland Transitions in China: An Advocacy Coalition Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Muramatsu, Michio & Krauss, Ellis S., 1984. "Bureaucrats and Politicians in Policymaking: The Case of Japan," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 78(1), pages 126-146, March.
    3. Changgeun Yun, 2019. "External shocks and policy change in different coalition opportunity structures," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 17-35, January.
    4. Nannan Zhao & Yuting Liu & June Wang, 2021. "Network Governance and the Evolving Urban Regeneration Policymaking in China: A Case Study of Insurgent Practices in Enninglu Redevelopment Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Barnes, Clare & van Laerhoven, Frank & Driessen, Peter P.J., 2016. "Advocating for Change? How a Civil Society-led Coalition Influences the Implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 162-175.
    6. Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Sabatier, Paul A., 1994. "Evaluating the Advocacy Coalition Framework," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 175-203, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rugema, Didier Milindi & Birhanu, Tadesse Amsalu & Shibeshi, Gebeyehu Belay, 2022. "Analysing land policy processes with stages model: Land policy cases of Ethiopia and Rwanda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. repec:hal:journl:hal-04689665 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2021. "Agricultural Policy Processes: Influential Actors, Policy Networks and Competing Narratives," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315323, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez & Valentina Auricchio & Marzia Mortati, 2022. "Mapping design activities and methods of public sector innovation units through the policy cycle model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 89-136, March.
    5. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2020. "Who has the better story? On the narrative foundations of agricultural development dichotomies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Jean-Philippe Berrou & Alain Piveteau & Thibaud Deguilhem & Leo Delpy & Claire Gondard-Delcroix, 2021. "Who Drives if No-one Governs? A Social Network Analysis of Social Protection Policy in Madagascar," Working Papers hal-03180029, HAL.
    7. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2015. "Donors and domestic policy makers: Two worlds in agricultural policy-making?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-14.
    8. Wong, Chan-Yuan, 2011. "Rent-seeking, industrial policies and national innovation systems in Southeast Asian economies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 231-243.
    9. Jungrav-Gieorgica, Natalia, 2020. "Narrative Policy Framework - polityka publiczna jako walka opowieści," Studia z Polityki Publicznej / Public Policy Studies, Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 1-27, July.
    10. Gluck, Peter, 2000. "Theoretical perspectives for enhancing biological diversity in forest ecosystems in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 195-207, December.
    11. Dang, Yuxuan & Zhao, Zhenting & Kong, Xiangbin & Lei, Ming & Liao, Yubo & Xie, Zhen & Song, Wei, 2023. "Discerning the process of cultivated land governance transition in China since the reform and opening-up-- Based on the multiple streams framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    12. Thumm, Alex Jürgen & Perl, Anthony, 2020. "Puzzling over parking: Assessing the transitional parking requirement in Vancouver, British Columbia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 85-101.
    13. Xiaoping Zhou & Duanshuai Shen & Xiaokun Gu, 2022. "Influences of Land Policy on Urban Ecological Corridors Governance: A Case Study from Shanghai," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-21, August.
    14. Adam Wellstead, 2017. "Plus ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose? A review of Paul Sabatier’s “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 549-561, December.
    15. Albert Weale, 2010. "Political Theory and Practical Public Reasoning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(2), pages 266-281, March.
    16. Hirschl, Bernd, 2009. "International renewable energy policy--between marginalization and initial approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4407-4416, November.
    17. Tal, Gil & Cohen-Blankshtain, Galit, 2011. "Understanding the role of the forecast-maker in overestimation forecasts of policy impacts: The case of Travel Demand Management policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 389-400, June.
    18. Xiuyu Huang & Ying Wang & Wanyi Liang & Zhaojun Wang & Xiao Zhou & Qinqiang Yan, 2023. "Spatial–Temporal Evolution and Driving Factors of the Low–Carbon Transition of Farmland Use in Coastal Areas of Guangdong Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Veenswijk, Marcel & Koerten, Henk & Poot, Jaap, 2012. "Unravelling Organizational Consequences of PSI Reform - An In-depth Study of the Organizational Impact of the Reuse of Public Sector Data," Discussion Papers 1275, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    20. Watkins, Andrew & Papaioannou, Theo & Mugwagwa, Julius & Kale, Dinar, 2015. "National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1407-1418.
    21. Shandong Niu & Xiao Lyu & Guozheng Gu, 2022. "What Is the Operation Logic of Cultivated Land Protection Policies in China? A Grounded Theory Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:1:p:32-50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.