IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v39y2022i1p73-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Winners and losers: Conflict management through strategic policy engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Kristin L. Olofsson

Abstract

In high‐conflict policy debates, individuals often make strategic decisions about the ways in which they engage in efforts to influence the direction of the debate. Some individuals act to expand the scope of the conflict, whereas others would prefer to contain the scope of the conflict and maintain status quo. This study empirically examines the relationship between activities of political engagement and goals of conflict expansion or containment in a particular setting in which there are clear “winners” and “losers.” This research first explores the tactics an individual undertakes as either conflict expansion or containment. The patterns uncovered are then tested against sectoral affiliation, to draw conclusions about key factors that explain some variation in policy engagement. Findings confirm that there are predictable patterns to engagement decisions, paving the way for future testing in different policy arrangements. 在冲突激烈的政策辩论中，个体经常就其如何通过努力以影响辩论方向一事作出战略决策。一些个体通过行动扩大冲突范围，另一些则偏好控制冲突范围和维持现状。本文实证检验了在存在明显的“赢家”和“输家”这一具体背景下，政治参与活动和冲突扩大目标或冲突控制目标之间的关系。本文首先探究了个体在冲突扩大或冲突控制上分别采取的策略。得出的策略模式随后被用于检验部门隶属关系（sectoral affiliation），最后就一系列关键因素得出结论，这些关键因素能解释政策参与中的部分差异。研究发现证实了存在可预测的参与决策模式，为今后不同政策安排中的相关检验打下基础。 En los debates sobre políticas de alto conflicto, las personas a menudo toman decisiones estratégicas sobre las formas en que se involucran en los esfuerzos para influir en la dirección del debate. Algunas personas actúan para ampliar el alcance del conflicto, mientras que otras prefieren contener el alcance del conflicto y mantener el statu quo. Este estudio examina empíricamente la relación entre las actividades de participación política y los objetivos de expansión o contención del conflicto en un entorno particular en el que hay claros "ganadores" y "perdedores". Esta investigación primero explora las tácticas que emprende un individuo como expansión o contención del conflicto. Los patrones descubiertos luego se prueban contra la afiliación sectorial, para finalmente sacar conclusiones sobre factores clave que explican alguna variación en el compromiso político. Los hallazgos confirman que existen patrones predecibles para las decisiones de participación, allanando el camino para futuras pruebas en diferentes acuerdos de políticas.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristin L. Olofsson, 2022. "Winners and losers: Conflict management through strategic policy engagement," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 73-89, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:1:p:73-89
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12453
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12453?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. Jolanda Hessels & Siri Terjesen, 2010. "Resource dependency and institutional theory perspectives on direct and indirect export choices," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 203-220, February.
    2. Pralle, Sarah B., 2003. "Venue Shopping, Political Strategy, and Policy Change: The Internationalization of Canadian Forest Advocacy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 233-260, September.
    3. Henry Kaiser, 1958. "The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 23(3), pages 187-200, September.
    4. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    5. Brady, Henry E. & Verba, Sidney & Schlozman, Kay Lehman, 1995. "Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(2), pages 271-294, June.
    6. Maloney, William A. & Jordan, Grant & McLaughlin, Andrew M., 1994. "Interest Groups and Public Policy: The Insider/Outsider Model Revisited," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 17-38, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jennifer A. Kagan & Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible & Duncan Gilchrist & Ramiro Berardo & Hongtao Yi, 2023. "Advancing scholarship on policy conflict through perspectives from oil and gas policy actors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 573-594, September.

    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. Ronconi, Lucas & Zarazaga S.J., Rodrigo, 2015. "Labor Exclusion and the Erosion of Citizenship Responsibilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 453-461.
    2. Wegenast, Tim, 2010. "Cana, café, cacau: agrarian structure and educational inequalities in Brazil," Revista de Historia Económica / Journal of Iberian and Latin American Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 103-137, March.
    3. Luigi M. Solivetti, 2020. "Political partisanship versus turnout in Italy’s 2016 referendum," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 709-734, June.
    4. Deniz Guvercin, 2019. "Going to the Polls or Feeding Children? An Empirical Investigation of Voter Turnout among Turkish Women with Children at Home," Bogazici Journal, Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Bogazici University, Department of Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 1-16.
    5. Clemens Kroneberg & Meir Yaish & Volker Stocké, 2010. "Norms and Rationality in Electoral Participation and in the Rescue of Jews in WWII," Rationality and Society, , vol. 22(1), pages 3-36, February.
    6. Charles Pattie & Patrick Seyd & Paul Whiteley, 2003. "Citizenship and Civic Engagement: Attitudes and Behaviour in Britain," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(3), pages 443-468, October.
    7. André Schmidt, 2017. "Determinants of Corporate Voting – Evidence from a Large Survey of German Retail Investors," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 18(1), pages 71-103, February.
    8. Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2017. "Political participation and party capture in a dualized economy: A game theory approach," CIW Discussion Papers 4/2017, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    9. Ronconi, Lucas, 2019. "From Citizen's Rights to Civic Responsibilities," IZA Discussion Papers 12457, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Tao, Ran & Su, Fubing & Sun, Xin & Lu, Xi, 2011. "Political trust as rational belief: Evidence from Chinese village elections," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 108-121, March.
    11. Liran Harsgor & Neil Nevitte, 2022. "Do Leader Evaluations (De)Mobilize Voter Turnout? Lessons From Presidential Elections in the United States," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(4), pages 361-373.
    12. Shelleka Gupta & Vinay Chauhan, 2023. "Understanding the Role of Social Networking Sites in Political Marketing," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 12(1), pages 58-72, June.
    13. Ronconi, Lucas & Zarazaga S.J., Rodrigo, 2015. "Labor Exclusion and the Erosion of Citizenship Responsibilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 453-461.
    14. Kwabena Asomanin Anaman & Gbensuglo Alidu Bukari, 2019. "Political Economy Analysis of Voter Participation and Choices in National Elections in Ghana¡¯s Fourth Republican Era," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 10(3), pages 174-198, December.
    15. David Brockington, 2004. "The Paradox of Proportional Representation: The Effect of Party Systems and Coalitions on Individuals’ Electoral Participation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(3), pages 469-490, October.
    16. Akbulut-Yuksel, Mevlude & Okoye, Dozie & Yuksel, Mutlu, 2017. "Learning to Participate in Politics: Evidence from Jewish Expulsions in Nazi Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 10778, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Lieberman, Evan S. & Posner, Daniel N. & Tsai, Lily L., 2014. "Does Information Lead to More Active Citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 69-83.
    18. Abhinash Borah, 2019. "Voting Expressively," Working Papers 1012, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    19. Cheryl L. Eavey, 1987. "Bureaucratic Competition and Agenda Control," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(3), pages 503-524, September.
    20. Christophe Crombez, 2004. "Introduction," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 227-231, 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:73-89. 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.