IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v17y1987i01p71-91_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Paradigm of ‘Crisis’ Decision Making: The Case of Synfuels Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Ahrari, Mohammed E.

Abstract

In explaining the making and unravelling of the synfuels policy in the United States, a new approach—the ambivalent-majoritarian paradigm—is presented in this article. This paradigm fills a significant conceptual gap for the study of domestic policy formulated under crisis conditions.It is argued that the self-imposed necessity to respond to a crisis condition involving a policy decision is likely to force legislators to adopt a policy option that they would not adopt under normal conditions. The crisis response is likely to be passed by a ‘majoritarian’ crisis coalition which would also include a significant number of ‘ambivalents’, i.e., those legislators who have serious misgivings about the correctness or feasibility of the policy. In order for such a policy response to survive, it must withstand the scrutiny of ‘normal’ conditions involving that policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahrari, Mohammed E., 1987. "A Paradigm of ‘Crisis’ Decision Making: The Case of Synfuels Policy," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 71-91, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:17:y:1987:i:01:p:71-91_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123400004610/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fischer, Manuel, 2015. "Collaboration patterns, external shocks and uncertainty: Swiss nuclear energy politics before and after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 520-528.
    2. Peter Z. Grossman, 2019. "Utilizing Ostrom’s institutional analysis and development framework toward an understanding of crisis-driven policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 3-20, March.
    3. Grossman, Peter Z., 2015. "Energy shocks, crises and the policy process: A review of theory and application," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 56-69.

    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:cup:bjposi:v:17:y:1987:i:01:p:71-91_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    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.