IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v38y2018i01p1-25_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding rationales for collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts

Author

Listed:
  • Weible, Christopher M.
  • Heikkila, Tanya
  • Pierce, Jonathan

Abstract

Why people collaborate to achieve their political objectives is one enduring question in public policy. Although studies have explored this question in low-intensity policy conflicts, a few have examined collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts. This study asks two questions: What are the rationales motivating policy actors to collaborate with each other in high-intensity policy conflicts? What policy actor attributes are associated with these rationales? This study uses questionnaire data collected in 2013 and 2014 of policy actors from New York, Colorado and Texas who are actively involved with hydraulic fracturing policy debates. The results show that professional competence is the most important rationale for collaborating, whereas shared beliefs are moderately important, and financial resources are not important. Policy actor attributes that are associated with different rationales include organisational affiliation and extreme policy positions. This article concludes with a discussion on advancing theoretical explanations of collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts.

Suggested Citation

  • Weible, Christopher M. & Heikkila, Tanya & Pierce, Jonathan, 2018. "Understanding rationales for collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 1-25, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:38:y:2018:i:01:p:1-25_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X16000301/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. V. P. Kirilenko & G. V. Alekseev, 2021. "Measuring Political Trust in a Modern Democracy," Administrative Consulting, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. North-West Institute of Management., issue 10.
    2. Bolognesi, Thomas & Pflieger, GĂ©raldine, 2024. "Do you perceive interdependencies among human activities related to water? Drivers and effects on preferences for participation and regulation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    3. Caner Bakir & Sinan Akgunay & Kerem Coban, 2021. "Why does the combination of policy entrepreneur and institutional entrepreneur roles matter for the institutionalization of policy ideas?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 397-422, June.

    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:jnlpup:v:38:y:2018:i:01:p:1-25_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/pup .

    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.