IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v42y2022i1p185-200_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do policy clashes between the judiciary and the executive affect public opinion? Insights from New Delhi’s odd–even rule against air pollution

Author

Listed:
  • Beiser-McGrath, Liam F.
  • Bernauer, Thomas
  • Prakash, Aseem

Abstract

Policy processes are affected by how policymakers assess public support for a policy. But is public support for a given policy itself affected by characteristics of the policy process, such as cooperation or confrontation amongst policy actors? Specifically, if different branches of government hold conflicting positions on a given policy, do clashes affect public support for the policy? To address this question, we exploit an unexpected clash amongst the executive and judiciary in New Delhi, between survey waves, over exemptions for women in the context of the odd–even rule, a policy intervention to reduce air pollution from transportation. We find that public support for the contested policy was not undermined by the executive–judiciary clash. However, the clash polarised public opinion by gender, based upon the policy exemptions. Our findings shed new light on the broader question of how conflicts amongst different parts of government influence mass public policy preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Beiser-McGrath, Liam F. & Bernauer, Thomas & Prakash, Aseem, 2022. "Do policy clashes between the judiciary and the executive affect public opinion? Insights from New Delhi’s odd–even rule against air pollution," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 185-200, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:1:p:185-200_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X2100012X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:42:y:2022:i:1:p:185-200_9. 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.