IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v50y2017i1d10.1007_s11077-017-9280-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Conflict Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher M. Weible

    (University of Colorado Denver)

  • Tanya Heikkila

    (University of Colorado Denver)

Abstract

This essay introduces a Policy Conflict Framework to guide and organize theoretical, practical, and empirical research to fill the vacuum that surrounds policy conflicts. The framework centers on a conceptual definition of an episode of policy conflict that distinguishes between cognitive and behavioral characteristics. The cognitive characteristics of a policy conflict episode include divergence in policy positions among two or more actors, perceived threats from opponents’ policy positions, and unwillingness to compromise. These cognitive characteristics manifest in a range of behavioral characteristics (e.g., framing contests, lobbying, building networks). Episodes of policy conflicts are shaped by a policy setting, which consists of different levels of action where conflicts may emerge (political, policy subsystem and policy action situations), interpersonal and intrapersonal policy actor attributes, events, and the policy issue. In turn, the outputs and outcomes of policy conflicts produce feedback effects that shape the policy setting. This essay ends with an agenda for advancing studies of policy conflicts, both methodologically and theoretically.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher M. Weible & Tanya Heikkila, 2017. "Policy Conflict Framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 23-40, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11077-017-9280-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-017-9280-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-017-9280-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-017-9280-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    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. Elena A. Mikhailova & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post & George B. Shepherd, 2022. "Conflicts of Interest and Emissions from Land Conversions: State of New Jersey as a Case Study," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Markus Hinterleitner & Fritz Sager, 2022. "Policy’s role in democratic conflict management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 239-254, June.
    3. Hongshan Yang & Hongtao Yi, 2023. "Frontiers of policy process research in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(4), pages 484-489, July.
    4. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Governing wickedness in megaprojects: discursive and institutional perspectives," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 131-147.
    5. Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "Unpacking the intensity of policy conflict: a study of Colorado’s oil and gas subsystem," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 179-193, June.
    6. Simon Fink & Eva Ruffing & Tobias Burst & Sara Katharina Chinnow, 2023. "Emotional citizens, detached interest groups? The use of emotional language in public policy consultations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 469-497, September.
    7. Dennis Abel & Armin Mertens, 2024. "United in disagreement: Analyzing policy networks in EU policy making," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 41(1), pages 59-82, January.
    8. Sojin Jang & Hongtao Yi, 2022. "Organized elite power and clean energy: A study of negative policy experimentations with renewable portfolio standards," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 8-31, January.
    9. Kathleen S. Bailey & Hongtao Yi & Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible, 2023. "Policy conflicts in shale development in China and the United States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(4), pages 589-605, July.
    10. Gwen Arnold & Meghan Klasic & Changtong Wu & Madeline Schomburg & Abigail York, 2023. "Finding, distinguishing, and understanding overlooked policy entrepreneurs," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 657-687, December.
    11. Wolf, Eva & Van Dooren, Wouter, 2021. "Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion," SocArXiv z5uxy, Center for Open Science.
    12. 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.
    13. Anna P. Durnová & Christopher M. Weible, 2020. "Tempest in a teapot? Toward new collaborations between mainstream policy process studies and interpretive policy studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 571-588, September.
    14. Sumit Vij, 2023. "Polycentric disaster governance in a federalising Nepal: interplay between people, bureaucracy and political leadership," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 755-776, December.
    15. Fienitz, Meike & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2023. "Latent, collaborative, or escalated conflict? Determining causal pathways for land use conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    16. Lisa Roeck & Wouter Dooren, 2024. "Performing policy conflict: A dramaturgical analysis of public participation in contentious urban planning projects," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(4), pages 761-785, December.
    17. Imrat Verhoeven & Tamara Metze, 2022. "Heated policy: policy actors’ emotional storylines and conflict escalation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 223-237, June.

    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. Fayolle, Alain & Liñán, Francisco, 2014. "The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 663-666.
    2. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    3. Jaeyeob Jeong & Myeonggil Choi, 2017. "The Expected Job Satisfaction Affecting Entrepreneurial Intention as Career Choice in the Cultural and Artistic Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    5. van Wee, Bert & Witlox, Frank, 2021. "COVID-19 and its long-term effects on activity participation and travel behaviour: A multiperspective view," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    6. Daniel V. Holland & Dean A. Shepherd, 2013. "Deciding to Persist: Adversity, Values, and Entrepreneurs’ Decision Policies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(2), pages 331-358, March.
    7. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2014. "Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1149-1159, June.
    8. Michel Borgh & Jeroen Schepers, 2018. "Are conservative approaches to new product selling a blessing in disguise?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 857-878, September.
    9. Maresch, Daniela & Harms, Rainer & Kailer, Norbert & Wimmer-Wurm, Birgit, 2016. "The impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial intention of students in science and engineering versus business studies university programs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 172-179.
    10. Siqi Dai & Kai Chen & Rui Jin, 2022. "The effect of message framing and language intensity on green consumption behavior willingness," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2432-2452, February.
    11. Arnstein Aassve & Alice Goisis & Maria Sironi, 2012. "Happiness and Childbearing Across Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 65-86, August.
    12. Dietz, Thomas & Stern, Paul C., 1995. "Toward a theory of choice: Socially embedded preference construction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 261-279.
    13. Morshedi, Mohamad Ali & Kashani, Hamed, 2022. "Assessment of vulnerability reduction policies: Integration of economic and cognitive models of decision-making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    14. Geoffrey J. Syme & Blair E. Nancarrow & Clive Seligman, 2000. "The Evaluation of Information Campaigns to Promote Voluntary Household Water Conservation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 24(6), pages 539-578, December.
    15. Schwanen, Tim & Ettema, Dick, 2009. "Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: Examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 511-525, June.
    16. Daniele Vignoli & Alessandra Minello & Giacomo Bazzani & Camilla Matera & Chiara Rapallini, 2022. "Narratives of the Future Affect Fertility: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(1), pages 93-124, March.
    17. Aleksandar Radic & Michael Lück & Amr Al-Ansi & Bee-Lia Chua & Sabrina Seeler & António Raposo & Jinkyung Jenny Kim & Heesup Han, 2021. "To Dine, or Not to Dine on a Cruise Ship in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Tripartite Approach towards an Understanding of Behavioral Intentions among Female Passengers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Jlenia Di Noia, 2022. "Agent-Based Models for Climate Change Adaptation in Coastal Zones. A Review," Working Papers 2022.20, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    19. Hagebölling, Mona & Seegebarth, Barbara & Woisetschläger, David M., 2021. "Tactical termination of contractual services – An analysis of the phenomenon and its determinants," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 170-181.
    20. Mariska van Essen & Tom Thomas & Eric van Berkum & Caspar Chorus, 2020. "Travelers’ compliance with social routing advice: evidence from SP and RP experiments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1047-1070, June.

    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:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11077-017-9280-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.