| Titre | Comparing and Analyzing Policy Formulation of Proposed and Final Public Policies | |
|---|---|---|
| Auteur | Catherine Chen, Christopher M. Weible, Tanya Heikkila, Jennifer A. Kagan | |
 |
Revue | International Review of Public Policy |
| Numéro | vol. 5, no 2, 2023 | |
| Résumé anglais |
This paper builds on arguments in policy formulation, the institutional grammar, and comparative public policy by comparing and analyzing the initial and passed versions of 105 bills in six U.S. state legislatures from 2007 through 2017. Our substantive context is oil and gas development. The findings show that shifts from proposed to final versions of legislation tend to expand more than retract in the institutional grammar components, averaged across states. However, this pattern of expansion does not hold when examining all the individual states. Furthermore, no consistent patterns emerge about the changes in the institutional grammar components across states; that is, we see variation across states in what increases or decreases from the proposed to final versions of the legislation. The findings underscore the complexity of policy formulation and the need for theoretical development, the sacrifices in validity when analyzing large samples of public policy using the institutional grammar, and the sizeable variation across states in the content of public policy for the same substantive area. We conclude with a call for a concerted effort using diverse research to begin to generalize and localize knowledge about policy diversity and formulation. Source : Éditeur (via OpenEdition Journals) |
|
| Article en ligne | https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/3430 |
