Author: PSJ Editorial Team

Latent Target Groups – A Methodological Contribution of Social Identities to Policy Design Research

Researchers have traditionally studied target groups as homogenously constructed groups. Thereby, the groups of interest were assigned single social identities, such as, e.g., people in unemployment. However, it can be questioned whether a singular identity approach is appropriate for studying populations of interest, and in turn, designing effective policies. The authors in this article argue that the internal characteristics of at first sight, and from a traditional policy design perspective, homogenous groups are internally highly heterogenous and respond differently to policies based on their overlapping identities. These concerns have prompted the authors to explore the concept of “latent” target groups, or the idea that individuals have multiple competing identities to analyze the extent of subgroup diversity within these target populations.

Theoretical Arguments

The authors establish two primary arguments to guide their investigation of latent target groups in their study:

  1. Target groups are not homogenous and as a result, their heterogeneity must be considered in policy design.
  2. Social identities serves as a useful conceptual backdrop for target group diversity by structuring how they are composed of different subgroups and identities.

Methodology

This study applies Latent Class Analysis (LCA) as the primary methodological tool to uncover individual attributes through a person-centered design. An original dataset of 2,042 German adult respondents was used, specifically examining two groups: non-vegetarians and car users. The authors focused on these groups due to the consequences of their behaviors on the environment and contributions to increased carbon emissions. To identify hidden social identities, the demographic, local, and organizational identities of the respondents were measured through LCA. Furthermore, the authors utilized regression modeling to predict policy preferences toward specific types of nutrition and mobility policies within the subgroups.

Key Findings

Non-Vegetarians and Car Users are not Monolithic Identity Groups

The results of the LCA, as shown in Figure 1 demonstrated that four hidden subgroups existed within the broader population of non-vegetarians and car users examined. These latent groups consisted of four classes: Wealthy and status-seeking people of the rural and provincial upper class (Class 1); politically engaged men in metropolitan areas influenced by monetary incentives (Class 2); a disengaged subset of women expressing minimal social or political engagement (Class 3); and socially/politically active citizens (Class 4). These discoveries confirm the authors’ expectations that seemingly cohesive groups are distinctly characterized by various identity groups making up their composition. Unique to non-vegetarians and car users, these groups are clearly not monolithic and instead shaped by various socioeconomic and political experiences.

Figure 1. Probability of membership in classes.

Hidden Groups Only Predict Policy Preferences for Car Use

Table 3 shows that the observed latent classes exhibit a higher probability of predicting preferences toward mobility policy. In particular, citizens who are socially and politically active (Class 4) are the most likely subgroup to promote car usage policies. This indicates that underneath the broad socially constructed identity groups, specific subgroup identity cohorts drive support or opposition toward policy preferences. Effectively, this revelation confirms that receptiveness to policy designs is a complex phenomenon heavily influenced by conflicting and salient identity factions.

Table 3. Results of logistic regression analyses.

Why It Matters

This article thoughtfully reevaluates how policymakers should approach the design of policy measures and/or programs intended to serve specific target populations. The understanding of identity transcends the traditionally broad social construction of groups into a defined category, as shown in the article. Complex policy issues such as environmental restrictions can spark multiple conflicting identities that create unique policy preferences that differ from others in the demographic segment. Future research directions suggested by the authors include examining how the internal cohesiveness of subgroup identities are affected by policy instruments such as regulations or incentives. By continuing to study latent target groups, policymakers can begin to transition away from “one-size-fits-all” policy approaches and instead pursue tailored design frameworks that align with the behaviors, identities, and values of diverse subgroups.

Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

Hornung, Johanna, Nils C. Bandelow, and Madita Olvermann. 2025. “Latent Target Groups—A Methodological Contribution of Social Identities to Policy Design Research.” Policy Studies Journal 53(3): 774–794. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70028.

About the Article’s Author(s)

Dr. Johanna Hornung is an assistant professor in Public Policy at the University of Lausanne. She is co-editor-in-chief of the Review of Policy Research (RPR) and the European Policy Analysis (EPA) journal. Her research interests lie in public policy research, particularly health policy, and the integration of psychological perspectives in actor-centered explanations of policy processes. 

Dr. Nils C. Bandelow is professor Political Science and Head of the Institute of Comparative Politics and Public Policy (CoPPP) at the TU Braunschweig. He is co-editor-in-chief of the journals Review of Policy Research (RPR) and European Policy Analysis (EPA). He is interested in policy process research, particularly health policy and infrastructure policy, and integrating psychological perspectives in actor-centered explanations of policy processes.

Dr. Madita Olvermann is an Innovation Manager at the Project House of the TU Braunschweig. She earned her PhD at the Chair of Industrial/Organizational and Social Psychology at the TU Braunschweig. She is passionate about interdisciplinary research and focuses on applying individual-level insights from the psychological field to emerging transition pathways. 

, , , , , ,

A Novel Research Method to Detect Punctuation and its Application to Bureaucratic Decision-Making

How can researchers effectively capture shifts in policy over time? Traditionally, political scientists have relied upon conventional index measures to test the Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET)—the idea that policy is stable for a long period before erupting into brief moments of radical change (i.e., punctuation). However, traditional approaches to evaluating policy change have received a lot of criticism for being unable to sufficiently measure the magnitude of policy changes and subjectively categorizing stability and punctuation cutoffs. For these reasons, this article proposes a new approach to measuring punctuated policy changes that involves using a statistical model to separate policy stability from punctuation to provide an objective visualization of changes in policy over time. To test this novel approach, the authors apply the framework toward budgetary decisions in both highly bureaucratized and non-bureaucratized local education systems in New York and Texas. By pursuing this methodological innovation, the authors aim to answer this central research question: Do bureaucratized or non-bureaucratized organizations exhibit a more punctuated pattern of budgetary changes?

Methodology

The authors collected instructional spending per pupil in both New York and Texas school districts during 1997-2019. Annual percentage changes in both states’ school districts instructional funding were calculated to measure year-over-year changes. Subsequently, the authors applied a Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) used to differentiate between incremental or routine budget changes and extreme spikes.

Key Findings

New York Bureaucratic School Districts Follow PET Patterns

School districts in New York that are considered highly bureaucratic or structurally rigid exhibited occurrences of punctuated changes in spending patterns after periods of stability. As shown in Figure 2, bureaucratic schools correlated with a higher frequency of punctuated budgetary trends compared to non-bureaucratized schools. These dynamics illustrate that spending on instructional expenses in New York school districts align with the theoretical assumptions of PET—overseeing periods of routine stability before institutional frictions create a breaking point of drastic spikes in spending. Ultimately, the patterns indicate that regional institutional frameworks in New York act as facilitators of volatile, punctuated policy shifts.

Figure 2. The distribution of changes in instructional spending per student in New York overlaid with normal distribution. (Panel a) Bureaucratized school districts. (Panel b) Non-bureaucratized school districts.

Spending Patterns in Texas Bureaucratic School Districts are Unstable

In stark contrast to New York, heavily bureaucratized school districts in Texas display unique budgetary patterns that actively deviate from traditional theoretical assumptions. As shown in Figure 5, bureaucratized school districts in Texas were associated with ongoing instability instead of a long period of stability in budgetary behavior punctuated by rare spikes. This indicates that highly bureaucratic and rigid administrative frameworks do not always maintain routine policies. Instead, the revelations in Texas bureaucratic school districts suggest that intense bureaucratization prompts hyper-reactive administrative environments defined by frequent corrections or revisions to budgetary policies..

Figure 5. The distribution of changes in instructional spending per student in Texas overlayed with normal distribution. (Panel a) Bureaucratized school districts. (Panel b) Non-bureaucratized school districts.

Why It Matters

The investigations in this article illustrate a thoughtful breakthrough to methodologically testing the assumptions of PET. By tailoring methodological standards to specific institutions and objective cutoffs, the authors provide an appropriate template for analyzing and understanding policy changes over a longitudinal period. The findings illuminated in the article emphasize the potency of administrative environments in shaping organizational policy choices affecting important public services such as education. For future research opportunities, the authors recommend exploring the conditions that propel policy fluctuations, with a specific emphasis on the flow of information in bureaucratic settings. Building upon these empirical foundations and research directions will allow policymakers and researchers alike to create strategies that improve decision-making in bureaucratic organizations.

Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

Butler, J. S. and Iuliia Shybalkina. 2025. “A Novel Research Method to Detect Punctuation and Its Application to Bureaucratic Decision-Making.” Policy Studies Journal, 53(4): 876–898. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70013.

About the Article’s Author(s)

J.S. Butler is an accomplished econometrician, earned his Ph.D. in Economics from Cornell University. Before joining the University of Kentucky Martin School, he taught at Vanderbilt University and Cornell University. His teaching focuses on econometrics and statistics. 

Iuliia Shybalkina is an assistant professor at the Martin School at the University of Kentucky. She holds a Ph.D. in Public Administration from the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. Her research and teaching are centered on local financial administration.

, , , ,

Collaborative Diffusion: The Dynamics of Policy Output in COVID-19 Interstate Compacts

State policy development often involves replicating and adapting ideas from across state lines. Interstate compacts have served as a popular vehicle of policy innovation and diffusion as states join together to pool resources and collaborate on a common goal or issue. These dynamics have intrigued previous scholars to study the decision processes of states joining a compact. However, these same research efforts leave unanswered questions about how policies are adopted within a compact after a state has joined. In this article, the authors aim to bridge this gap in literature by exploring and analyzing what happens after a compact is formed. Leveraging the atypicaly policy adoption rates of the COVID-19 crisis, the authors explore these phenomena by looking at how states coordinated within interstate compacts on pandemic-era policies.

Hypotheses

The authors hypothesize the following about policy diffusion processes in interstate compacts:

Hypothesis 1: Members of interstate compacts are more likely than non-members to adopt policy pertaining the compact formation.

Hypothesis 2: The likelihood of adoption for member states increases as the number of their peer members having adopted the policy increases.

Hypothesis 3: The likelihood of policy adoption in non-compact states rises with the number of adoptions in compact member states.

    Methodology

    The authors examined three compacts that were created to regionally coordinate responses to COVID-19: the Eastern, Midwestern, and Western compacts. Using a Network Event History Analysis (NEHA) modeling approach, the adoption of pandemic policies after compact formation were measured to analyze the rate of diffusion among member and non-member states. Additionally, the authors controlled for variables such as state ideology and professionalism to isolate their effects on policy diffusion dynamics.

    Key Findings

    Being a Compact Member Does Not Boost Policy Adoption

    Surprisingly, as shown in Figure 5 below, being part of an interstate compact does not automatically make member states more assertive in adopting newer policies within the compact. In fact, member states only adopted at a greater rate when there was not adoption by other compact members. However, as member states began adopting internal policies, this decreases the chances of further adoption within the compact. These results show that internal policy activities do not necessarily provoke reactionary behavior from member states. Instead, these results imply potential administrative conundrums wherein coordinating among already ideologically aligned and proactive members does not realistically accelerate further policy diffusion.

    Figure 5. Compact membership and cumulative adoption effects.

    Ideology Drives the Spread and Adoption of COVID-19 Policies

    The authors discovered that the ideology of member states had a significant impact on adopting pandemic-related policies during COVID-19. As shown in Table 2, this indicates that liberal-oriented states were more likely to adopt or emulate pandemic policies within their respective compacts. This outcome clarifies the leadership dynamics of the pandemic, demonstrating that Democratic-led states anchored early policy activity and that ideology serves as a primary determinant of when and how policies spread.

    Non-Member States Free-Ride Off of their More Innovative Peers

    While the more left-leaning and innovative states adopted new policies at a faster rate, that is not to say that their right-leaning and more reactive contemporaries did nothing. The authors observed a free-riding dynamic amongst non-compact members. As the leader states adopted more policies, the follower states observed. Eventually, they adopted many of the novel solutions of their peers, but at a slower pace. Leader states acted quickly, prompting follower states to mimic their innovations as a shortcut for their own institutional decisions. Furthermore, this delayed wave of pandemic policies allowed for right-leaning states to “copy” one another, as opposed to the Democrat-run states that led the charge. Many of these efforts coalesced around Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, who, along with a few other states/actors, provided a parallel path for innovation to right-leaning free-riders that still had to manage the realities of the pandemic despite partisan pressures from the federal government. These findings reflect classic American policy diffusion, showing how cautious states copy their peers after a delay to handle practical problems and partisan pressures.

    Table 2. Policy Adoption Network Event History Analysis.

    Why It Matters

    The activities that occur once an interstate compact is created offer a glimpse into policy cohesiveness and effectiveness of states attempting to tackle shared problems. This article provides an important contribution to the policy diffusion literature by exploring how policy activities navigate the structural frameworks of formal compacts. These investigations also offer valuable insights into how collaborative initiatives affect the decision processes of member and non-member states amid crises. For future research, the authors recommend examining multi-compact initiatives over a longitudinal period, extended to municipal and/or international settings. By pursuing these directions, scholars can begn to fundamentally understand how ideas and practices are shared as well as developed in the midst of ongoing policy experimentation.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Pollert, Isaac, Johabed Olvera, Bruce A. Desmarais, Frederick J. Boehmke and Jeffrey J. Harden. 2025. “Collaborative Diffusion: The Dynamics of Policy Output in COVID-19 Interstate Compacts.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 944–970. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70008.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Isaac Pollert is a a Teaching Professor at the Pennsylvania State University. His research focuses on American politics, with a focus on the states and policy diffusion. 

    Johabed Olvera is an Assistant Professor at the Pennsylvania State University School of Public Policy and an associate faculty member at the Population Research Institute. Her research examines how the design and implementation of governemnt interventions impact maternal and child health as well as the economic well-being of minorities and low-income families in the U.S. and Latin America.

    Bruce A. Desmarais is the DeGrandis-McCourtney Early Career Professor in the Department of Political Science and faculty affiliate of the Institute for Computational and Data Sciences at Pennsylvania State University. His research focuses on the development and application of research methods to analyze the complex interdependence underlying political interactions.

    Frederick J. Boehmke is Professor and Marvin and Rose Lee Pomerantz Chair in Political Science at the University of Iowa. His research focuses on American state politics and quantitative political methods.

    Jeffrey J. Harden is the Andrew J. McKenna Family College Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame. His research interests include political representation, public policy diffusion, and political methodology. 

    , , ,

    The Impact of Political Attention on Collaborative Environmental Governance Among Municipal Street-Level Bureaucrats

    Does the level of attention that politicians direct toward complex environmental problems impact how frontline bureaucrats in municipal settings form relationships? The collaborative interactions among civil servants are a defining feature of environmental governance, drastically shaping how issues are addressed. In this article, the authors incorporate political attention, or the priority status that an issue receives on the political agenda, to analyze how fluctuating attention levels affect the ties created between street-level bureaucrats and the policy outcomes produced. These dynamics are explored within the issue context of flood risk mitigation across municipal civil servant networks in Southern Sweden. Three actor types within municipal administration heavily involved in flood risk mitigation are examined: water & sewage, planning, and politicians and senior managers. By investigating the effects of political attention on collaborative environmental governance, the authors aim to illustrate how policy consequences and relationships at the municipal level are shaped by top-down influences.

    Hypotheses

    To evaluate the relationships between political attention and collaborative networks, the authors established the following hypotheses:

    1. When political attention is low, water and sewage actors tend to have more ties than each of the other types of actors.
    2. When political attention is high, planners, politicians, and senior-level managers tend to have more ties than each of the other types of actors.
    3. Actors appointed as coordinators tend to have more ties, the stronger the political attention is.

    Methodology

    The authors examined three municipalities in Southern Sweden, including Lomma, Lund, and Staffanstorp (as shown in Figure 2), that all exhibited varying degrees of political attention to flood risk mitigation. Three sources of data were utilized in the study, consisting of scientific literature, 143 qualitative interviews with local actors, and a national performance metric of climate adaptation performances by Swedish municipalities. In addition, social network analytical modeling in R was conducted to analyze the relationships between different municipal actors.

    Figure 2. The location of Lomma, Lund, and Staffanstorp municipalities in Southern Sweden (developed from Vatten.Atlas.se).

    Key Findings

    Collaborative Network Dominance Varies by Actor Type and Attention

    As shown in Table 3 below, the propensity of ties or relationships differ drastically across the examined municipalities. In Staffanstorp, an area of low political attention to flood risk mitigation, water & sewage actors exhibit more ties than any other category. However, in municipalities with high political attention such as Lomma and Lund, planners, as well as politicians and senior managers have more ties compared to water & sewage actors. These dynamics reveal that network collaborations differ by the level of political attention or prioritization that is given to flood risk mitigation issues. Subsequently, this confirms the authors’ two initial hypotheses (H1 & H2), demonstrasting political attention serves as a catalyst for dictating the types of collaborative relationships that develop.

    Table 3. Results of hypothesis testing model (including the type of actor, appointed coordinator, gender, level of education, and triangle formation).

    Coordinators Act as a Bridge for Developing Network Ties

    Being an appointed coordinator in a Swedish municipality with high political attention is shown to matter in fostering network ties between street-level bureaucrats. Figure 3 illustrates that in municipalities such as Lomma and Lund with high political attention to flood risk mitigation, coordinators who are appointed are critical to mobilizing different actors. In contrast, in Staffanstorp, the low political attention dynamics correspond to coordinators having no significant impact on their ability to form collaborative relationships. These results indicate that high political attention boosts the success of coordination between actors when an issue is being prioritized. Furthermore, the results imply that politicians’ attention to environmental challenges establishes the issue salience needed for collaborative networks to form and to incentivize cooperation.

    Figure 3. Ranges of estimates (+/-2 standard errors) for each configuration in the model per municipality. Ranges crossing zero correspond to the estimate not providing a significant result for the particular municipality, while overlapping ranges in the estimates for a particular configuration connote no significance difference between municipalities.

    Why It Matters

    The tendencies of street-level bureaucrats or public servants to work together is heavily defined by different environmental and institutional contexts. This article demonstrates that the level of political attention expressed toward complex environmental challenges facilitates varying degrees of network coordination among street-level actors. The described phenomenon signifies that networks are formed on the basis of a shared issue prioritization and preference for collaboration. More importantly, the authors acknowledge that the study could potentially explore additional factors that may influence the development of ties between street-level actors. Nonetheless, the study makes an important contribution to the field of collaborative governance by illuminating the patterns that drive network development in municipal settings.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Becker, Per and Örjan Bodin. 2025. “The Impact of Political Attention on Collaborative Environmental Governance Among Municipal Street-level Bureaucrats.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 852–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70020.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Per Becker is Professor of Risk and Sustainability at Lund University, Professor of Leadership and Command & Control at the Swedish Defence University, Extraordinary Professor at North-West University. His research focuses on the systemic interactions between the physical environment, social organization and social behavior in relation to societal safety, security, and sustainability. 

    Örjan Bodin is Professor of Environmental and Sustainability Science at Stockholm Resilience Center, Stockholm University, and Visiting Professor at the Swedish Defence University. His research focuses on collaborative environmental governance using a combination of natural and social science methods and perspectives.

    , ,

    Building Street-Level Capacity: Evidence From a Policy for Problem Gambling Prevention

    How are problem-gambling prevention policies actually implemented at the street-level? Although policies may appear clear on paper, frontline workers must constantly consider how to apply them in unpredictable, real-world settings. This article further explores these dynamics, specifically examining how policies related to problem gambling prevention were implemented in Turin, Italy, under the 2021 “Time is Money” project. In addition, this article also analyzes how frontline workers develop “policy capacity”, or competencies and skills needed to implement these policies on the ground. To guide this investigation, the authors ask the following questions: How do operators use their margin of discretion to redesign policy during implementation? Does this process imply the development of individual analytical policy capacities at the street level?

    Theoretical Expectations

    The authors outline the following expectations in their study:

    1. Street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) prioritize understanding policy problems through direct experience and real-time problem-solving.
    2. Policy capacities matter in environments wherein frontline workers have high discretion levels and must constantly redesign rules/policies.

    Methodology

    To gather relevant data, the authors use a three-phase qualitative, longitudinal case-study design in Turin, Italy. First, scientific publications, literature and related documents were reviewed to improve understanding of gambling policies at the local, national, and international levels. Second, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants involved in the “Time is Money” project to learn more about the creation and implementation of the project. Third, an ethnographic approach was pursued, involving participant observation in at least three gambling venues over the course of four months, to observe the interactions between the operators (SLBs) and gamblers.

    Key Findings

    An Intensive Process of Policy Divergence and Re-Design

    During their time spent observing policy implementation, the authors noticed a series of transformations in the policy. What was written on paper was not exactly how things were going in practice. This phenomenon known as “policy divergence” was highlighting something more: a process of so-called “re-design”. In other words, frontline workers were adapting the “original” policy to concrete, unexpected problems. To do so, they were using their experience and expertise. With small adjustments, trial and error, and reflective effort, the implementers applied small (but important) changes to the policy, trying to achieve a better fit to the goals. The article discusses in detail some of these adaptive strategies (i.e.: hooking, bargaining, termination, conversation) that helped implementers establish relations of shared trust with gamblers, aimed at risk-prevention and damage-control.

    The Development of a Distinct Kind of Analytical Capacity at the Street-Level

    Observing the process of re-design, the authors noticed that the adaptive strategies didn’t come to be during the early stages of implementation, but later on. At first, frontline workers tried going by the book, but over time they introduced small changes as they gained more experience. The authors interpreted this as evidence of distinct kinds of capacity being developed. Previous studies have shown that designing “on paper” an effective policy requires analytical capacities (the skills to understand a problem and picking the best solution). This article suggests that similar processes occur during frontline implementation. Like policy design, policy “re-design” requires a specific set of skills. Although they take different forms, these frontline skills serve the same purpose: identifying effective solutions to real-world problems. The article illustrates how these capacities develop in practice: workers identify problems and reflect on possible responses, test creative solutions, and evaluate feedback on what works.

    Why It Matters

    These findings have a series of practical implications for policymaking. First, the article shows that policy divergences do not necessarily indicate inappropriate design, nor excessive discretion among frontline workers. On the contrary, for policies addressing complex social problems (like problem-gambling), divergence is a space for creative problem-solving and an opportunity for learning. Second, leveraging these opportunities requires specific capacities. While the article shows how such skills can be developed autonomously, this process requires an amount of time and effort that is not always granted in every public program. More research is needed on how these capacities can be taught, shared, and transferred. Third, the findings broaden our understanding of the skills and competencies required by policymakers (policy capacities). Some of these capacities (like the analytical ones) can manifest in different, unexpected forms and places. Regardless of where, when, and how they emerge, such capacities appear to complement each other in supporting policy success.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Aimo, Niccolò and Federico Cuomo. 2025. “Building Street-level Capacity. Evidence From a Policy For Problem Gambling Prevention.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 1045–1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70005.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Niccolò Aimo acquired a Ph.D. in Urban and Regional Development at the Polytechnic University of Turin following his master’s degree in Political Science at the University of Turin. He is a senior researcher in policy analysis and evaluation for IRES Piemonte and has conducted research abroad at the University of Lisbon (ULisboa). His research focuses on various aspects of sub-national policymaking, with a particular emphasis on the local implementation of European-funded programs, social policies, gambling regulation, sustainability, and workfare. 

    Federico Cuomo obtained a Ph.D. in Innovation for the circular economy at the University of Turin after graduating in Political Science. At the same time, he worked within the European Funds and Innovation Office of the City of Turin. He carried out research stays at the University of Amsterdam (UvA), the Centre for Social Sciences in Budapest, the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid (UaM) and the University of Antwerp (UAntwerp). His research interests range from the analysis of urban experimentations and collaborative governance arrangements to the evaluation of environmental and healthcare policies. Currently, he is a postdoctoral researcher in policy analysis at the University of Turin and IRES Piemonte.

    , , , ,

    How to Talk about Crises? Leaders’ Narrative Strategies During the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign in Italy and France

    During a crisis, narratives matter as they allows us to make sense of an unpredictable situation and navigate urgency. The COVID-19 pandemic showed that the type of narratives and communication strategies used fundamentally shaped public opinion toward governmental efforts aimed at mitigating the virus. This article examines the role of narrative strategies utilized by France and Italy during the pandemic; focusing on the vaccination campaigns in both countries, to see how political leaders processed and framed both pandemic-related issues and recommended solutions. Furthermore, to track how narrative strategies and patterns in both countries developed over time, the authors applied the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) and an analytical typology that examines evidence versus emotion, as well as gain versus loss framing.

    Hypotheses

    The authors established several theoretical expectations to study changes in narrative strategies during crisis.

    1. Evidence-based strategies will only be preferred over emotion-based arguments when sound information is available; evidence-based strategies are less likely to appear in earlier stages of a crisis.
    2. Evidence-based strategies are more likely to be implemented when leaders have a scientific or technical background.
    3. Decision-makers will try to extensively utilize gain-framed messaging in their narrative strategies given the social acceptability of positive communication.
    4. The propensity of loss-framed messaging may increase when gain-framed strategies are ineffective or the desired outcomes need to be accelerated.

    Methodology

    The authors examined a total of 22 documents (13 Italian and 9 French) that included speeches and press releases from government leaders and Health Ministers in both Italy, as well as France. These documents were selected from 2021, encompassing the first phases of vaccination campaigns pursued by the French and Italian governments. Moreover, the authors utilized Discourse Network Analyzer (DNA) software to code for narratives present in the collected documents.

    Key Findings

    Who are the Heroes and Villains of the Pandemic?

    Figure 2 shows that in the majority of cases and in both countries, vaccines were narrated as the “heroes” of the story, alongside restrictive measures and health staff—with science also featuring as a “hero”, though only in the Italian case. The distribution of “heroes” is notably similar across the two countries. The more meaningful differences emerge on the “villains” side: while COVID-19 and its variants feature as the primary “villain” in both countries, no-vax people appear far more frequently as “villains” in the French case than in the Italian one. These patterns indicate that while France and Italy broadly share the same “heroic” narratives around vaccines, French leaders were considerably more inclined to cast unvaccinated individuals in an antagonistic role—a finding consistent with the greater use of loss-framed and scaring tactics observed in the French narrative strategies more broadly.

    Figure 2. Heroes and Villains in the French and Italian Narratives.

    France and Italy Used Different Narratives Strategies Over Time

    As illustrated in Figure 6, during Phase 1 of the vaccination campaign, both France and Italy utilized encouraging narrative approaches to build trust; this was more pronounced in France whereas Italy employed a mixture of an encouraging approach and logical persuasion. However, across Phases 2-3, the narrative strategies began to diverge in both countries as France resorted toward admonition and scaring practices, whereas Italy balanced admonition with gain-framed types of narratives (i.e., logical persuasion and an encouraging approach). These findings indicate that France was more likely to depend on alarmist and emotional narrative tactics to increase vaccination rates, whereas Italy pursued a more technical, deliberative approach.

    Figure 6. Narrative Strategies by Country and Phase.

    Why It Matters

    This article reveals that narratives are not simply “talk”, but represent strategic tools applied to shape public acceptance toward restrictive policies. By focusing on France and Italy as empirical cases of COVID-era narratives, the study illuminates how political leaders in different national settings communicated with the public during a time of crisis. The authors encourage future research to apply their typological framework to other crises, such as climate change mitigation, to determine whether evidence-based or emotion-based strategies are employed in different policy contexts. Understanding these narrative patterns can help future political leaders select communication strategies that mediate compliance and institutional trust.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Mastroianni, Laura and Stefania Profeti. 2025. “How to Talk About Crises? Leaders’ Narrative Strategies During the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign in Italy and France.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 994–1013. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12585.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Laura Mastroianni is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Public Policy at the University of Bologna, Department of Political and Social Sciences. 

    Stefania Profeti is Associate Professor in Political Science at the University of Bologna, Department of Political and Social Sciences.

    , ,

    Indirect Restrictions Demobilize Supporters of Abortion Rights

    Abortion rights remain a high-stakes issue in American politics, provoking a lot of moral debate and public reactions. Since the landmark ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), several states have added more restrictions on abortion access. Researchers have found that public opinion shapes state policies on abortion, but it is not clear how citizens judge indirect restrictions on abortion rights. To investigate this phenomenon, this study examines how people’s judgments and political mobilization depends on whether the restrictions are indirect, such as defunding services, compared to direct, such as complete bans on abortion.

    Hypotheses

    The authors test two hypotheses to determine how the type and framing of abortion restrictions influence people’s judgments:

    1. Demobilization Hypothesis: Indirect restrictions demobilize abortion supporters by inciting less opposition compared to direct bans or restrictons.
    2. Exclusion Framing Hypothesis: Pro-choice (abortion) supporters will express greater opposition toward exclusion restrictions (indirect restrictions framed as direct) compared to direct restrictions.

    Methodology

    Two experiments were conducted in 2015 and 2016 with participants from the United States. In the first experiment, participants read one of three policy conditions: banning, defunding, or excluding. Then participants answered how much they support or oppose the policy, and their willingness to participate in politics to express their views. The second experiment replicated the prior design, except provided participants with a statement indicating the substantial number of women who would be deprived of abortion services because of the restriction, holding constant the number of women who would be affected across the three types of policy.

    Key Findings

    Pro-Choice Supporters Oppose Banning more than Defunding

    Figure 1 from Experiment 1 reveals that pro-choice supporters expressed less opposition to policies defunding abortion services than to outright bans. Pro-choice supporters also opposed exclusion policies more than defunding policies. These patterns support the demobilization hypothesis, indicating that indirect restrictions reduce public and political opposition compared to direct restrictions. This finding suggests that subtle differences in policy design and framining could bypass mobilized opposition.

    Figure 1. Participants’ judgments of abortion restrictions by abortion stance and policy type, Experiment 1. Error bars are standard errors. The sample sizes for the pro-choice groups were: banning n=104, defunding n=117, and excluding n=111. For the anti-abortion group, they were: banning n=43, defunding n=45, and excluding n=33.

    Consequences Do Not Overcome Demobilization

    Experiment 2 replicated the findings while holding constant the number of women who would be affected. Figure 2 shows that pro-choice participants opposed defunding abortion less than a complete ban, despite the fact that both policies prevented the same number of women from receiving abortion access. Even when participants knew the consequences, pro-choice supporters were still less opposed to the indirect restriction. The findings also demonstrated that pro-choice supporters opposed exclusionary policies less than direct bans. People’s judgements of restrictions depended on the framing of the policy, particularly how direct the restriction appeared.

    Figure 2. Participants’ judgements of abortion restrictions by abortion stance and policy type, Experiment 2. Error bars are standard errors. The sample sizes for the pro-choice groups were: banning n=103, defunding n=94, and excluding n=1-3. For the anti-abortion group, they were: banning n=40, defunding n=49, and excluding n=39.

    Why It Matters

    This study shows that people’s judgments of abortion restrictions depend on how directly they prevent abortion, determining their willingness to politically mobilize in response. For policymakers and political activists, the takeaway is clear: the directness of the policy, in design and framing, will determine how much people support and oppose those restrictions. As for future research, the authors call for more attention to the psychology of indirect restrictions to better understand public opinion on abortion rights and how state legislatures may seek to minimize opposition.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Connors, Elizabeth C., Alessandro Del Ponte, and Peter DeScioli. 2025. “Indirect Restrictions Demobilize Supporters of Abortion Rights.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 1123–1137. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12575.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Elizabeth C. Connors is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. 

    Alessandro Del Ponte is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Alabama, a Visiting Research Professor at the Global Asia Institute at the National University of Singapore, and a Visiting Assistant Professor at the Smith Institute for Political Economy and Philosophy at Chapman University.

    Peter DeScioli is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at Stony Brook University. 

    , , , ,

    Toward a New Perspective on Forms and Sites of Democratic Life

    How do we determine if democracy is succeeding or failing? Is it people “watching” politics or “doing” politics or both? These are questions that Dr. Andrea Felicetti engages with in his perspective piece, as traditional understandings of civic responsibilities in democracy are reconsidered. According to Felicetti, behaviors once deemed problematic to the health of a democratic society—anonymity, non-participation and spectatorship are now being reconsidered and they might have some benefits for democratic life. In particular, spectatorship, or merely observing political activities, is highlighted in this article as many citizens choose to be bystanders in politics. However, Felicetti encourages us to rethink the role of spectatorship in creating a vibrant democracy, asking the following questions: What forms might positive spectatorship take? In what contexts might we find this? How can we observe them empirically?

    How Can Spectatorship Be Positive for Democracy?

    Spectatorship has long been criticized as detrimental or burdensome to encouraging engagement with the democratic process—citizens are not engaged or willing to be involved in political activities. That said, Felicetti challenges us to consider that observing politics can be a positive stimulus for political engagement. Citizens can better understand their political environment and the issues being discussed through moments of observatory reflection. At the same time, watching citizens can question information, improving their ability to think critically. Moreover, Felicetti proposes that the learning of political dynamics through spectatorship leads in some cases to eventual collaboration as citizens unite around common interests and form collective identity. In this sense, while many are quick to discount spectatorship as antithetical to democratic engagement, it is actually necessary for building political understanding and action.

    Where Does Spectatorship Take Place?

    There are several locations where we can witness positive displays of spectatorship take place, according to Felicetti. He illustrates deliberative assemblies, participatory governance, social movements, and the workplace or schools as the common sites of positive spectatorship. These real-world spaces provide opportunities for citizens to present their perspectives and collectively reflect on shared challenges. For example, in the workplace, we do not just work; we are actively observing how shared challenges are managed, thus shaping our sense of democratic responsibility. By empirically examining positive spectatorship in these daily environments, Felicetti believes that researchers can begin to understand how people process their problems together.

    Why It Matters

    The emphasis on the positive forms of spectatorship in this article ultimately reconceptualizes how political theorists think about current democratic engagement. These activities are necessary for a healthy democratic landscape, challenging traditional arguments that participation alone is a signal of a healthy democracy. Felicetti encourages future researchers to pursue qualitative and quantitative approaches to study positive spectatorship in real-world environments—including social media and digital platforms. By pursuing an empirical-based strategy, we can start to engage with overlooked elements of democratic life beyond participation and learn from a massive segment of the democratic ecosystem.

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Felicetti, Andrea. 2025. “Toward a New Perspective on Forms and Sites of Democratic Life.” Policy Studies Journal, 53(4): 1098–1107. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70021.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Andrea Felicetti (PhD, Australian National University) is an Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science, Law, and International Studies at the University of Padua. His research interests and teaching activities revolve around democratic theories, public spheres, and governance. 

    , , , , , ,

    Agendas and Instability in American Local Politics: A Study of the Austin City Council Agenda 1900-2020

    How does the itinerary of topics that the government chooses to focus on change over time at the local level? The everyday life of citizens has been directly impacted by decisions made at the local level, with the issues being spotlighted on the agenda reflecting local priorities. Scholarship has understudied the development of policy agendas at the local-level, displacing focus on the interactions between federal and state-level activities. This article looks to examine long-term changes in local policy agendas by focusing on policy developments within the city of Austin, Texas, and how local agenda dynamics are influenced by national-level agendas, population shifts, and institutional changes.

    Hypotheses

    The authors test the theoretical argument that local policy agendas will expand in response to changes in national-level agenda(s), local population growth, and institutional reforms.

    Methodology

    City council meeting minutes in Austin, Texas were analyzed using a 120-year sample of agenda items from 1900 to 2020. These meeting minutes were content-coded using the Austin Agendas Project codebook that tracked changes in agenda size and issue content. The authors also calculated an entropy score to measure the number of agenda subtopics by year. Additionally, the study included measures of all U.S. House and Senate hearings that occurred during the 1900-2020 period, to compare local agenda shifts with national-level activities.

    Key Findings

    Post-War Conditions Triggered Agenda Expansion in Austin

    Figure 2 demonstrates that the local agenda of Austin expanded greatly following World War II and has continued to increase into the contemporary period. The number of items and subtopics discussed each year on the local agenda increased significantly, expanding the scope of policy items in focus. These findings suggest that the growth of local agenda items was highly receptive to wartime conditions which sparked a reevaluation of local needs such as infrastructure and property taxes. Furthermore, this finding confirms that the occurrence of major or dramatic national events can transcend into an activation of local-level policy agendas.

    Figure 2. Number of Items and Topics on the Austin City Agenda, 1900-2020.

    Population Growth Drives the Local Agenda

    As shown in Figure 5, the increase in the number of citizens in Austin correlated with an expansion of the local agenda. However, these dynamics are not necessarily stable, as the local agenda expanded more than the increase of citizens following World War II, and around 1990, the local agenda stagnated despite a growing population. These fluctuations indicate that while the local agenda does not firmly follow steady population growth patterns, local policy agendas are generally receptive to the need to accommodate interests of newer residents.

    Figure 5. Population Growth and Agenda Expansion.

    Why It Matters

    This article provides an analysis of how local policy agendas respond to changing forces, such as population growth, national agendas, and institutional reforms. It contributes to the field by providing an empirical analysis of local policy developments and thereby offering an opportunity for scholarship to further explore trends in local-level policy dynamics. The authors argue that expanding the scope of this research could help uncover the interplay between local and national agendas, as well as patterns in policy experimentation in other cities.

    Listen to their Podcast Interview

    The authors participated in the Art of Science Podcast (AoS) to discuss their study on local policy agendas in Austin, Texas. You can listen to their interview via either link below:

    Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

    Mortensen, Peter B. and Brooke Nicole Shannon. 2025. “ Agendas and Instability in American Local Politics: A Study of the Austin City Council Agenda 1900–2020.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12587.

    About the Article’s Author(s)

    Peter B. Mortensen is a full professor at the Department of Political Science, Aarhus University. His research interests include public policy and local and national agenda setting. 

    Brooke Nicole Shannon is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Memphis. Her research explores the policy agenda of city councils, American political development at the local level, policy process theory, and local institutions such as city councils, mayors, and law enforcement departments.

    ,

    Does the Implementation Status of Gender Provisions Affect the Implementation of a Peace Agreement? Evidence from Colombia’s 2016 Peace Agreement Implementation Process

    Consider these questions: How involved are women in the negotiation and implementation of peace agreements? Are the rights and well-being of women well-reflected in peace programs? The protection of women’s rights has been a cornerstone of recent discussions in post-war peacebuilding, as recent scholarship has begun to explore the extent to which women have a voice in negotiations and are able to include gendered protections. This article investigates whether such protections included in Colombia’s Final Agreement in 2016 were implemented. The 2016 agreement in Colombia was finalized after a series of negotiations in Havana that started in 2012 between the Colombian government and the leftist insurgency FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – Ejercito del Pueblo). To guide this study, the author specifically asks: To what degree are the gender provisions negotiated in a peace agreement implemented compared to gender-neutral provisions? Does the implementation status of gender provisions affect the implementation of the peace agreement?

    Hypotheses

    The author introduces two hypotheses to determine the relationship between the implementation of gender protections and the peace agreement’s success:

    H1: The incorporation of gendered provisions in the peace agreement is negatively associated with implementation, compared to gender-neutral provisions.

    H2: A positive relationship exists between the implementation status of gender provisions and the overall implementation success of the peace agreement.

      Methodology

      This study utilizes a quantitative analysis of the 2016 Colombian Peace Agreement. Monthly data from the PAM Barometer Initiative (PAM-BI) containing 578 commitments or provisions included in the 2016 Final Agreement were collected between December 2016 and April 2023. The author utilized two different measurement indicators: implementation status and gender-specific benchmarks — that were analyzed at two levels: the stipulation and sub-theme (reforms or programs) level. This allowed the implementation progress of gendered provisions to be compared against non-gendered provisions.

      Key Findings

      Gender Provisions Lag Behind Non-Gender Provisions

      Figure 2 demonstrates that the implementation of gender provisions in the peace agreement falls behind non-gendered provisions. This pattern is consistent across all points of the Final Agreement, suggesting widespread and systemic limitations in the implementation of gender protections. Furthermore, these dynamics indicate a significant implementation gap along gender dimensions, where gendered provisions experience less success in being part of negotiated peace deals compared to provisions not directly advocating for such protections. This reaffirms the challenge of ensuring that women’s perspectives and rights are reflected in the implementation of peace negotiations.

      Figure 2. Point Specific Analysis of Gender Provisions and Implementation Status.

      Implementing More Gender Provisions Uplifts the Entire Peace Agreement

      The complete or “full” implementation of gender provisions provides a significant boost to the success of the peace process, as shown in Figure 3. The addition of more completed gendered-provisions or stipulations improves the probability of the peace agreement being implemented. This confirms the author’s second hypothesis that the implementation of gendered provisions or protections are foundational to supporting broader reforms negotiated in the agreement. Gendered conditions, in this case, act as leverage for advancing peace and stability in post-war nations.

      Figure 3. Prediction of Level Implementation Rate.

      Why It Matters

      This article provides a helpful illustration for how gendered perspectives are implemented in and shape post-war peacebuilding, in comparison with non-gendered perspectives. A dynamic connection is clearly present between gendered provisions and the rate of success for implementing a peace agreement–highlighting their significance in the peace implementation process. The author encourages future research to build upon the findings of this study to determine what conditions or factors influence the inclusion of gender protections in peace negotiations in other settings. By doing this, scholarship will be able to magnify the role of women and their perspectives in implementing important peace agreements.

      Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

      Joshi, Madhav. 2025. “Does the Implementation Status of Gender Provisions Affect the Implementation of a Peace Agreement? Evidence From Colombia’s 2016 Peace Agreement Implementation Process.” Policy Studies Journal 53(4): 1152–1163. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12584

      About the Article’s Author(s)

      Madhav Joshi is a research professor and an associate director of the Peace Accords Matrix (PAM) at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame’s Keough School of Global Affairs. He oversees the data coding for the PAM project and leads the research initiatives on peace agreement design, implementation, and post-implementation political and economic developments. His current priorities focus on collaborative initiatives fulfilling the Kroc Institute’s mandate specific to developing methodology and verifying the implementation of the 2016 peace agreement between the Colombian government and the FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – Ejercito del Pueblo). In collaboration with Catholic Relief Services-Philippines, he leads the Peace Accords Matrix-Mindanao technical accompaniment support to the Joint Normalization Committee in monitoring and verifying the implementation of the Normalization Annex in the 2014 Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of North Texas. His works are published in Political Geography, Social Science Research, British Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, the Journal of Peace Research, Democratization, International Peacekeeping, International Studies Quarterly, and many other journals. 

      , , , ,