There and Back Again: A Tale of the Advocacy Coalition Framework

TLDR

The study builds on a 2009 review of 80 ACF applications (1987‑2006) to examine the framework’s breadth and depth. The article catalogs and analyzes 161 ACF applications from 2007‑2014 and explores how its three theoretical foci—advocacy coalitions, policy change, and policy‑oriented learning—are applied. The authors reviewed 161 ACF studies, cataloguing each to assess how the framework is applied across contexts. The review found that the studies involve over 130 first authors from 25 countries, appear in nearly 100 journals (mostly outside the US), focus mainly on environment and energy at the national level using qualitative methods, and show that the ACF balances common application approaches with context‑specific nuances.

Abstract

To better understand how the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) is applied, this article catalogues and analyzes 161 applications of the ACF from 2007 to 2014. Building on a previous review of 80 applications of the ACF (1987–2006) conducted by Weible, Sabatier, and McQueen in 2009, this review examines both the breadth and depth of the framework. In terms of breadth, there are over 130 unique first authors from 25 countries, in almost 100 journals applying the framework, including a majority outside of the United States. In terms of depth, a plurality of applications analyzes environment and energy, subsystems at the national level, and utilizes qualitative methods of data collection and analyses. This review also explores how the three theoretical foci of the framework—advocacy coalitions, policy change, and policy‐oriented learning—are applied. Our findings suggest that the ACF balances common approaches for applying the framework with the specificity of particular contexts.