Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework to Understand Freight Transportation Policy Change

Abstract

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) was developed to study complex, enduring public policy processes involving multiple actors. In this article, it is applied to the freight transportation policy subsystem in the United States, in which the highway motor complex has traditionally dominated coalitions from other transportation modes (e.g., railroads, aviation, and inland waterways). Using historical analysis and the Appalachian wood products industry as an illustrative example of the policy change toward intermodalism, the article shows how changes external to the subsystem are forcing a rethinking of the governing belief systems. The research provides support for several ACF hypotheses and substantiates its validity as a framework for studying the freight transportation policy subsystem. Conclusions regarding the need for increased policy-oriented learning and the prediction of the emergence of a new intermodal coalition are made based on the ACF.

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

“…Content analysis of policy change includes whether it is identified, if it is major and/or minor change, and if a pathway(s) to policy change are identified: (1) external events or perturbations, (2) internal events within the policy subsystem such as policy failure, (3) policy‐oriented learning that influences policy change, and (4) negotiated agreement as well as the presence of a policy broker (Jenkins‐Smith, Nohrstedt, et al, ). Overall, 67 (42 percent) ACF applications analyze either policy change or stasis (e.g., Nohrstedt, ; Stich & Miller, ).…”

“…(1) external events or perturbations, (2) internal events within the policy subsystem such as policy failure, (3) policy-oriented learning that influences policy change, and (4) negotiated agreement as well as the presence of a policy broker (Jenkins- Smith, Nohrstedt, et al, 2014). Overall, 67 (42 percent) ACF applications analyze either policy change or stasis (e.g., Nohrstedt, 2008Nohrstedt, , 2010Nohrstedt, , 2011Stich & Miller, 2008).…”

Policy Change: An Advocacy Coalition Framework Perspective

“…External events are also identified with negotiation (18/78) (e.g., Diaz-Kope, Lombard, & Miller-Stevens, 2013), superior jurisdiction (15/78) (e.g., Bukowski, 2007), and internal events (9/78) (e.g., Adshead, 2011). Overall, external events are identified in 60 percent (78/131) of all policy changes, and 82 percent (58/71) among applications that identify multiple pathways to policy change (e.g., Stich & Miller, 2008).…”

Public Policy and Governance: Some Thoughts on Its Elements

“…We are friends as well as constituents of common society where policy makers and interested parties can interplay to produce a better policy outcome. Particularly if the society and industry evolve extensively and on higher context of influence, the web of networks or policy geometries in substantial representation of the societal or national interests seems workable and helpful to administer the public agenda (Stich, B., & Miller, C. R., 2008).…”