Abstract
In comparative approaches to the policy process, policymaking institutions are usually considered at the level of political systems. Countries, however, may vary not only in systemic institutions but also in types of policymaking arenas within specific domains. Systematic attention to this variation in policy arenas at both levels may complement existing theories of the policy process that focus on other explanatory variables and may increase the comparative potential of these approaches. As an explanatory variable, arena variation makes a difference to policy results in that it may increase or decrease the potential for policy change sought by policy entrepreneurs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkinson, M.N. and W.D. Coleman. (1989). “Strong States and Weak States: Sector Policy Networks in Advanced Capitalist Economies.” British Journal of Political Science 19, 47–67.
Baumgartner, F.R. (1989). Conflict and Rhetoric in French Policymaking. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Baumgartner, F.R. and B.D. Jones. (1991). “Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems.” Journal of Politics 53(4), 1044–1074.
Baumgartner, F.R. and B.D. Jones. (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burns, T.R and H. Flam. (1987). The Shaping of Social Organization. Social Rule System Theory with Applications. London/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage.
Döhler, M. (1991). “Policy Networks, Opportunity Structures and Neo-Conservative Reform Strategies in Health Policy.” In B. Marin and R. Mayntz (eds.), Policy Networks: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Considerations. Frankfurt: Campus.
Dudley, G. and J. Richardon. (1998). “Arenas without Rules and the Policy Change Process: Outsider Groups and British Roads Policy.” Political Studies XLVI, 727–747.
Goggin, M., D. Orth, I. Bleiklie, and A. Timmermans. (2000). “A Theory of Policy Design.” Unpublished manuscript.
Haas, P.M. (1989). “Do Regimes Matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranian Pollution Control.” International Organization 43, 377–403.
Hall, P.A. (1993). “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State. The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics, April, 275–296.
Harrop, M. (ed.). (1992). Power and Policy in Liberal Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heclo, H. (1974). Social Policies in Britain and Sweden. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Heclo, H. (1978). “Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment.” In A. King (ed.), The New American Political System. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute.
Immergut, E.M. (1992). Health Politics. Interests and Institutions in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kingdon, J.W. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
Kirejczyk, M. (1996). Met Technologie Gezegend? Gender en de omstreden invoering van in vitro fertilisatie in de Nederlandse gezondheidszorg. Utrecht: Jan van Arkel.
Kirejczyk, M. (2000). “Beleidsculturen en menselijke embryo's: Een historische vergelijking van de beleidsontwikkeling betreffende embryo-onderzoek in Nederland en het Verenigd Koninkrijk.” Beleidswetenschap 3, 203–228.
Lasswell, H.D. (1936). Politics: Who Gets What, When and How. Cleveland: Meridian Books.
Levy, B. and P. Spiller. (1994). “The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment: A Comparative Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation.” The Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 10, 201–246.
Linder, W. (1994). Swiss Democracy. Possible Solutions to Conflict in Multicultural Societies. Houndsmill: MacMillan.
Lijphart, A. (1984). Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy. Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, A. and M. Crepaz. (1991). “Corporatism and Consensus Democracy in Eighteen Countries: Conceptual and Empirical Linkages.” British Journal of Political Science 21, 235–256.
Mintrom, M. and S. Vergari. (1996). “Advocacy Coalitions, Policy Entrepreneurs, and Policy Change.” Policy Studies Journal 24(3), 420–434.
Moe, T.M. (1990). “Political Institutions: The Neglected Side of the Story.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6, 213–253.
Moe, T.M. and M. Caldwell. (1994). “The Institutional Foundations of Democratic Government: A Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 150(1), 171–195.
Montpetit, E. (2000). “Regulating Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Canada.” Unpublished manuscript.
Montpetit, E. and W. Coleman. (1999). “Policy Communities and Policy Divergence in Canada: Agro-Environmental Policy Development in Quebec and Ontario.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 32, 691–714.
Mulkey, M. (1997). The Embryo Research Debate. Science and the Politics of Reproduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (1986). “A Method of Institutional Analysis.” In F.-X. Kaufmann et al. (eds.), Guidance, Control, and Performance Evaluation in the Public Sector. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E., R. Gardner, and J. Walker. (1994). Rules, Games, and Common Pool Resources. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Ostrom, E. (1999). “Institutional Rational Choice: An Assessment of the AID Framework.” In P.A. Sabatier (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder: Westview.
Page, E.C. (1985). Political Authority and Bureaucratic Power. A Comparative Analysis. Brighton: Wheatsheaf Books.
Pfeffer, N. (2000). “Regulating Reproduction.” In A.R. Saetnan, N. Oudshoorn, and M. Kirejczyk (eds.), Bodies of Technology. Women's Involvement with Reproductive Medicine. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Polsby, N. (1984). Political Innovation In America. The Politics of Policy Initiation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Rothmayr, C., U. Serdült, and F. Varone. (2000). “Regulating Assisted Reproductive Technology in Switzerland: A Policy Design Perspective.” Unpublished manuscript.
Sabatier, P. A. and H. Jenkins-Smith (eds.). (1993). Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Framework. Boulder: Westview Press.
Sabatier. P.A. (1998). “The Advocacy Coalition Framework. Assessment and Applicability to Europe.” Journal of European Public Policy 5, 98–130.
Scharpf, F.W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play. Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder and Oxford: Westview Press.
Schattschneider, E.E. (1960). The Semisovereign People. New York: Holt.
Schneider, A.L. and H. Ingram. (1997). Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Scholten, I. (1987). “Introduction: Corporatist and Consociational Arrangements.” In I. Scholten (ed.), Political Stability and Neo-Corporatism. London: Sage.
Steinmo, S., K. Thelen, and F. Longstreth (eds.). (1993). Structuring Politics. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Timmermans, A. (2001). “Conflict and Consensus in Assisted Reproductive Technology Policy: The Dutch Case.” Unpublished manuscript.
Tsebelis, G. (1995). “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarianism, Multicameralism, and Multipartism.” British Journal of Political Science 25, 289–326.
Tsebelis, G. (1999). “Veto Players and Institutional Analysis.” Governance 13, 441–474.
Weaver, R.K. and B.R. Rockman (eds.). (1993). Do Institutions Matter? Government Capabilities in the United States and Abroad. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Weimer, D.L. (1992). “Claiming Races, Broiler Contracts, and Habits: Ten Concepts for Policy Design.” Policy Sciences 25, 135–159.
Weir, M. (1993). “Ideas and the Politics of Bounded Innovation.” In Steinmo et al. (eds.), Structuring Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Timmermans, A. Arenas as Institutional Sites for Policymaking: Patterns and Effects in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 3, 311–337 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012357518537
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012357518537