Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:14:12.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Comparative Policy Agendas Project: theory, measurement and findings*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2015

Keith Dowding ,
Andrew Hindmoor  and
Aaron Martin
Keith Dowding
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Australian National University, Australia E-mail: [email protected]
Andrew Hindmoor
Affiliation:
Department of Politics, University of Sheffield, UK E-mail: [email protected]
Aaron Martin
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Melbourne, Australia E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Policy Agendas Project (PAP) was developed in the United States in the early 1990s as a means of collecting data on the contents of the policy agenda. The PAP coding method has subsequently been employed in the United Kingdom, a number of European countries, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, as well as the state of Pennsylvania (http://www.comparativeagendas.org/). What does PAP measure? How does it measure it? What does it find? How does it explain what it finds? We use these questions to structure our review.

Keywords

agenda settingpolicyPolicy Agendas Projectpunctuated equilibrium
Type
Discussion
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 3 - 25
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Earlier versions of this article were presented at meetings of the Australian Political Studies Association and the UK Political Studies Association.

References

Adler, E. S. (2002) New Issues, New Members: Committee Composition and the Transformation of Issue Agendas on House Banking and Public Works Committees. In Baumgartner F. R. and Jones B. D. (eds.), Policy Dynamics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 230–249.Google Scholar
Adler, E. S. and Lapinski, J. (2006) The Macropolitics of Congress. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, E. S. and Wilkerson, J. (2008) Intended Consequences? Committee Reform and Jurisdictional Change in the House of Representatives. Legislative Studies 33(1): 85–112.Google Scholar
Adler, E. S. and Wilkerson, J. (2012) Congress and the Politics of Problem Solving. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Albaek, E, Green-Pedersen, C. and Nielson, L. (2007) Making Tobacco Consumption a Political Issue in the United States and Denmark: The Dynamics of Issue Expansion in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 9(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Angus, D., Smith, A. and Wiles, J. (2012) Conceptual Recurrence Plots: Revealing Patterns in Human Discourse. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(6): 988–997.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R., Boef, S. L. and Boydsun, A. E. (2008) The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R., Green-Pedersen, C., Jones, B. D., Mortensen, P., Neytenmans, M. and Walgrave, S. (2009) Punctuated Equilibrium in Comparative Perspective. American Journal of Political Science 53(3): 602–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R. and Jones, B. D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R. and Jones, B. D. (eds.) (2002) Policy Dynamics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R., Jones, B. D. and MacLeod, M. C. (2000) The Evolution of Legislative Jurisdictions. Journal of Politics 62(2): 321–349.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F., Jones, B. D. and Wilkerson, J. D. (2002) Studying Policy Dynamics. In Baumgartner F. R. and Jones B. D. (eds.), Policy Dynamics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 37–56.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F., Jones, B. D. and Wilkerson, J. D. (2011) Comparative Studies of Policy Dynamics. Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 947–972.Google Scholar
Bentley, A. (1908) The Process of Government. Harvard: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Berry, W. (1990) The Confusing Case of Budgetary Incrementalism: Too Many Meanings for a Single Concept. Journal of Politics 52(1): 167–196.Google Scholar
Bertelli, A. and John, P. (2013a) Public Policy Investment: Risk and Return in British Politics. British Journal of Political Science 43(4): 741–773.Google Scholar
Bertelli, A. and John, P. (2013b) Priority-Setting and Conditional Representation in Public Statecraft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bevan, S. and Jennings, W. (2014) Representation, Agendas and Institutions. European Journal of Political Research 53(1): 37–56.Google Scholar
Boydstun, A. E. (2013) Making the News: Politics, the Media and Agenda Setting. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breeman, G., Lowery, D., Poppleaars, C., Resodihardjo, S., Lantink, T. and Lettinga, B. (2009) Political Attention in a Coalition System: Analysing Queen’s Speeches in the Netherlands 1945–2007. Acta Politica 44(1): 1–27.Google Scholar
Breunig, C. (2011) Reduction, Stasis, and Expansion of Budgets in Advanced Democracies. Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 1060–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capano, G. (2009) Understanding Policy Change as an Epistemological and Theoretical Problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 11(1): 7–31.Google Scholar
Carmines, E. and Stimson, J. (1990) Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Chaqués, L. and Palau, A. (2009) Comparing the Dynamics of Change in Food Safety and Pharmaceutical Policy in Spain. Journal of Public Policy 29(1): 103–126.Google Scholar
Clinton, J. and Lapinski, J. (2006) Measuring Legislative Accomplishment, 1877–1994. American Journal of Political Science 50(2): 232–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, R. and Elder, C. (1972) Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda Building. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Cockfield, G. and Botterill, L. C. (2013) Rural and Regional Policy: A Case of Punctuated Incrementalism? Australian Journal of Public Administration 72(2): 129–142.Google Scholar
Collingwood, L. and Wilkerson, J. D. (2012) Tradeoffs in Accuracy and Efficiency in Supervised Learning Methods. Journal of Information Technology and Politics 9(1): 298–318.Google Scholar
Daviter, F. (2009) Schattsneider in Brussels: How Policy Conflict Reshaped the Biotechnology Agenda in the European Union. West European Politics 32(6): 1118–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1986) The Blind Watchmaker. Colchester: Longman Scientific.Google Scholar
Dowding, K., Hindmoor, A., Iles, R. and John, P. (2010) Policy Agendas in Australian Politics: The Governor-General’s Speeches, 1945–2008. Australian Journal of Political Science 45(4): 533–557.Google Scholar
Dowding, K., Hindmoor, A. and Martin, A. (2013) Australian Public Policy: Attention, Content and Style. Australian Journal of Public Administration 72(2): 82–88.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1972) Up and Down with Ecology: The Issue-Attention Cycle. Public Interest 28(1): 38–54.Google Scholar
Eldredge, S. and Gould, S. J. (1972) Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism. In Schopf T. M. (ed.), Models in Palaeobiology. San Francisco, CA: Freeman Cooper, 82–115.Google Scholar
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (2011) The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report: Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States. New York, NY: Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.Google Scholar
Gist, J. (1982) Stability and Competition in Budget Theory. American Political Science Review 76(4): 959–972.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (2002) The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, C. and Krogstrup, J. (2008) Immigration as a Political Issue in Denmark and Sweden. European Journal of Political Research 47(5): 610–634.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, C. and Stubager, R. (2010) The Political Conditionality of Mass Media Influence: When Do Parties Follow Mass Media Attention? British Journal of Political Science 40(3): 663–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. (1989) The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism Across Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hillard, D., Purpura, S. and Wilkerson, J. D. (2007) Computer-Assisted Topic Classification for Mixed-Methods Social Science Research. Journal of Information Technology and Politics 4(1): 31–46.Google Scholar
Hindmoor, A. and McConnell, A. (2013) Why Didn’t They See It Coming? Warning Signs, Acceptable Risks and the Global Financial Crisis. Political Studies 61(3): 543–560.Google Scholar
Howlett, M. and Migone, A. (2011) Charles Lindblom Is Alive and Well and Living in Punctuated Equilibrium Land. Policy and Society 30(1): 53–62.Google Scholar
Jennings, W., Bevan, S., Timmermans, A., Breeman, G., Brouard, S., Chaqués-Bonafont, L., Green-Pedersen, C., John, P., Mortensen, P. B. and Palau, A. M. (2011) Effects of the Core Functions of Government on the Diversity of Executive Agendas. Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 1001–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, W. and John, P. (2009) The Dynamics of Political Attention: Public Opinion and the Queen’s Speech in the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science 53(4): 838–854.Google Scholar
John, P. (2006) The Policy Agendas Project: A Review. Journal of European Public Policy 13(7): 975–986.Google Scholar
John, P. and Bevan, S. (2012) What Are Policy Punctuations? Large Changes in the Legislative Agenda of the UK Government, 1911–2008. Policy Studies Journal 40(1): 89–107.Google Scholar
John, P., Bertelli, A., Jennings, W. and Bevan, S. (2013) Policy Agendas in British Politics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
John, P. and Jennings, W. (2010) Punctuations and Turning Points in British Politics: The Policy Agenda of the Queen’s Speech, 1940–2005. British Journal of Political Science 40(3): 561–586.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D. (2004) Reconceiving Decision-Making in Democratic Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2004) Representation and Agenda Setting. Policy Studies Journal 32(1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2005) The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2012) From Here to There: Punctuated Equilibrium to the General Punctuation Thesis to a Theory of Government Information Processing. Policy Studies Journal 40(1): 1–19.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2013) The Dynamics of Agenda Expansion and Contraction in the US. Paper presented to American Political Science Association Conference, Chicago, IL, September.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D., Baumgartner, F. R., Breunig, C., Wlezien, C., Soroka, S., Foucault, M., François, A., Green-Pedersen, C., Koski, C., John, P., Mortensen, P., Varone, F. and Walgravee, S. (2009) A General Empirical Law of Public Budgets: A Comparative Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 53(4): 855–873.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D., Sulkin, T. and Larsen, H. (2003) Policy Punctuations in American Political Institutions. American Political Science Review 97(1): 151–169.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J. W. (2003) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. (1984) Approaches to the State: Alternative Conceptions and Historical Dynamics. Comparative Politics 16(2): 223–246.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. E. (1959) The Science of “Muddling Through”. Public Administration Review 19(1): 79–88.Google Scholar
May, P. J., Workman, S. and Jones, B. D. (2008) Organizing Attention: Responses of the Bureaucracy to Agenda Disruption. Journal of Public Administration, Research and Theory 18(4): 517–541.Google Scholar
Mayhew, D. (1991) Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking and Investigations, 1946–1990 . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McCombs, M. and Shaw, D. (1972) The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36(1): 176–187.Google Scholar
McDonagh, O. (1958) The 19th Century Revolution in Government: A Reappraisal. Historical Journal 1(1): 52–67.Google Scholar
McDonagh, O. (1961) A Pattern of Government Growth 1800–60. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T. (1997) Machine Learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Mortensen, P. B. (2005) Policy Punctuations in Danish Local Budgeting. Public Administration 83(4): 932–950.Google Scholar
Mortensen, P. B., Green-Pedersen, C., Breeman, G., Jacques, L., Jennings, W., John, P., Palau, A. M. and Timmermans, A. (2011) Comparing Government Agendas: Executive Speeches in the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Denmark and Spain. Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 973–1000.Google Scholar
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (2004) The 9/11 Commission Report. Washington, DC: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.Google Scholar
Prindle, D. (2012) Importing Concepts from Biology into Political Science: The Case of Punctuated Equilibrium. Policy Studies Journal 40(1): 21–43.Google Scholar
Richardson, J., Gustafsson, G. and Jordan, G. (1982) The Concept of Policy Style. In Richardson J. (ed.), Policy Styles in Western Europe. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1–16.Google Scholar
Rose, R. (1990) Inheritance Before Choice in Public Policy. Journal of Theoretical Politics 2(3): 263–291.Google Scholar
Rose, R. and Davies, P. L. (1994) Inheritance in Public Policy: Change Without Choice in Britain. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, S. and Norvig, P. (2002) Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. (1960) The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Schiffino, C. and Varone, F. (2009) Biomedical Policies in Belgium and Italy: From Regulatory Reluctance to Regime Changes. West European Politics 32(4): 549–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulmann, P. (1975) Non-Incremental Policy-Making: Notes Toward an Alternative Paradigm. American Political Science Review 69(4): 1354–1370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, S. and Wlezien, C. (2010) Degrees of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sterelny, K. (2007) Dawkins Vs. Gould: Survival of the Fittest. Cambridge: Icon Books.Google Scholar
Talbert, J. C., Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (1995) Nonlegislative Hearings and Policy Change in Congress. American Journal of Political Science 39(2): 383–405.Google Scholar
Thurow, L. (1996) The Future of Capitalism. New York, NY: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
True, J. L., Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2007) Punctuated-Equilibrium Theory: Explaining Stability and Change in Public Policymaking. In Sabatier P. A. (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press, 155–187.Google Scholar
Truman, D. (1951) The Governmental Process. New York, NY: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
Vliegenthart, R. and Walgrave, S. (2011) Content Matters: The Dynamics of Parliamentary Questioning in Belgium and Denmark. Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 1031–1059.Google Scholar
Walgrave, S. (2008) Again the Almighty Mass Media. A Subjective Assessment of the Media’s Political Agenda-Setting Power by Politicians and Journalists in Belgium. Political Communication 25(4): 445–459.Google Scholar
Walgrave, S. and Aelst, P. V. (2006) The Contingency of the Mass Media’s Political Agenda Setting Power. Towards a Preliminary Theory. Journal of Communication 56(1): 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walgrave, S. and Varone, F. (2008) Punctuated Equilibrium and Agenda-Setting: Bringing Parties Back In: Policy Change After the Dutroux Crisis in Belgium. Governance 21(3): 365–395.Google Scholar
Walgrave, S. and Vliegenthart, R. (2010) Why Are Policy Agendas Punctuated? Friction and Cascading in Parliament and Mass Media in Belgium. Journal of European Public Policy 17(8): 1147–1170.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, J. D., Feely, T., Jens, S., Nicole, S. and Sue, C. (2002) Using Bills and Hearings to Trace Attention in Congress: Using Windows in Health Care Legislation. In Baumgartner F. R. and Jones B. D. (eds.), Policy Dynamics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 230–250.Google Scholar