IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v40y2023i6p972-1003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An item response approach to sea‐level rise policy preferences in a nascent subsystem

Author

Listed:
  • Kyra Gmoser‐Daskalakis
  • Tyler A. Scott
  • Mark Lubell
  • Francesca P. Vantaggiato

Abstract

Sea‐level rise is a “nascent subsystem” with policy actors actively developing initial policy preferences through participation across multiple policy forums in a polycentric system. This paper uses item‐response models to empirically analyze how actors, perceived problems, and preferred policy solutions are related in a latent “policy space”. We focus on California's San Francisco Bay region, where in the last decade, sea‐level rise emerged to become one of the most salient climate adaptation issues. We find that actors and policy preferences are arranged in a two‐dimensional space, with highly engaged actors more likely to consider environmental justice and ecological aspects of sea level rise. Our findings have implications for theories of nascent subsystems within the Advocacy Coalition Framework, and for understanding how a local policy subsystem develops to address and prioritize the multi‐faceted impacts of climate change. El aumento del nivel del mar es un “subsistema naciente” con actores políticos que desarrollan activamente preferencias políticas iniciales a través de la participación en múltiples foros políticos en un sistema policéntrico. Este documento utiliza modelos de respuesta a ítems para analizar empíricamente cómo los actores, los problemas percibidos y las soluciones políticas preferidas se relacionan en un “espacio de políticas” latente. Nos enfocamos en la región de la Bahía de San Francisco en California, donde en la última década, el aumento del nivel del mar se convirtió en uno de los problemas de adaptación climática más destacados. Encontramos que los actores y las preferencias políticas están organizados en un espacio bidimensional, con actores altamente comprometidos que tienen más probabilidades de considerar la justicia ambiental y los aspectos ecológicos del aumento del nivel del mar. Nuestros hallazgos tienen implicaciones para las teorías de los subsistemas nacientes dentro del Marco de la Coalición de Defensa y para comprender cómo se desarrolla un subsistema de políticas locales para abordar y priorizar los impactos multifacéticos del cambio climático. 海平面上升是一个“新生子系统”,其中,政策行动者通过参与多中心系统中的多个政策论坛来积极制定初始政策偏好。本文使用项目反应模型来实证分析行动者、感知问题和首选政策解决方案在潜在的“政策空间”中如何产生联系。我们聚焦于加利福尼亚旧金山湾区,过去十年中,海平面上升成为该地区最突出的气候适应问题之一。我们发现,行动者和政策偏好被安排​​在一个二维空间中,其中高度参与的行动者更有可能考量环境正义与海平面上升的生态方面。我们的研究结果对倡导联盟框架内的新生子系统理论具有意义,并对“理解地方政策子系统如何发展以解决和优先考虑气候变化的多方面影响”一事具有启示。

Suggested Citation

  • Kyra Gmoser‐Daskalakis & Tyler A. Scott & Mark Lubell & Francesca P. Vantaggiato, 2023. "An item response approach to sea‐level rise policy preferences in a nascent subsystem," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(6), pages 972-1003, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:40:y:2023:i:6:p:972-1003
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12520
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12520
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12520?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mathew E. Hauer & Jason M. Evans & Deepak R. Mishra, 2016. "Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 691-695, July.
    2. Bailey, Michael, 2001. "Ideal Point Estimation with a Small Number of Votes: A Random-Effects Approach," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 192-210, January.
    3. Mark Lubell & Mark Stacey & Michelle A. Hummel, 2021. "Collective action problems and governance barriers to sea-level rise adaptation in San Francisco Bay," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-25, August.
    4. Peress, Michael & Spirling, Arthur, 2010. "Scaling the Critics: Uncovering the Latent Dimensions of Movie Criticism With an Item Response Approach," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(489), pages 71-83.
    5. Jasmin Beverwijk & Leo Goedegebuure & Jeroen Huisman, 2008. "Policy change in nascent subsystems: Mozambican higher education policy 1993–2003," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(4), pages 357-377, December.
    6. Chalmers, R. Philip, 2012. "mirt: A Multidimensional Item Response Theory Package for the R Environment," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i06).
    7. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    8. Ho, Daniel E. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2008. "Measuring Explicit Political Positions of Media," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 3(4), pages 353-377, December.
    9. Oberski, Daniel, 2014. "lavaan.survey: An R Package for Complex Survey Analysis of Structural Equation Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 57(i01).
    10. Vantaggiato, Francesca PhD & Lubell, Mark PhD, 2020. "Learning to Collaborate: Lessons Learned from Governance Processes Addressing the Impacts of Sea Level Rise on Transportation Corridors Across California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4rn5j20d, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Joshua D. Clinton & Anthony Bertelli & Christian R. Grose & David E. Lewis & David C. Nixon, 2012. "Separated Powers in the United States: The Ideology of Agencies, Presidents, and Congress," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 341-354, April.
    12. Iwin Leenen & Iven Mechelen, 2004. "A conjunctive parallelogram model for pick any/n data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 401-420, September.
    13. Silvana Bortolotti & Rafael Tezza & Dalton Andrade & Antonio Bornia & Afonso Sousa Júnior, 2013. "Relevance and advantages of using the item response theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2341-2360, June.
    14. Carroll, Royce & Lewis, Jeffrey B. & Lo, James & Poole, Keith T. & Rosenthal, Howard, 2009. "Measuring Bias and Uncertainty in DW-NOMINATE Ideal Point Estimates via the Parametric Bootstrap," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 261-275, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2006. "Roll Call Data and Ideal Points," Wallis Working Papers WP42, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
    2. Paola Annoni & Nicholas Charron, 2019. "Measurement Assessment in Cross-Country Comparative Analysis: Rasch Modelling on a Measure of Institutional Quality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 31-60, January.
    3. James Lo, 2018. "Dynamic ideal point estimation for the European Parliament, 1980–2009," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 229-246, July.
    4. Brandon Marshall & Michael Peress, 2018. "Dynamic estimation of ideal points for the US Congress," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 153-174, July.
    5. Richard F. Potthoff, 2018. "Estimating Ideal Points from Roll-Call Data: Explore Principal Components Analysis, Especially for More Than One Dimension?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, January.
    6. Scott S. Boddery, 2019. "Signals from a politicized bar: the solicitor general as a direct litigant before the U.S. Supreme Court," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 194-210, June.
    7. Anthony Charles Milordis & William Hale Butler & Tisha Joseph Holmes, 2023. "What is slowing progress on climate change adaptation? Evaluating barriers to planning for sea level rise in Florida," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(8), pages 1-26, December.
    8. Joshua B. Fischman, 2015. "Do the Justices Vote Like Policy Makers? Evidence from Scaling the Supreme Court with Interest Groups," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 269-293.
    9. Anrafel de Souza Barbosa & Maria Cristina Crispim & Luiz Bueno da Silva & Jonhatan Magno Norte da Silva & Aglaucibelly Maciel Barbosa & Sandra Naomi Morioka, 2024. "How can organizations measure the integration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria? Validation of an instrument using item response theory to capture workers' perception," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3607-3634, May.
    10. Abinash Bhattachan & Matthew D. Jurjonas & Priscilla R. Morris & Paul J. Taillie & Lindsey S. Smart & Ryan E. Emanuel & Erin L. Seekamp, 2019. "Linking residential saltwater intrusion risk perceptions to physical exposure of climate change impacts in rural coastal communities of North Carolina," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(3), pages 1277-1295, July.
    11. Izolda Pristojkovic Suko & Magdalena Holter & Erwin Stolz & Elfriede Renate Greimel & Wolfgang Freidl, 2022. "Acculturation, Adaptation, and Health among Croatian Migrants in Austria and Ireland: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-15, December.
    12. Ashley C. Freeman & Walker S. Ashley, 2017. "Changes in the US hurricane disaster landscape: the relationship between risk and exposure," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 88(2), pages 659-682, September.
    13. Nana Kim & Daniel M. Bolt & James Wollack, 2022. "Noncompensatory MIRT For Passage-Based Tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 992-1009, September.
    14. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Laslier, Jean-Francois, 2007. "Euclidean preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 87-98, February.
    15. de Leeuw, Jan, 2006. "Principal component analysis of binary data by iterated singular value decomposition," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 21-39, January.
    16. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    17. Andrew Kirby, 2022. "The Right to Make Mistakes? The Limits to Adaptive Planning for Climate Change," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, June.
    18. Mi Jung Lee & Daejin Kim & Sergio Romero & Ickpyo Hong & Nikolay Bliznyuk & Craig Velozo, 2022. "Examining Older Adults’ Home Functioning Using the American Housing Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-13, April.
    19. Rorie Spill Solberg & Stefanie A. Lindquist, 2006. "Activism, Ideology, and Federalism: Judicial Behavior in Constitutional Challenges Before the Rehnquist Court, 1986–2000," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), pages 237-261, July.
    20. Luo, Nanyu & Ji, Feng & Han, Yuting & He, Jinbo & Zhang, Xiaoya, 2024. "Fitting item response theory models using deep learning computational frameworks," OSF Preprints tjxab, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:40:y:2023:i:6:p:972-1003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.