IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v5y1985i04p467-496_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

National Styles and Policy Sectors: Explaining Structured Variation

Author

Listed:
  • Freeman, Gary P.

Abstract

A vigorous tradition in comparative politics argues that national policymakers develop characteristic and durable methods for dealing with public issues, that these can be linked to policy outcomes, and that they can be systematically compared. More recently, a number of scholars have suggested reversing the direction of causality, claiming that the nature of political issues themselves causes the politics associated with them. This policy sector approach implies that there should be cross-national similarities in the way issues are treated, whatever the styles particular nations adopt. The two approaches need to be integrated into a common framework built around a research strategy that investigates policymaking within specific sectors across multiple national cases. Such an approach can transcend the often sterile debate over whether the policies of nations are unique or are converging by seeking to explain how the nature of issues structures the variation among the policies of nations.

Suggested Citation

  • Freeman, Gary P., 1985. "National Styles and Policy Sectors: Explaining Structured Variation," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 467-496, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:5:y:1985:i:04:p:467-496_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X00003287/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giliberto Capano & Michael Howlett, 2020. "The Knowns and Unknowns of Policy Instrument Analysis: Policy Tools and the Current Research Agenda on Policy Mixes," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440199, January.
    2. Green, Mick & Collins, Shane, 2008. "Policy, Politics and Path Dependency: Sport Development in Australia and Finland," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 225-251, November.
    3. Michael Howlett & Pablo del Rio, 2015. "The parameters of policy portfolios: verticality and horizontality in design spaces and their consequences for policy mix formulation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1233-1245, October.
    4. Feick, Jürgen & Jann, Werner, 1989. "Comparative Policy Research: Eclecticism or Systematic Integration?," MPIfG Discussion Paper 89/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. Ishani Mukherjee, 2022. "Fueling green connections: Networked policy instrument choices for sustainability regulation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 602-631, September.
    6. Conzelmann, Thomas, 1998. "Europeanisation of Regional Development Policies? Linking the Multi-Level Governance Approach with Theories of Policy Learning and Policy Change," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 2, June.
    7. Alexandra Lesnikowski & James D. Ford & Robbert Biesbroek & Lea Berrang-Ford, 2019. "A policy mixes approach to conceptualizing and measuring climate change adaptation policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 447-469, October.
    8. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee & Jeremy Rayner, 2014. "The Elements of Effective Program Design: A Two-Level Analysis," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 1-12.
    9. Bauer, Angela & Kruppe, Thomas, 2013. "Policy Styles : zur Genese des Politikstilkonzepts und dessen Einbindung in Evaluationsstudien," IAB-Discussion Paper 201322, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    10. Johan Eriksson & Mikael Karlsson & Marta Reuter, 2010. "Technocracy, Politicization, and Noninvolvement: Politics of Expertise in the European Regulation of Chemicals," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 27(2), pages 167-185, March.

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:5:y:1985:i:04:p:467-496_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.