IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/z5uxy.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion

Author

Listed:
  • Wolf, Eva
  • Van Dooren, Wouter

    (University of Antwerp)

Abstract

This article investigates the relationship between policy conflict and trust-erosion. It concludes that in a context of trust-erosion, practices to deal with conflict may backfire and lead to further conflict escalation. The article draws on an in-depth analysis of 32 interviews with key actors in the conflict over a contested multibillion-euro highway project in Antwerp (Belgium). It concludes that while all actors draw on the policy repertoire of “managing public support” to explain the conflict, their perspectives of what it means for a policy to have public support differ. Practices to “manage public support” that made sense from one perspective, contributed to the erosion of trust from those holding a different perspective, thus further escalating the conflict. Practices intended to end conflict proved to be fatal remedies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolf, Eva & Van Dooren, Wouter, 2021. "Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion," SocArXiv z5uxy, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:z5uxy
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/z5uxy
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/611667d58e59210038778c3c/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/z5uxy?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. Christopher M. Weible & Tanya Heikkila, 2017. "Policy Conflict Framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 23-40, March.
    2. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jennifer A. Kagan & Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible & Duncan Gilchrist & Ramiro Berardo & Hongtao Yi, 2023. "Advancing scholarship on policy conflict through perspectives from oil and gas policy actors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 573-594, September.

    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. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    2. Hongshan Yang & Hongtao Yi, 2023. "Frontiers of policy process research in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(4), pages 484-489, July.
    3. Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "Unpacking the intensity of policy conflict: a study of Colorado’s oil and gas subsystem," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 179-193, June.
    4. Simon Fink & Eva Ruffing & Tobias Burst & Sara Katharina Chinnow, 2023. "Emotional citizens, detached interest groups? The use of emotional language in public policy consultations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 469-497, September.
    5. Gomes, Sharlene L. & Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2018. "Extending community operational research to address institutional aspects of societal problems: Experiences from peri-urban Bangladesh," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 904-917.
    6. Sojin Jang & Hongtao Yi, 2022. "Organized elite power and clean energy: A study of negative policy experimentations with renewable portfolio standards," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 8-31, January.
    7. Edwards, David M. & Collins, Timothy M. & Goto, Reiko, 2016. "An arts-led dialogue to elicit shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 319-328.
    8. Kenter, Jasper O. & Reed, Mark S. & Fazey, Ioan, 2016. "The Deliberative Value Formation model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 194-207.
    9. Julio C. Zambrano-Gutiérrez & Claudia N. Avellaneda, 2023. "Inter-municipal vs. Inter-governmental Cooperation: Their Impact on International Aid," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 861-881, September.
    10. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    11. Ensor, Jonathan & de Bruin, Annemarieke, 2022. "The role of learning in farmer-led innovation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    12. Ngar-yin Mah, Daphne & Hills, Peter, 2014. "Participatory governance for energy policy-making: A case study of the UK nuclear consultation in 2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 340-351.
    13. repec:mth:bmh888:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:30-51 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Jennifer A. Kagan & Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible & Duncan Gilchrist & Ramiro Berardo & Hongtao Yi, 2023. "Advancing scholarship on policy conflict through perspectives from oil and gas policy actors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 573-594, September.
    15. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    16. Imrat Verhoeven & Tamara Metze, 2022. "Heated policy: policy actors’ emotional storylines and conflict escalation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 223-237, June.
    17. Vitale Brovarone, Elisabetta & Staricco, Luca & Verlinghieri, Ersilia, 2023. "Whose is this street? Actors and conflicts in the governance of pedestrianisation processes," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    18. Bąkowska-Waldmann Edyta & Brudka Cezary & Jankowski Piotr, 2018. "Legal and organizational framework for the use of geoweb methods for public participation in spatial planning in Poland: experiences, opinions and challenges," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 37(3), pages 163-175, September.
    19. Rehana Shrestha & Heike Köckler & Johannes Flacke & Javier Martinez & Martin Van Maarseveen, 2017. "Interactive Knowledge Co-Production and Integration for Healthy Urban Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-21, October.
    20. Kate Crowley & Brian W. Head, 2017. "The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: revisiting Rittel and Webber," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 539-547, December.
    21. Sumit Vij, 2023. "Polycentric disaster governance in a federalising Nepal: interplay between people, bureaucracy and political leadership," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 755-776, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:z5uxy. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.