POLS206 WK11 - Pacific States and Advocacy Coalition Framework

social construction of policy

meaning of public policy is constructed

perception that policy = strategic plan

plans regarded as wish lists

importance of culture in decision making

• end up with strong cultures within policy making institutions

• certain idea of what policy is/how it should function

upside down decolonization

extended colonial relationships rather than full independence/sovereignty

can be military support

can be voluntary

common when indigenous peopels are in the minority

e.g. tokelau - nz was pushing for its independence but it didnt happen

what are trust territories

in legal terms, fully independent

but IS has control over their foreign/military policy

whats the context of NZ and the pacific?

nz proud of decolonization record

sees itself as the center of the south pacific region

NZ has one of the largest economic zones/search and safety on the sea

pacific regionalism

complex interactions among pacific nations and entities beyond the region

pacific regional governance

agency the pacific states have as international actors in the international arena/policy making capabilities

island logic

sea of islands - countering the conventional representation of islands in a far sea - a series of alliances

development administration mindset

recipients didn’t have that much input on how funding was used

development assistance model

allow local communities to have democratic input

inverse sovereignty effect

 

a state's level of legal independence is inversely related to its material standard of living and access to foreign aid or remittances

• One of frameworks - paris declaration - development is most effective if local gov has control

• When funding provided- hard to let go of the strings attached

• Not direct coercion, but incentive to alter behavior in ways that benefit us - lose control over the direction of your own development policy

principles of action

fonofale - interconnected well-living

vai nui - mutual interdependence, sense of belonging

normalization of loss

climate change loss

warnings not eliciting enough international support

lack of adaptation knowledge

convoluted global adaption system

collective disassociation

too late narratives

absolve from responsibility

social disengagement

language of crisis

focuses on places that CAN be saved

leads to disengagement with efforts to allow ppl in the lower laying islands to remain in class

advocacy coalition framework

people form coalitions with people who share their beliefs

their goal is to impact public policy and compete with other coalitions

takes place in subsystems

how are ACFs related to interest groups?

a coalition can be comprised of more than one interest group

less defined organizational and leadership function

with is the coalition impact on policy

can influence through status

ability to garner public support

ability to spin arguments

mobilize members

bankroll political candidates

exploit opportunities for policy chagne

what are the layers of ACF beliefs?

deep core beliefs

policy core beliefs

secondary aspects

deep core beliefs

an actor’s underlying personal philosophy about nature and human nature

• e.g. left wing/right wing

  • values like freedom/security, are ppl evil etc

policy core beliefs

fundamental policy positions that relate to a specific subsystem issue

combo of empirical (what is happening) and normative (what should happen)

e.g. what causes the policy problem, should we solve it, how etc.

more susceptible to change

secondary aspects

the funding, delivery, and implementation of policy goals and the info gathered to support the process

what are the weaknesses of the ACF?

mostly applied to one policy area, often not applied fully

focuses on domestic players, not international

what are the strengths of the ACF?

can apply to many policymaking contexts

accounts for a wide variety of players

why is learning not straightforward in ACF frameworks?

evidence is unclear and contested

competing coalitions may refuse to engage on each other’s terms

dominant coalitions are unlikely to simply accept the arguments of other coalitions and adopt their preferred policies

how is stability within subsystems reinforced externally?

by relatively stable parameters that are unlikely to change over one cycle

e.g. - rules and constitutional structures of a political system

fundamental social structures and values of the wider polity

basic attributes of a problem area (e.g. natural resources related to environmental policies)

how is stability within subsystems reinforced internally?

through coalition actors

• although they engage in learning - this is mainly for secondary aspects

what are the sources of policymaking instability

‘shocks’ - combination of events and the response by coalitions to events

• can be external to the subsystem

• internal can be failure of current policy to solve the policy problem