The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe
Abstract
The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) has generated considerable interest among European policy scholars. This article summarizes some of the more important findings concerning, and changes to, the ACF since the last major revision in 1993. These include: (1) a much clearer model of the individual; (2) a clearer, more integrated concept of ‘policy subsystem;’ (3) much greater attention to the problematic nature of collective behavior among people who share policy beliefs; and (4) some suggestions concerning methods of ascertaining the existence and membership of advocacy coalitions. The article also briefly addresses the ACF's applicability to parliamentary systems, to the countries of Eastern Europe, and to the dynamic politics of the European Union.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Olson, M. (1965) · doi:10.4159/9780674041660 · Cited by 14,191
Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain
Hall, P. A. (1993) · Comparative Politics · doi:10.2307/422246 · Cited by 7,369
Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994) · Princeton University Press · doi:10.1515/9781400821211 · Cited by 7,225
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science
Simon, H. A. (1985) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1956650 · Cited by 1,359
The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change
Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00138786 · Cited by 1,346
Cited by
Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis
Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., & Rickne, A. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.003 · Cited by 2,269
Policy Implementation and Cognition: Reframing and Refocusing Implementation Research
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543072003387 · Cited by 1,908
The Europeanization of Public Policy
Radaelli, C. M. (2003) · The Politics of Europeanization · doi:10.1093/0199252092.003.0002 · Cited by 1,049
Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S., Markard, J., Sandén, B., & Truffer, B. (2015) · Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.003 · Cited by 627
The role of cognitive and normative frames in policy-making
Surel, Y. (2000) · Journal of European Public Policy · doi:10.1080/13501760050165334 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Sabatier, P. A.
- Venue
- Journal of European Public Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 98-130
- ISSN
- 1350-1763 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4429
- OpenAlex
- W2038559467
- Cited by
- 1,462
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 220.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13501768880000051
- The paper
- Sabatier, P. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501768880000051
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
