The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Network Structures within Policy Processes: Coalitions, Power, and Brokerage in Swiss Climate Policy
Abstract
The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) is a prominent approach to investigate the formation of coalition and their impact on policy outputs. Although the ACF combines both the network structures of a political process with actors' values and belief systems, most empirical tests focus mainly on beliefs rather than network structures. Considering a relational approach makes particular sense when one wants to investigate the structural patterns of a subsystem and to assess coalition formation and maintenance. The author therefore proceeds by taking two steps to study the existence of coalitions, power relations, and policy preferences: first, social network analysis frames the empirical study of network structures, based on the assumption that common beliefs are reflected in relations among actors involved in policy processes. Second, using a sophisticated mathematical algorithm, the multicriteria analysis furnishes a systematic evaluation of the elite's belief system. This methodological combination constitutes the added value of this research and allows for testing to establish if common beliefs are reflected in network structures.
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
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach
Roberts, A., Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994) · Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques · doi:10.2307/3551961 · Cited by 3,628
An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein
Sabatier, P. A. (1988) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00136406 · Cited by 3,570
Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate, and Settlement
Lebow, R. N., Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1987) · Political Psychology · doi:10.2307/3790931 · Cited by 1,740
Assessing the Political Landscape: Structure, Cognition, and Power in Organizations
Krackhardt, D. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393394 · Cited by 1,421
Managing Uncertainties in Networks
Koppenjan, J., & Klijn, E.-H. (2004) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203643457 · Cited by 973
A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving
Bardach, E., & Patashnik, E. M. (2019) · Cited by 915
Theories of the policy process
Steen-Johnsen, K., & Schanke Sundet, V. (2024) · Handbook of Media and Communication Governance · doi:10.4337/9781800887206.00016 · Cited by 711
Cited by
A social network analysis of Germany’s wood-based bioeconomy: Social capital and shared beliefs
Giurca, A., & Metz, T. (2018) · Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.09.001 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Ingold, K.
- Venue
- Policy Studies Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-07-27
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 435-459
- ISSN
- 0190-292X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0072
- OpenAlex
- W2166986736
- Cited by
- 361
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 113.55
- 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: Network Structures within Policy Processes: Coalitions, Power, and Brokerage in Swiss Climate Policy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00416.x
- The paper
- Ingold, K. (2011). Network Structures within Policy Processes: Coalitions, Power, and Brokerage in Swiss Climate Policy. Policy Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00416.x
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.