The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Narrative Policy Analysis: Theory and Practice
Abstract
Narrative Policy Analysis presents a powerful and original application of contemporary literary theory and policy analysis to many of today’s most urgent public policy issues. Emery Roe demonstrates across a wide array of case studies that structuralist and poststructuralist theories of narrative are exceptionally useful in evaluating difficult policy problems, understanding their implications, and in making effective policy recommendations. Assuming no prior knowledge of literary theory, Roe introduces the theoretical concepts and terminology from literary analysis through an examination of the budget crises of national governments. With a focus on several particularly intractable issues in the areas of the environment, science, and technology, he then develops the methodology of narrative policy analysis by showing how conflicting policy often tell a more policy-relevant meta-narrative. He shows the advantage of this approach to reading and analyzing stories by examining the ways in which the views of participants unfold and are told in representative case studies involving the California Medfly crisis, toxic irrigation in the San Joaquin Valley, global warming, animal rights, the controversy over the burial remains of Native Americans, and Third World development strategies. Presenting a bold innovation in the interdisciplinary methodology of the policy sciences, Narrative Policy Analysis brings the social sciences and humanities together to better address real-world problems of public policy—particularly those issues characterized by extreme uncertainty, complexity, and polarization—which, if not more effectively managed now, will plague us well into the next century.
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
Cited by
What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability
Smith, A., & Raven, R. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.012 · Cited by 1,712
Hisschemöller, M., & Hoppe, R. (1995) · Knowledge and Policy · doi:10.1007/bf02832229 · Cited by 344
Technical knowledge, discursive spaces and politics at the science–policy interface
Wesselink, A., Buchanan, K. S., Georgiadou, Y., & Turnhout, E. (2013) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.12.008 · Cited by 224
Narrative policy analysis and the integration of public involvement in decision making
Hampton, G. (2009) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11077-009-9087-1 · Cited by 104
Interpreting health statistics for policymaking: the story behind the headlines
Walker, N., Bryce, J., & Black, R. E. (2007) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60454-1 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Roe, E.
- Venue
- Duke University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Duke University Press
- Published
- 1994-11-04
- OpenAlex
- W2337188481
- Cited by
- 774
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.25
- Type
- book
- 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
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.