Policy process theories in autocracies: Key observations, explanatory power, and research priorities

• Published in: The Review of policy research 2024-11, Vol.41 (6), p.865-891
• Main Authors: van den Dool, Annemieke, Schlaufer, Caroline
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Advocacy; Advocacy Coalition Framework; Authoritarianism; Autocracy; autoritarismo; Content analysis; Frame analysis; marco de coalición de promoción; marco de corrientes múltiples; marco político narrativo; Multiple Streams Framework; Narrative Policy Framework; Policy making; policy process; proceso político; Punctuated Equilibrium Theory; Qualitative analysis; teoría del equilibrio puntuado; Theory; 倡导联盟框架; 叙事政策框架; 多源流框架; 威权主义; 政策过程; 间断平衡理论
• ISSN: 1541-132X; 1541-1338
• DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12596

The policy process frameworks and theories that are currently considered mainstream were originally developed in the United States, before traveling to other countries. Despite their roots in democratic values, these frameworks and theories are increasingly applied to autocracies. Given important differences between democracies and autocracies, this raises questions about the desirability, limitations, and future directions of this development. In response, this article synthesizes findings from studies that apply existing policy process frameworks and theories to autocracies with the aim of assessing the extent to which the theories are, can, and should be used to explain key aspects of the policy process in autocracies. Based on qualitative content analysis of 146 English‐language peer‐reviewed journal articles that apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Multiple Streams Framework, the Narrative Policy Framework, and the Punctuated Equilibrium Theory to 39 autocracies, we show that these theories help identify influential institutions, actors, networks, ideas, beliefs, and events. The analysis reveals important differences in policy processes between autocracies and democracies. Future research ought to bring existing literature on authoritarianism and authoritarian politics into policy process research to test existing and new hypotheses. 摘要 目前被视为主流的一系列政策过程框架及理论最初源于美国，然后才传播到其他国家。尽管这些框架和理论植根于民主价值观，但却越来越多地应用于独裁国家。鉴于民主国家和独裁国家之间的重要差异，这引发了关于“政策过程框架及理论发展的可取性、局限性和未来方向”的问题。为回答该问题，本文总结了将现有政策过程框架及理论应用于独裁国家的研究结果，旨在评估这些理论在多大程度上正被用于、能够用于、和应该用于解释独裁国家政策过程的关键方面。基于对146篇英文同行评审期刊文章的定性内容分析(这些文章将倡导联盟框架、多源流框架、叙事政策框架和间断平衡理论应用于39个独裁国家)，我们表明，这些理论有助于识别有影响力的机构、行动者和网络、想法和信仰、以及事件。分析揭示了独裁国家和民主国家的政策过程的重要差异。未来研究应将有关威权主义和威权政治的现有文献纳入政策过程研究。 Resumen Los marcos y teorías de los procesos políticos que actualmente se consideran convencionales se desarrollaron originalmente en los EE. UU., antes de viajar a otros países. A pesar de sus raíces en valores democráticos, estos marcos y teorías se aplican cada vez más a las autocracias. Dadas las importantes diferencias entre democracias y autocracias, esto plantea interrogantes sobre la conveniencia, las limitaciones y las direcciones futuras de este desarrollo. En respuesta, este artículo resume los hallazgos de estudios que aplican marcos y teorías de procesos políticos existentes a las autocracias con el objetivo de evaluar en qué medida las teorías son, pueden y deben usarse para explicar aspectos clave del proceso político en las autoc