Discurse network analysis: discursive-dynamic aspect of public policy research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18413/2687-0967-2020-47-4-921-932Keywords:
discourse network analysis, public political debates, political discourse, qualitative contentanalysis, quantitative network analysis, dynamic aspect of research, public policyAbstract
The paper’s analysis is aimed at the concept of discourse network analysis suggested by the British political scientist Philip Leifeld and, most of all, at its essential features that make it possible to evaluate an explanatory potential of such a concept that appears to be a combination of qualitative content-analysis and quantitative network analysis. It is interpreted here a principal importance of defining in this concept of the public political debates as dynamic discourse networks discussing policy problems in their development and of the detailed and creative elaboration of the central notion of «political discourse» emphasizing its dynamic nature as well as a significance of combining in its methodology of the actor-oriented and the content-oriented approaches to the research over policy discourses that let conceptualizing and measuring co-evolution of actors and their contents in the process of dynamic changes of formulation, reformation and shift of the policies thus having provided an option of their long-term monitoring.
References
Мирошниченко И. В., Морозова Е.В. 2017. Сетевая публичная политика: контуры предметного поля. Полис. Политические исследования, № 2: 82–102.
Atkinson R. 2000. Narratives of Policy: the Construction of Urban Problems and Urban Policy in the Official Discourse of British Government 1968–1998. Critical Social Policy, 20: 211–232.
Baumgartner F.R. and Jones B.D. (1991) Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems. The Journal of Politics, 53 (4): 1044–1074.
Berardo Ramiro and John T. Scholz. 2010. Self-Organizing Policy Networks: Risk, Partner Selection, and Cooperation in Estuaries. American Journal of Political Science, 54 (3): 632–649.
Berardo Ramiro and Mark Lubell. 2016. Understanding What Shapes a Polycentric Governance System. Public Administration Review, 76 (5): 738–751.
Berardo Ramiro. 2014. Bridging and Bonding Capital in Two-Mode Collaboration Networks. Policy Studies Journal, 42 (2): 197–225.
Brandes U. and Corman S.R. 2003. Visual unrolling of network evolution and the analysis of dynamic discourse. Information Visualization, 2 (1): 40–50.
Bryman A. 2012. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 766 p.
Clegg S.S. 1989. Frameworks of Power. London: Sage: 297 p.
Falk D. 2007. Policy Framing in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 14 (4): 654–666.
Ferrari F. 2007. Metaphor at work in the analysis of political discourse: investigating a 'preventive war' persuasion strategy. Discourse & Society, 18 (5): 603–625.
Fischer F., and J. Forester. (eds.) 1993. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham: Duke University Press: 352 p.
Ghinoi S. & Steiner B. 2020. The political debate on climate change in Italy: A discourse network analysis. Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 215–228.
Haas P.M. 1992. Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46 (1): 1–35.
Hajer M. 1993. Discourse Coalitions and the Institutionalization of Practice: The Case of Acid Rain in Britain. In: Fischer F. and J. Forester (eds.). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 34–76.
Hajer M. 1996. Ecological Modernization as Cultural Politics. In: Lash S., B. Szerszynski and B. Wynne, (eds.). Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology. London: Sage: 246–268.
Hajer M. (2002) «Discourse Analysis and the Study of Policy Making», European Political Science 2 (1): 61–65.
Hall P.A. 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25 (3): 275–296.
Haunss S., Kuhn J., Padó S., Blessing A., Blokker N., Dayanik E. & Lapesa G. (2020) Integrating manual and automatic annotation for the creation of discourse network data sets. Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 326–339.
Howe A.C., M.C.J. Stoddart and D.B. Tindall. 2020. Media coverage and perceived pol icy influence of environmental actors: Good strategy or pyrrhic victory? Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 298–310.
Hurrelmann A., Krell-Laluhov Z., Nullmeier F., Schneider S. and Wiesner A. 2009. Why the democratic nation-state is still legitimate: A study of media discourses. European Journal of Political Research, 48 (4): 483–515.
Johnson D.W. and Johnson R.T. 2000. Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 6 (4): 291–317.
Kukkonen A. and Ylä-Anttila T. 2020. The science-policy interface as a discourse network: Finland’s climate change policy 2002–2015. Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 200–214.
Laclau E. and C. Mouffe. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso: 240 p.
Leifeld P. 2010. Ideas, policy design and policy instruments: casting light on the missing link. Paper presented at the workshop of ECPR Joint Sessions, Munster, March 22–27, 2010. https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/d9d2e2b4-306f-4bed-a1a9-8be194ff7dbf.pdf
Leifeld P. 2013. Reconceptualizing major policy change in the advocacy coalition framework: A discourse network analysis of German pension politics. Policy Studies Journal, 41 (1): 169–198.
Leifeld P. 2014. Polarization of coalitions in an agent-based model of political discourse. Computational Social Networks, 1 (1), article No. 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40649-014-0007-y.
Leifeld P. 2017. Discourse network analysis: Policy debates as dynamic networks. In: Victor J.N., A.H. Montgomery & M.N. Lubell (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of political networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 301–325.
Leifeld P. and S. Haunss. 2012. Political Discourse Networks and the Conflict Over Software Patents in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 51 (3): 382–409 doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.02003.x.
Leifeld P. and L. Brandenberger. 2019. Endogenous coalition formation in policy debates. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.05327.
Leifeld P. and S. Haunss. 2012. Political discourse networks and the conflict over software patents in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 51 (3): 382–409.
Leifeld P. 2020. Policy Debates and Discourse Network Analysis: A Research Agenda. Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 180–183.
Lenschow A. and A.R. Zito. 1998. Blurring or Shifting of Policy Frames? Institutionalization of the Economic-Environmental Policy Linkage in the European Community. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 11 (4): 415–441.
Linder S. 1995. Contending Discourses in the Electric and Magnetic Fields Controversy: The Social Construction of EMF Risk as a Public Problem, Policy Sciences, 28 (2): 209–230.
Muller Allan. 2015. Using Discourse Network Analysis to Measure Discourse Coalitions: Towards a Formal Analysis of Political Discourse. World Political Science. 11 (2): 377–404.
Popping R. 2003. Knowledge graphs and network text analysis. Social Science Information, 42 (1): 91–106.
Sabatier P.A. and C.M. Weible. 2007. The advocacy coalition framework. In: Sabatier P.A., (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process. Boudler CO: Westview Press: 189–222.
Sederberg P.C. 1984. The Politics of Meaning. Tucson, Arizona: The University of Arizona Press: 294 p.
Schaub S. and Metz F. 2020. Comparing discourse and policy network approaches: Evidence from water policy on micropollutants. Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 184–199.
Szarka J. 2004. Wind Power, Discourse Coalitions and Climate Change: Breaking the Stalemate? European Environment, 14 (6): 314–330.
Victor J.N., Montgomery A.N. and Lubell M.N. (Eds.). 2017. The Oxford Handbook of Political Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1008 p.
Wallaschek S., Starke C. and Brüning C. 2020. Solidarity in the public sphere: A discourse network analysis of German newspapers (2008–2017). Politics and Governance, 8 (2): 257–271.
Weible C.M. and Sabatier P.A. (Eds.). 2017. Theories of the policy process (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge: 416 p.
Wodak R. and Meyer M. 2009. Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. In: Wodak R. and Meyer M., (eds.). Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications Ltd: 1–33.
Yanow D. 2000. Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis. London: Sage: 120 p.
Abstract views: 428
Share
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2020 Via in tempore. History and political science
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
