Comparative policy agendas: a review essay

References

• Althaus, Catherine, Peter Bridgman, and Glyn Davis. 2012. Australian Policy Handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, Frank R., Christian Breunig, and Emiliano Grossman, eds. 2019. Comparative Policy Agendas: Theory, Tools, Data. Oxford: OUP Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, Frank R., Christoffer Green-Pedersen, and Bryan. D. Jones, eds. 2008. Comparative Studies of Policy Agendas. NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Béland, Daniel. 2009. “Ideas, institutions, and policy change.” Journal of European Public Policy 16 (5): 701–18. doi: 10.1080/13501760902983382
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cashore, Benjamin, and Michael Howlett. 2007. “Punctuating Which Equilibrium? Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (3): 532–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00266.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colomer, Josep M. 2012. “The More Parties, the Greater Policy Stability.” European Political Science 11 (2): 229–43. doi: 10.1057/eps.2011.34
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowding, Keith, Andrew Hindmoor, Richard Iles, and Peter John. 2010. “Policy Agendas in Australian Politics: The Governor-General’s Speeches, 1945–2008.” Australian Journal of Political Science 45 (4): 533–57. doi: 10.1080/10361146.2010.517174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowding, Keith, Andrew Hindmoor, and Aaron Martin. 2016. “The Comparative Policy Agendas Project: Theory, measurement and findings.” Journal of Public Policy 36: 3–50. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X15000124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowding, Keith, and Aaron Martin. 2017. Policy Agendas in Australia. Basel: Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Durant, Robert F., and Paul F. Diehl. 1989. “Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy: Lessons from the U.S. Foreign Policy Arena.” Journal of Public Policy 9 (2): 179–205. doi: 10.1017/S0143814X00008114
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, Jacob S. 2004. “Privatizing Risk without Privatizing the Welfare State: The Hidden Politics of Social Policy Retrenchment in the United States.” The American Political Science Review; Washington 98 (2): 243–60. doi: 10.1017/S0003055404001121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, Peter. A. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics 25 (3): 275–96. doi: 10.2307/422246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, Peter. A. 2013. “Brother, Can You Paradigm?” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institution 26 (2): 189–92. doi: 10.1111/gove.12031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hearings. 2017. The Policy Agendas Project at the University of Texas at Austin. Accessed September 26, 2017. www.comparativeagendas.net.
   Google Scholar
• Heijden, van der Jeroen. 2013. “Different but Equally Plausible Narratives of Policy Transformation: A Plea for Theoretical Pluralism.” International Political Science Review 34 (1): 57–73. doi: 10.1177/0192512112453604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijden, van der Jeroen, and Johanna Kuhlmann. 2017. “Studying Incremental Institutional Change: A Systematic and Critical Meta-Review of the Literature from 2005 to 2015.” Policy Studies Journal 45 (3): 535–54. doi: 10.1111/psj.12191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John, Peter, A. Bertelli, Will Jennings, and Shaun Bevan. 2013. Policy Agendas in British Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen. 2010. Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, Robert, Terry Royed, Elin Naurin, Joaquín Artés, Rory Costello, Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik, Mark Ferguson, et al. 2017. “The Fulfillment of Parties’ Election Pledges: A Comparative Study on the Impact of Power Sharing.” American Journal of Political Science 61 (3): 527–42. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar