Framing mechanisms: the interpretive policy entrepreneur’s toolbox

References

• Abolafia, M. Y. 2004. “Framing Moves: Interpretive Politics at the Federal Reserve.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14 (3): 349–370. doi:10.1093/jopart/muh023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baltissen, J. 2015. Het verhaal van de Zandmotor. The Hague: Provincie Zuid-Holland, Rijkswaterstaat & Royal Haskoning DHV.
   Google Scholar
• Bureau Landwijzer, B. Van Wesenbeeck, J. Reinders, and T. Vulink. 2012. “Zachte werken met harde trekken: Toepassingen van eco-engineering in de waterbouw." Delft: Deltares.
   Google Scholar
• Boeters, B. 2008. "Tulpeiland is slechts een metafoor." Technisch Weekblad, Februari 7. https://www.technischweekblad.nl/nieuws/tulpeiland-is-slechts-een-metafoor/item6325
   Google Scholar
• Commissie voor de milieueffectrapportage. 2014. “Afgeronde adviezen: 2212. Pilot zandmotor Delflandse kust.” Accessed 22nd October. http://www.commissiemer.nl/advisering/afgerondeadviezen/2212.
   Google Scholar
• Dewulf, A., and R. Bouwen. 2012. “Issue Framing in Conversations for Change: Discursive Interaction Strategies for “Doing Differences”.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 48 (2): 168–193. doi:10.1177/0021886312438858.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Disco, C. 2002. “Remaking “Nature”: The Ecological Turn in Dutch Water Management.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 27 (2): 206–235. doi:10.1177/016224390202700202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodge, J. 2015. “The Deliberative Potential of Civil Society Organizations: Framing Hydraulic Fracturing in New York.” Policy Studies 36 (3): 249–266. doi:10.1080/01442872.2015.1065967.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dulfer, W., C. Van Gelder-Maas, S. Marx, and D. W. Carrie. 2014. Hoe bruikbaar is de Zandmotor? Eerste tussentijdse verkenning naar de haalbaarheid en bruikbaarheid van de pilot Zandmotor 2011-2013. Utrecht: Rijkswaterstaat.
   Google Scholar
• Dwarshuis-Van De Beek, H. C. M., J. C. Huizinga-Heringa, J. Van Der Tak, J. Klijnsma, L. M. M. Bolsius, M. A. P. Van Haersmabuma, and F. D. Jong. 2008. Ambitieovereenkomst pilotproject Zandmotor. Natuurlijk werken aan de Delflandse Kust!.  The Hague: Provincie Zuid-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Entman, R. M. 1993. “Framing: Towards Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43 (4): 51–58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadamer, H. G. 2010. Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. 7th. Gesammelte Werke. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
   Google Scholar
• Gallo-Cruz, S. 2012. “Negotiating the Lines of Contention: Counterframing and Boundary Work in the School of the Americas Debate1.” Sociological Forum 27 (1): 21–45. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2011.01300.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. 1973. “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” in Chap 1 The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. London: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Haas, P. 1992. “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination.” International Organization 46: 1–35. doi:10.1017/S0020818300001442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haverland, M., and D. Yanow. 2012. “A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Public Administration Research Universe: Surviving Conversations on Methodologies and Methods.” Public Administration Review 72 (3): 401–408. doi:10.111/j.1540-6210.2012.02524.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, B., and C. Holden. 2013. “Framing the Alcohol Policy Debate: Industry Actors and the Regulation of the UK Beverage Alcohol Market.” Critical Policy Studies 7 (1): 53–71. doi:10.1080/19460171.2013.766023.
   Google Scholar
• Hoes, A.-C., and B. J. Regeer. 2015. “Adoption of Novelties in a Pluralist Society: Exploring an Agropark Case Study.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 17 (1): 3–24. doi:10.1080/1523908X.2014.880635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingdon, J. W. 2014. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Kurt, R. 2004. "Die Praxis der Auslegung". Chap. 7 in Hermeneutik: Eine sozialwissenschaftliche Einführung. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. “Audit Trail Categories, Files Types and Evidence.” App. A in Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Minister van Verkeer en Waterstaat, Provincie Zuid-Holland, Gemeente Den Haag, Gemeente Westland, and Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland. 2010. Beheerovereenkomst Pilot Zandmotor. Den Haag: Provincie Zuid-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M. 1997. “Policy Entrepreneurs and the Diffusion of Innovation.” American Journal of Political Science 41 (3): 738–770. doi:10.2307/2111674.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M., and P. Norman. 2009. “Policy Entrepreneurship and Policy Change.” The Policy Studies Journal 37 (4): 649–667. doi:10.1111/psj.2009.37.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• QSR International Pty Ltd. 2012. NVivo qualitative data analysis Software, Version 10. Melbourne: QSR International Pty.
   Google Scholar
• Rein, M., and S. Donald. 1996. “Frame-Critical Policy Analysis and Frame-Reflective Policy Practice.” Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer and Utilization 9 (1): 84–104. doi:10.1007/BF02832235.
   Google Scholar
• Scholten, P. W. A., and F. K. M. Van Nispen. 2008. “Building Bridges Across Frames?” Journal of Public Policy 28: 02. doi:10.1017/s0143814x08000846.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A., and M. Rein. 1994. Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: BasicBooks.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz-Shea, P., and D. Yanow. 2012. Interpretive Research Design. Concepts and Processes. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stive, M. J., F. Matthieu, A. De Schipper, L. Arjen P., S. G. J. Aarninkhof, C. Van Gelder-Maas, S. Jaap, et al. 2013. “A New Alternative to Saving Our Beaches from Sea-Level Rise: The Sand Engine.” Journal of Coastal Research 290: 1001–1008. doi:10.2112/jcoastres-d-13-00070.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, D. 2002. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision-Making. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Stumpe, J. 2011. Bestuursakkoord Water. Den Haag: Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu.
   Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M., and D. Yanow. 2014. ““From Policy “Frames” to “Framing”: Theorizing a More Dynamic, Political Approach.” The American Review of Public Administration. doi:10.1177/0275074014533142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lieshout, M., A. Dewulf, N. Aarts, and C. Termeer. 2012. “Doing Scalar Politics: Interactive Scale Framing For Managing Accountability in Complex Policy Processes.” Critical Policy Studies 6 (2): 163–181. doi:10.1080/19460171.2012.689736.
   Google Scholar
• Van Lieshout, M., A. Dewulf, N. Aarts, and C. Termeer. 2014. “The Power to Frame the Scale? Analysing Scalar Politics over, in and of a Deliberative Governance Process.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 1–24. doi:10.1080/1523908x.2014.936581.
   Google Scholar
• Van Slobbe, E., H. J. De Vriend, S. Aarninkhof, M. V. Kris Lulofs, and P. Dircke. 2013. “Building with Nature: In Search of Resilient Storm Surge Protection Strategies.” Natural Hazards 65 (1): 947–966. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0342-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, P. 2002. “The Competent Boundary Spanner.” Public Administration 80 (1): 103–124. doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkel, G., and S. Leipold. 2015. “Demolishing Dikes: Multiple Streams and Policy Discourse Analysis.” The Policy Studies Journal 00 (00): 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Zahariadis, N. 2014. “Ambiguity and Multiple Streams.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by P. A. Sabatier and C. M. Weible, 25–58. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar