Pathways to Dam Construction and Removal: Comparing Cases of South Korea and the United States

This paper investigates the conditions under which policy change occurs — or fails to occur — by applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to four cases of dam construction and removal in South Korea and the United States. Using process tracing, the study examines how coalitions, institutional contexts, and triggering events interact to shape policy outcomes. The analysis finds that while external and internal events are consistently present across all cases, their occurrence alone is not sufficient to produce change. Policy change occurred only when such events were followed by negotiated agreements and supported by adequate coalition resources. These findings suggest that triggering events may serve as necessary but not sufficient conditions for policy change within the cases analyzed. More broadly, the results emphasize the importance of institutional structures, coalition dynamics, and the presence of viable negotiation mechanisms in enabling or constraining policy transformation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Water Economics and Policy
Published
2025-07-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1142/s2382624x25500092
Primary Topic
Policy Transfer and Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pathways to Dam Construction and Removal: Comparing Cases of South Korea and the United States

Kyudong Park
Water Economics and Policy
Policy Transfer and Learning
article

Pathways to Dam Construction and Removal: Comparing Cases of South Korea and the United States

Kyudong Park
article en

Abstract

This paper investigates the conditions under which policy change occurs — or fails to occur — by applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to four cases of dam construction and removal in South Korea and the United States. Using process tracing, the study examines how coalitions, institutional contexts, and triggering events interact to shape policy outcomes. The analysis finds that while external and internal events are consistently present across all cases, their occurrence alone is not sufficient to produce change. Policy change occurred only when such events were followed by negotiated agreements and supported by adequate coalition resources. These findings suggest that triggering events may serve as necessary but not sufficient conditions for policy change within the cases analyzed. More broadly, the results emphasize the importance of institutional structures, coalition dynamics, and the presence of viable negotiation mechanisms in enabling or constraining policy transformation.

Water Economics and Policy
University of Seoul (KR)
University of Seoul
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Policy Transfer and Learning
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.