How Patterns of Democracy Impact Policy Processes: When Lijphart and Sabatier Meet

Policy process theories and institutional theories are two foundational strands in political science, both concerned with how people engage in politics. However, they differ in their focus, with policy process theories emphasizing the roles of actors, while institutional theories concentrate on the structures in which these actors are embedded. This paper bridges these two previously isolated strands, exploring how macro‐institutions influence policy processes. Specifically, we investigated how political institutions, such as decentralization and corporatism, relate to coalition opportunity structures (COSs), a key concept within the advocacy coalition framework (ACF); we also investigated the role of minority coalitions and subsystem collaboration. Empirically, we based our analysis on prototypes selected according to Aranda Lijphart's models of majoritarian and consensus democracies. Drawing on existing comparative ACF applications related to climate, water, and energy policy processes, we compared results from these studies to assess the impact of institutional settings on coalition dynamics. Our findings suggest that minority coalitions are more present—and sometimes more influential—in federalist than in unitary countries and that corporatism has a greater effect on collaboration within policy subsystems than consensualism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/94526
Primary Topic
Policy Transfer and Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Patterns of Democracy Impact Policy Processes: When Lijphart and Sabatier Meet

Rahel Freiburghaus, Adrian Vatter, Karin Ingold, Manuel Fischer et al.
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Policy Transfer and Learning
article

How Patterns of Democracy Impact Policy Processes: When Lijphart and Sabatier Meet

Rahel Freiburghaus, Adrian Vatter, Karin Ingold, Manuel Fischer, Daniel Nohrstedt
article en

Abstract

Policy process theories and institutional theories are two foundational strands in political science, both concerned with how people engage in politics. However, they differ in their focus, with policy process theories emphasizing the roles of actors, while institutional theories concentrate on the structures in which these actors are embedded. This paper bridges these two previously isolated strands, exploring how macro‐institutions influence policy processes. Specifically, we investigated how political institutions, such as decentralization and corporatism, relate to coalition opportunity structures (COSs), a key concept within the advocacy coalition framework (ACF); we also investigated the role of minority coalitions and subsystem collaboration. Empirically, we based our analysis on prototypes selected according to Aranda Lijphart's models of majoritarian and consensus democracies. Drawing on existing comparative ACF applications related to climate, water, and energy policy processes, we compared results from these studies to assess the impact of institutional settings on coalition dynamics. Our findings suggest that minority coalitions are more present—and sometimes more influential—in federalist than in unitary countries and that corporatism has a greater effect on collaboration within policy subsystems than consensualism.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, German Institute for International and Security Affairs (DE), Institute of Political Science (PL)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
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.