We add the concept of imposed interdependencies to components of the Advocacy Coalition Framework to derive four hypotheses regarding coordinated behavior in overlapping geographic and functional policy subsystems. More specifically, we address: (1) whether imposed interdependencies affect the extent to which shared beliefs are related to coordinated behavior; and (2) which types of beliefs are the principal `glue' of coordination. We then examine the implications of these hypotheses in an empirical analysis of ally networks in San Francisco Bay-Delta water policy. Our empirical results suggest that both belief congruence and functional interdependence are important for understanding coordination. Further, the types of beliefs critical to coordination are consistent with the underlying rationale - but not necessarily the specific hypotheses - of the Advocacy Coalition Framework.
Research on coalitions in the policy process has found evidence of both short-term and long-term coalitions. Two possible methodological reasons for the varied results are that (1) there has been little systematic longitudinal research on the topic, and (2) most scholars have not distinguished situations where fundamental versus secondary interests are at stake. This article addresses both points by first applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), which distinguishes fundamental from secondary beliefs/interests, and then performing a quantitative analysis of the content of organizations' testimonies regarding automotive pollution control over 26 years. Consistent with the ACF, we find that coalitions of interest groups, legislators, local governments, and agencies are relatively stable over time, despite two potentially disruptive events-the 1973-74 Oil Embargo and the 1980 Elections. On the other hand, there is little support for the ACF's hypothesis that broader beliefs will be more stable than narrower secondary beliefs. Our systematic methodology also enables us to separate the general pattern of stability from interesting exceptions of instability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.