Treść głównego artykułu
Abstrakt
Celem badań opisanych w artykule jest identyfikacja aktorów, uczestników dyskursu publicznego uwzględnianych w badaniach stosujących podejście instytucjonalizmu dyskursywnego. Z tego względu główne pytania badawcze to: które rodzaje aktorów wyszczególnia się najczęściej w dyskursie publicznym? Jakie są ich rzeczywiste konfiguracje, czyli z kim dane grupy aktorów najczęściej współwystępują? Jakie źródła informacji wykorzystuje się do opisu ich udziału w dyskursie publicznym? Odpowiedzi na te pytania są udzielone na podstawie analizy artykułów zidentyfikowanych w wyniku systematycznego przeglądu literatury, w których wiodącą metodologią badawczą jest instytucjonalizm dyskursywny stosowany do badania polityk publicznych. Wartością dodaną artykułu jest identyfikacja najczęściej badanej konfiguracji aktorów dyskursu publicznego i określenie głównego dyskursu (koordynacyjnego i komunikacyjnego).
Słowa kluczowe
Szczegóły artykułu
Prawa autorskie (c) 2024 Marek Ćwiklicki, Anna Mirzyńska
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Czasopismo „Studia z Polityki Publicznej/Public Policy Studies” zapewnia dostęp do treści artykułów w trybie otwartego dostępu (Open Access) na zasadach licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe (CC BY 4.0).
Więcej informacji: Polityka Open Access czasopisma "Studia z Polityki Publicznej/Public Policy Studies"
Referencje
-
Alasuutari, P. (2015). The Discursive Side of New Institutionalism. Cultural Sociology, 9(2), 162–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975514561805
Bacchi, C. (2000). Policy as Discourse: What does it mean? Where does it get us? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300050005493
Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education explorations in sociology. Routledge. https://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=none&isbn=9781136670527
Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601565
Beblavý, M., Sičáková-beblavá, E., & Bačová, B. (2022). A Conceptual Framework for Understanding and Measuring The Transparency of Public Policy. Sociológia - Slovak Sociological Review, 54(2), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.31577/sociologia.2022.54.2.4
Bell, S. (2011). Do We Really Need a New ‘Constructivist Institutionalism’ to Explain Institutional Change? British Journal of Political Science, 41(4), 883–906. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123411000147
Brunswicker, S., Pujol Priego, L., & Almirall, E. (2019). Transparency in policy making: A complexity view. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 571–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.05.005
Buijs, A., Kamphorst, D., Mattijssen, T., van Dam, R., Kuindersma, W., & Bouwma, I. (2022). Policy discourses for reconnecting nature with society: The search for societal engagement in Dutch nature conservation policies. Land Use Policy, 114, 105965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105965
Cairney, P., & Wellstead, A. (2020). COVID-19: Effective policymaking depends on trust in experts, politicians, and the public. Policy Design and Practice, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2020.1837466
Campbell, J., & Pedersen, O. (2001). Introduction. W J. Campbell & O. Pedersen, The Rise of Neoliberalism and Institutional Analysis (s. 1–24). Princeton University Press.
Carstensen, M. B., & Schmidt, V. A. (2016). Power through, over and in ideas: Conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(3), 318–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1115534
Curran, D., Gillanders, R., & Mahmalat, M. (2022). Policymaking, Ideational Power and the Role of the Media. Political Studies Review, 20(2), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929920968348
Fairbrass, J. (2011). Exploring Corporate Social Responsibility Policy in the European Union: A Discursive Institutionalist Analysis*: EXPLORING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(5), 949–970. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02162.x
Gasper, D., & Apthorpe, R. (1996). Discourse Analysis and Policy Discourse. The European Journal of Development Research, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09578819608426650
Hajer, M. (2002). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice: The case of acid rain in Great Britain. W F. Fischer & J. Forester (Red.), The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning (s. 51–84). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381815-007
Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x
Joosen, R., Haverland, M., & de Bruijn, E. (2022). Shaping EU agencies’ rulemaking. Comparative European Politics, 20(4), 411–442. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-021-00268-z
Louwerse, T., & Otjes, S. (2018). How Populists Wage Opposition: Parliamentary Opposition Behaviour and Populism in Netherlands: Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718774717
Mair, P. (2001). Searching for the positions of political actors: A review of approaches and a critical evaluation of expert surveys. W M. Laver (Red.), Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors (s. 10–31). Taylor & Francis.
Majone, G. (2004). Dowody, argumenty i perswazja w procesie politycznym. Naukowe PWN.
Margetts, H. (2011). The Internet and Transparency. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 518–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2011.02253.x
Meyer, J. W., & Jepperson, R. L. (2000). The “Actors” of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency. Sociological Theory, 18(1), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00090
Ortega Alvarado, I. A., Sutcliffe, T. E., Berker, T., & Pettersen, I. N. (2021). Emerging circular economies: Discourse coalitions in a Norwegian case. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.011
PRISMA-P Group, Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2000). Values and discourse in the politics of adjustment. W V. Schmidt Ann & F. Scharpf V., Welfare and Work in the Open Economy Volume I: From Vulnerability to Competitiveness (s. 229–309). Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2002). Does Discourse Matter in the Politics of Welfare State Adjustment? Comparative Political Studies, 35(2), 168–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414002035002002
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2008). ‘Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11(303–326). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2010). Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review, 2(01), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175577390999021X
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2015). ‘Forgotten Democratic Legitimacy: ‘Governing by the Rules’ and ‘Ruling by the Numbers‘. W M. Matthijs & M. Blyth, The Future of the Euro (s. 90–116). Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2016). Reinterpreting the rules ‘by stealth’ in times of crisis: A discursive institutionalist analysis of the European Central Bank and the European Commission. West European Politics, 39, 1032–1052. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2016.1186389
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2017). Theorizing Ideas and Discourse in Political Science: Intersubjectivity, Neo-Institutionalisms, and the Power of Ideas. Critical Review, 29(2), 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2017.1366665
Tellmann, S. M. (2016). Experts in public policymaking: Influential, yet constrained. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences.
Tretiak, O., Negodchenko, V., Dniprovskii University of the Humanities, Toryanyk, V., Dniprovskii University of the Humanities, Cap, A., & University of Prešov in Prešov. (2019). Economic policy-makers and economic experts in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe: Ways of interaction. Economic Annals-ХХI, 175(1–2), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V175-02
van Dijk, T. A. (1997). What is Political Discourse Analysis? Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 11, 11–52. https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.11.03dij
Warner, M. (2002). Publics and Counterpublics. Public Culture, 14(1), 49–90.
Wegmann, S. (2020). Policy-making power of opposition players: A comparative institutional perspective. The Journal of Legislative Studies. https://www-1tandfonline-1com-15m95kya3001c.hanbg.uek.krakow.pl/doi/abs/10.1080/13572334.2020.1843233
Referencje
Bacchi, C. (2000). Policy as Discourse: What does it mean? Where does it get us? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300050005493
Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education explorations in sociology. Routledge. https://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=none&isbn=9781136670527
Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601565
Beblavý, M., Sičáková-beblavá, E., & Bačová, B. (2022). A Conceptual Framework for Understanding and Measuring The Transparency of Public Policy. Sociológia - Slovak Sociological Review, 54(2), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.31577/sociologia.2022.54.2.4
Bell, S. (2011). Do We Really Need a New ‘Constructivist Institutionalism’ to Explain Institutional Change? British Journal of Political Science, 41(4), 883–906. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123411000147
Brunswicker, S., Pujol Priego, L., & Almirall, E. (2019). Transparency in policy making: A complexity view. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 571–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.05.005
Buijs, A., Kamphorst, D., Mattijssen, T., van Dam, R., Kuindersma, W., & Bouwma, I. (2022). Policy discourses for reconnecting nature with society: The search for societal engagement in Dutch nature conservation policies. Land Use Policy, 114, 105965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105965
Cairney, P., & Wellstead, A. (2020). COVID-19: Effective policymaking depends on trust in experts, politicians, and the public. Policy Design and Practice, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2020.1837466
Campbell, J., & Pedersen, O. (2001). Introduction. W J. Campbell & O. Pedersen, The Rise of Neoliberalism and Institutional Analysis (s. 1–24). Princeton University Press.
Carstensen, M. B., & Schmidt, V. A. (2016). Power through, over and in ideas: Conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(3), 318–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1115534
Curran, D., Gillanders, R., & Mahmalat, M. (2022). Policymaking, Ideational Power and the Role of the Media. Political Studies Review, 20(2), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929920968348
Fairbrass, J. (2011). Exploring Corporate Social Responsibility Policy in the European Union: A Discursive Institutionalist Analysis*: EXPLORING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(5), 949–970. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02162.x
Gasper, D., & Apthorpe, R. (1996). Discourse Analysis and Policy Discourse. The European Journal of Development Research, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09578819608426650
Hajer, M. (2002). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice: The case of acid rain in Great Britain. W F. Fischer & J. Forester (Red.), The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning (s. 51–84). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381815-007
Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x
Joosen, R., Haverland, M., & de Bruijn, E. (2022). Shaping EU agencies’ rulemaking. Comparative European Politics, 20(4), 411–442. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-021-00268-z
Louwerse, T., & Otjes, S. (2018). How Populists Wage Opposition: Parliamentary Opposition Behaviour and Populism in Netherlands: Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718774717
Mair, P. (2001). Searching for the positions of political actors: A review of approaches and a critical evaluation of expert surveys. W M. Laver (Red.), Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors (s. 10–31). Taylor & Francis.
Majone, G. (2004). Dowody, argumenty i perswazja w procesie politycznym. Naukowe PWN.
Margetts, H. (2011). The Internet and Transparency. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 518–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2011.02253.x
Meyer, J. W., & Jepperson, R. L. (2000). The “Actors” of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency. Sociological Theory, 18(1), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00090
Ortega Alvarado, I. A., Sutcliffe, T. E., Berker, T., & Pettersen, I. N. (2021). Emerging circular economies: Discourse coalitions in a Norwegian case. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.011
PRISMA-P Group, Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2000). Values and discourse in the politics of adjustment. W V. Schmidt Ann & F. Scharpf V., Welfare and Work in the Open Economy Volume I: From Vulnerability to Competitiveness (s. 229–309). Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2002). Does Discourse Matter in the Politics of Welfare State Adjustment? Comparative Political Studies, 35(2), 168–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414002035002002
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2008). ‘Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11(303–326). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2010). Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review, 2(01), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175577390999021X
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2015). ‘Forgotten Democratic Legitimacy: ‘Governing by the Rules’ and ‘Ruling by the Numbers‘. W M. Matthijs & M. Blyth, The Future of the Euro (s. 90–116). Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2016). Reinterpreting the rules ‘by stealth’ in times of crisis: A discursive institutionalist analysis of the European Central Bank and the European Commission. West European Politics, 39, 1032–1052. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2016.1186389
Schmidt, V., Ann. (2017). Theorizing Ideas and Discourse in Political Science: Intersubjectivity, Neo-Institutionalisms, and the Power of Ideas. Critical Review, 29(2), 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2017.1366665
Tellmann, S. M. (2016). Experts in public policymaking: Influential, yet constrained. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences.
Tretiak, O., Negodchenko, V., Dniprovskii University of the Humanities, Toryanyk, V., Dniprovskii University of the Humanities, Cap, A., & University of Prešov in Prešov. (2019). Economic policy-makers and economic experts in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe: Ways of interaction. Economic Annals-ХХI, 175(1–2), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V175-02
van Dijk, T. A. (1997). What is Political Discourse Analysis? Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 11, 11–52. https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.11.03dij
Warner, M. (2002). Publics and Counterpublics. Public Culture, 14(1), 49–90.
Wegmann, S. (2020). Policy-making power of opposition players: A comparative institutional perspective. The Journal of Legislative Studies. https://www-1tandfonline-1com-15m95kya3001c.hanbg.uek.krakow.pl/doi/abs/10.1080/13572334.2020.1843233