Science, stories and the anti-vaccination movement

• Authors: Marcela Veselková
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper discusses the theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the use or non-use of expert-based information in policy-making. Special attention is paid to the Narrative Policy Framework introduced by Jones & McBeth in 2010. This theory of the policy process adopts a quantitative, structuralist and positivist approach to the study of policy narratives. The Narrative Policy Framework is useful for the analysis of the use of expert-based information to resolve so-called wicked problems, which are characterized by intense value-based conflict between policy coalitions. The methodological approach of the Narrative Policy Framework is illustrated using the policy issue of mandatory vaccination.

Keywords

EN

narrative policy framework; wicked problems; mandatory vaccination

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Human Affairs
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 24
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 287-298

Dates

published

2014-07-01

online

2014-06-26

Contributors

author

Marcela Veselková

• Comenius University

References

• [1] Andre, F.E., Booy, R., Bock, H.L., Clemens, J., Datta, S.K., John, T.J., Lee, B.W., Lolekha, S., Peltola, H., Ruff T. A., Santosham, M., & Schmitt, H. J. (2008). Vaccination greatly reduces disease, disability, death and inequity worldwide. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86(2), 81–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.07.040089[Crossref]
• [2] Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• [3] Bennett, C., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25, 275–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00138786[Crossref]
• [4] Betsch, C., Brewer, N.T., Brocard, P., Davies, P., Gaissmaier, W., Haase, N., Leask, J., Renkewitz, F., Renner, B., Reyna, V.F., Rossmann, C., Sachse, K., Schachinger, A., Siegrist, M., & Stryk, M. (2012). Opportunities and challenges of Web 2.0 for vaccination decisions. Vaccine, 30, 3727–3733. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.02.025
• [5] Caplan, N. (1979). The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization. American Behavioral Scientist, 22(3), 459–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000276427902200308[Crossref]
• [6] Caplan, N. S., Morrison, A., & Stambaugh, R. (1975). The use of social science knowledge in policy decisions at the national level. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
• [7] Chermack, T. J. (2004). Improving decision-making with scenario planning. Futures, 36, 295–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00156-3[Crossref]
• [8] Dunn, W.N. (1980). The two-communities metaphor and models of knowledge use: an explanatory case study. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1, 515–536.
• [9] Freed, G. L., Clark, S. J., Butchart, A. T., Singer, D. C., & Davis, M. M. (2011). Sources and perceived credibility of vaccine-safety information for parents. Pediatrics, 127(Supplement), S107–S112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-1722P[Crossref]
• [10] Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W. & Robinson, N. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/chp.47[Crossref]
• [11] Hobson-West, P. (2007). Trusting blindly can be the biggest risk of all: Organised resistance to childhood vaccination in the UK. Sociology of Health & Illness, 29(2), 198–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.00544.x[Crossref]
• [12] Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687[Crossref]
• [13] Ingram, H., Schneider, A. L., & deLeon, P. (2007). Social construction and policy design. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process (pp. 93–128). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• [14] Innvaer, S., Vist, G., Trommald, M., & Oxman, A. (2002). Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 7(4), 239–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581902320432778[Crossref]
• [15] Irwin, A., & Wynne, B. (1996). Introduction. In A. Irwin & B. Wynne (Eds.), Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology (pp. 1–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511563737.001[Crossref]
• [16] Jones, M. D., & McBeth, M. K. (2010). A narrative policy framework: Clear enough to be wrong? The Policy Studies Journal, 38(2), 329–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00364.x[Crossref]
• [17] Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston/Toronto: Little Brown & Company.
• [18] Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098[Crossref]
• [19] May, P. J. (1992). Policy learning and failure. Journal of Public Policy, 12(4), 331–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00005602[Crossref]
• [20] McBeth, M. K., Shanahan, E. A., & Jones, M. D. (2005). The science of storytelling: Measuring policy beliefs in Greater Yellowstone. Society and Natural Resources, 18, 413–429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920590924765[Crossref]
• [21] McBeth, M. K., Shanahan, E. A., Hathaway, P. L., Tigert, L. E., & Sampson, L. J. (2010). Buffalo tales: interest group policy stories in Greater Yellowstone. Policy Sciences, 43, 391–409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11077-010-9114-2[Crossref]
• [22] McBeth, M. K., Shanahan, E. A., Arnell, R. J., & Hathaway, P. L. (2007). The intersection of narrative policy analysis and policy change theory. The Policy Studies Journal, 35(1), 87–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00208.x[Crossref]
• [23] Mitton, C., Adair, C. E., McKenzie, E., Patten, S. B., & Perry, B. W. (2007). Knowledge transfer and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85(4), 729–768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00506.x[Crossref]
• [24] Mosteller, F. (2006). Innovation and evaluation. In S. E. Fienberg & D. C. Hoaglin (Eds.), Selected Papers of Frederick Mosteller (pp. 515–529). Springer Science + Business Media. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-44956-2_33[Crossref]
• [25] Neilson, S. (2001). Knowledge utilization and public policy processes: A literature review. Ottawa: Evaluation Unit, IDRC December.
• [26] Nowlin, M. C. (2011). Theories of the policy process: State of the research and emerging trends. The Policy Studies Journal, 39(S1), 41–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00389_4.x[Crossref]
• [27] Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., Richey, S., & Freed, G. L. (2014). Effective messages in vaccine promotion: A randomized trial. Pediatrics, 133(4), e835–e842. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-2365[Crossref]
• [28] Pralle, S, B. (2006). Branching out digging in: Environmental advocacy and agenda setting. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• [29] Quattrone, G., & Tversky, A. (1988). Contrasting rational and psychological analysis of political choice. American Political Science Review, 82, 719–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1962487[Crossref]
• [30] Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730[Crossref]
• [31] Roe, E. (1991). Development narratives, or making the best of blueprint development. World Development, 19(4), 287–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90177-J[Crossref]
• [32] Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/9780822381891[Crossref]
• [33] Sabatier, P. (1978). The acquisition and utilization of technical information by administrative agencies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(September), 386–411.
• [34] Sabatier, P. (1987). Knowledge, policy-oriented learning, and policy change. Knowledge, 8(June), 649–92.
• [35] Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition gramework of policy change and the role of policyoriented learning therein. Policy Science, 21(2/3), 129–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00136406[Crossref]
• [36] Sabatier, P. A. (2000). Clear enough to be wrong. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(1), 135–40.
• [37] Shanahan, E. A., McBeth, M. K., Tigert, L. E., & Hathaway, P. L. (2010). From protests to litigation to YouTube: A longitudinal case study of strategic lobby tactic choice for the Buffalo Field Campaign. Social Science Journal, 47(1), 137–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2009.10.002[Crossref]
• [38] Shanahan, E., Jones, M. D., McBeth, M. K., & Lane, R. R. (2013). An angel on the wind: How heroic policy narratives shape policy realities. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 453–483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psj.12025[Crossref]
• [39] Simon, H. (1985). Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science. American Political Science Review, 79(June), 293–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956650[Crossref]
• [40] Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. (1997). Policy design for democracy. Lawrence, KA: University of Kansas Press.
• [41] Scholz, J., & Pinney, N. (1995). Duty, fear, and tax compliance: The heuristic basis of citizenships behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 39(May), 490–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111622[Crossref]
• [42] Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. (Revised ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.
• [43] Stone, D. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, and Company.
• [44] Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., & Abrams, L. (2001). Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 95–114.
• [45] Weber, E. P., Memon, A., & Painter, B. (2011). Science, society, and water resources in New Zealand: Recognizing and overcoming a societal impasse. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 13(1), 49–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2011.564414[Crossref]
• [46] Weible, C. M. (2007). An advocacy coalition framework approach to stakeholder analysis: Understanding the political context of California marine protected area policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 95–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muj015[Crossref]
• [47] Weible, C. M. (2008). Expert-based information and policy subsystems: A review and synthesis. The Policy Studies Journal, 36(4), 615–635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00287.x[Crossref]
• [48] Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2007). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. In. F Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis. Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 123–136). Boca Raton, FL.: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
• [49] Weiss, C. (1977). Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social science research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531–545.
• [50] Weiss, C. (1999). The interface between evaluation and public policy. Evaluation, 5(1), 468–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135638909900500408[Crossref]
• [51] Wildavsky, A., & Tenenbaum, E. (1981). The politics of mistrust. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/s13374-014-0227-8