Available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike 4.0 International Licence
5.6 POLITICAL SCIENCE, Political science
The paper tests Hogan and Doyle’s (2007; 2008) framework for examining critical junctures. This framework sought to incorporate the concept of ideational change in understanding critical junctures. Until its development, frameworks utilised in identifying critical junctures were subjective, seeking only to identify crisis, and subsequent policy changes, arguing that one invariably led to the other, as both occurred around the same time. Hogan and Doyle (2007; 2008) hypothesised ideational change as an intermediating variable in their framework, determining if, and when, a crisis leads to radical policy change. Here we test this framework on cases similar to, but different from, those employed in developing the exemplar. This will enable us determine whether the framework’s relegation of ideational change to a condition of crisis holds, or, if ideational change has more importance than is ascribed to it by this framework. This will also enable us determined if the framework itself is robust, and fit for the purposes it was designed to perform – indentifying the nature of policy change.
Hogan, J., Doyle, D.: A Comparative Framework: How Broadly Applicable is a “Rigorous” Critical Junctures Framework? Acta Politica, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 211-240.
Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences