Mid Sweden University

We trace the shift from a nascent to a mature policy subsystem by examining a hitherto overlooked aspect in policy process scholarship: the relationship between advocacy coalition beliefs and the narratives they express over time. The empirical focus of this case study is Sweden's Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE) policies between 2013 and 2022. We utilize aspects of the Advocacy Coalition Framework and the Narrative Policy Framework to examine narrative polarization, coalition density, and agreement in character expression. The findings show two coalitions based on policy core beliefs across three distinct time periods that coincide with the policy subsystem shifting from a nascent to a mature level of development. Furthermore, in the Swedish P/CVE context, the evolution to a mature subsystem coincided with the hardening of coalitions that became more polarized in their narratives with greater division in their character expressions. We conclude with a call for theoretical attention to subsystem development.

This chapter examines the progression of disaster risk reduction (DRR) from a marginal policy concern to a central topic on the international agenda, especially within the United Nations framework. The chapter explores how shifting perspectives on disasters—from isolated natural events to complex social constructs intertwined with vulnerability—have influenced policy development over time. Initially, DRR efforts were largely technical and state-centric, but evolving understandings of disaster vulnerability and resilience have fostered a more integrated approach. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) has been instrumental in this shift, particularly through major frameworks like the Hyogo and Sendai Frameworks, which emphasize resilience and the reduction of systemic vulnerabilities. Using Peter May’s "Policies With and Without Publics" framework, this chapter analyzes the transformation of DRR from an area dominated by experts to one marked by active public and international involvement. This development underscores the importance of inclusive, multi-sectoral collaboration in addressing the rising global demand for effective DRR strategies. Ultimately, the chapter highlights the role of the UNDRR in aligning DRR with broader sustainability and climate agendas, thus positioning DRR as a fundamental aspect of global governance.

 Increasingly, policymaking takes place while extraordinary events threaten fundamental societal values. During turbulent times, policy entrepreneurs emerge as pivotal figures. They are energetic actors who pursue dynamic change in public policy and, whereas we know much about how they promote innovation and change in normal policymaking, we know less about how they behave in crises, and even less about how different crises influence policy entrepreneurial action. This Element focuses on interaction between policy entrepreneurs and crises. It analyzes policy entrepreneurial action in six case studies – three fast-burning and three creeping crises – to ascertain policy entrepreneurs’ strategies and effectiveness during extraordinary events. It proposes crisis policy entrepreneurial strategies, a framework to understand outcomes based on policy entrepreneurial action and type of crisis and suggests avenues for further research on policy entrepreneurs and crises, including implications for crisis managers.

In this article, we examine concepts that underpin the theories of the policy process. We exemplify the applicability of these concepts in the European policy-making contexts through a systematic scoping review of European applications of the policy entrepreneur. Our findings include that (i) the overwhelming majority of the studies anchored the policy entrepreneur in the Multiple Streams Framework; (ii) more than half of the studies were contextualized at the EU level and in the UK country context; (iii) policy entrepreneurs were identified in a wide range of policy sectors, and (iv) policy entrepreneurs were identified as being individuals as well as organizations but mostly elite actors, often policy-makers. Future avenues for research include policy entrepreneurship in political parties, exploring the interactions of policy entrepreneurs and the role their other identities (public servant, elected official, NGO official, etc.) play in how reactive or proactive they are in seeking opportunities.

 This symposium examines the theoretical and empirical advancement of policy entrepreneurship scholarship, addressing a field that has grown significantly over the past four decades. This symposium contributes to the theoretical advancement of policy entrepreneurship through five papers that integrate modern entrepreneurship literature, synthesize frameworks into new models, and explore policy entrepreneurship across diverse contexts. Contributions include Hand and Birkhead's integration of opportunity creation theories and identification of distinct “species” of policy entrepreneurs, and Arslangulov and Ackrill's Multi-Level Governance and Strategy model for sustainability transitions. Arnold et al. demonstrate that policy entrepreneurship may enhance transformative governance capacity more than fiscal or political resources, while Taylor et al. extend research beyond elite influence to examine public behavior during policy implementation. Finally, Eriksson et al., explore expert-entrepreneurs' persistence in reorganizing Sweden's fire and rescue services. The symposium addresses policy entrepreneurship's relevance in increasingly complex policy environments spanning multiple domains and jurisdictions facing transformation pressures. Future research directions include challenging the normativity of policy entrepreneurship, establishing rigorous identification methods, and developing sophisticated measures beyond binary classifications. The work emphasizes the importance of micro-level policymaking dynamics, particularly when institutions fail to preserve democratic values in crisis contexts.

A policy entrepreneur is a distinct political actor aiming to affect change. The theoretical narrative regarding policy entrepreneurs is underpinned by their commitment to a policy solution, the multi-dimensional strategies they use to promote that solution, and a suite of attributes and skills facilitating their actions. Policy entrepreneurs reveal themselves through their attempts to transform policy ideas into policy innovations and, hence, disrupt status quo policy arrangements. Indeed, policy entrepreneurs share sensibilities with entrepreneurs in the market, whose conceptualisation serves as a heuristic for their counterparts in policy and politics. The emphasis on change borne out of innovative solutions distinguishes policy entrepreneurs from many other actors who aim to maintain current institutional settings and power relations. The growing scholarship on policy entrepreneurship assumes intentionality as inherent to the policy entrepreneur and their actions, foregrounding the image of the tenacious political actor set on steering their a priori pet policy to a suitable problem. This article draws from the market theory on entrepreneurship, contrasting proactive policy entrepreneurship (entrepreneurship by opportunity) and reactive policy entrepreneurship (entrepreneurship by necessity). We conduct a comparative social network analysis of three municipalities in southern Sweden focused on flood risk mitigation. We demonstrate two different logics of policy entrepreneurship (as a result of seizing opportunities versus as a reaction to vertical pressure), and we explore the consequences for enhancing our understanding of policy entrepreneurship

While national policy styles have (re)gained academic attention in recent comparative public policy work, the concept still needs a widely accepted operationalization that can allow the collection and analysis of data across contexts while steering away from construct validity threats. We build on Tosun and Howlett's (2022) work and employ a mixed-methods approach, which relies on exploratory factor analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis. We put forth an operationalization, using Bertelsmann's Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI) as proxies, that achieves conceptual clarity and distinctiveness, informational robustness, and statistical power. Ultimately, we construct two composite indicators—mode of problem-solving and inclusiveness—calculate them in 41 countries and present policy style classifications based on their combinations. We report the distribution of countries across four policy styles (administrative, managerial, accommodative, adversarial) and conclude with an analysis of the clusters, assessments of robustness, and comparison with other national policy style classification schemes.

Experiments have long been recognized as effective tools in teaching natural sciences and, to a lesser degree, in social sciences. However, understanding the role of immersive simulation experiments in undergraduate degree programmes demands more scholarly attention, given the pace of technological advances and research literacy in immersive simulation. The purpose of this article is to illustrate the potential of integrating immersive simulation laboratory experiments in social science education and specifically in a risk and crisis management undergraduate degree programme. Based on the work of Claire Dunlop, we demonstrate how an experiment with a high degree of experimental realism was a fruitful vehicle for initiating conversations about sensitive subjects in a safe environment and made teaching more inclusive, while high mundane realism made teaching risk and crisis management fun, and, we argue, fostered practical aspects of risk and crisis management. 

Why do countries respond differently when they face the same pandemic? In this article, we comparatively investigate the effects of policy styles in shaping responses to the COVID-19 crisis in two European countries: Greece and Sweden. Extending the concept of policy styles to extraordinary policymaking, we argue that political trust and policy styles result in national responses that range from centralization to decentralization. The combination of policy styles and political trust inevitably raises questions about the role of experts in shaping responses to pandemics. We conclude with implications for theories of national policy styles, political trust and crisis management.