Up to now, researchers of policy studies only marginally refer to the SIT (Boydstun and Glazier 2013 Miles 2016 Gilad and Alon-Barkat 2017), when in fact the social identity approach provides the possibility to explain preferences and behavior of policy actors, to enhance existing theories with regard to the model of the individual and to present a tool for political advisors (Winterich et al. 1987) that are subsumed under the label of the social identity approach (Haslam 2014). One of the most prominent and acknowledged psychological theories are the social identity theory (SIT) (Tajfel 1982a) and the related Self-Categorization Theory (SCT) (Turner et al. Although theories that focus on individual actors make use of psychological concepts, the existing theories of the policy process do not yet systematically include psychological models of choice (Cairney and Weible 2017). 2017 Weible and Sabatier 2017 Jenkins-Smith et al. These assumptions range from utility maximization (Rational Choice Theory) over belief systems (advocacy coalition framework), to ambiguity (multiple streams framework) (Nohrstedt and Olofsson 2016 Herweg et al. Theories of the policy process mostly originate from assumptions about the behavior of policy actors. By integrating SIPP into the analytical categories of theories of the policy process, this paper calls for a future research agenda establishing a further theoretical lens for a better understanding of policy processes. ![]() ![]() In policy subsystems, five such types appear relevant: organizational identities, local identities, sectoral identities, demographic identities, and informal identities. SIPP distinguish three levels of analysis, ranging from the psychological microlevel concerned with individual behavior and preferences, over the socio-psychological mesolevel of intra- and intergroup dynamics toward a macroperspective of general types of social identities. Additionally, social identities are moderated by internal and external factors. This salience is dependent on the strength of a social identity, determined by the feeling of belonging, positive evaluation, and emotional bond to a group. Policy actors thus act in accordance with their salient social identity. Compared to psychological foundations of existing theories of the policy process, the social identity approach emphasizes the importance of social group membership for forming common views on policy content and shaping policy actors’ behavior as beneficial to the in-group. Drawing from the prominent and widely acknowledged psychological social identity approach, it develops the theoretical concept of social identities in the policy process (SIPP) and advances the understanding of policy actors’ behavior. ![]() This paper introduces social identity theory and self-categorization theory to policy process research.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |