Advocacy Coalition Framework
application of the ACF in Sweden might suggest refinement and specification of the ACF . Although the study is focused on Swedish applications , we discuss avenues for future research that may apply in other countries as well . In this regard , the study adds to existing reviews of ACF applications in different cases and settings . Except for one comparative examination of applications in South Korea ( Jang , Weible , and Park 2016 ), previous reviews of the ACF cover larger samples of applications across policy issues and countries ( Jenkins- Smith et al . 2014 ; Sotirov and Memmler 2012 ; Weible , Sabatier , and McQueen 2009 ; Weible et al . 2011 ). While both strategies are needed to support further development and specification of the ACF , there is a shortage of comparative work that examines the strengths and weaknesses of the framework across policy issues within the same country . Such contributions are needed to better understand how policy subsystems are influenced by broader governing system attributes ( Jenkins-Smith et al . 2014 ).
We proceed in four steps . The paper begins with a brief overview of the ACF , including its key assumptions and theoretical revisions . The next section presents a summary of recent developments of public policymaking in Sweden along with a discussion about the terms for applying the ACF in this context . In the third step , we present our methodology for the review of empirical applications of the ACF in Sweden . In the final sections , we summarize and discuss the main findings from the review and draw lessons regarding the Swedish policy process and about the ACF , ending with a brief agenda for future research .
The Advocacy Coalition Framework — Assumptions and Revisions
Figure 1 summarizes the 2007 version of the ACF flow diagram , including the role of advocacy coalitions within a policy subsystem and the role of exogenous factors in shaping the constraints and opportunities of subsystem actors over time . The framework assumes that policy subsystem actors are influenced by relatively stable parameters ( such as sociocultural values and basic constitutional structure ). These parameters are seldom the target for coalition strategies but shape the longterm opportunity structures of subsystem actors . Subsystem actors are also influenced by external system events , which include changes in socioeconomic conditions , public opinion , governing coalition , and other subsystems . These are developments that are outside the control of subsystem actors and that are likely to change over time ( a decade or more ). A policy subsystem is depicted as adversarial competition among actors who form coalitions , engage in analytical debates , and exploit political strategies , resources , and venues to advocate for their preferred policy problems and solutions . Coalition interactions result in one or more governmental programs , generating policy outputs and impacts , which in turn might prompt advocacy coalition actors to revise their beliefs and / or strategies ( Sabatier and Weible 2007 ; Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1999 ).
The ACF is a framework supporting several areas of theoretical emphasis that narrow the scope of inquiry ,
20