European Policy Analysis
ACF work is dominated by environmental and energy policy issues ( 76 percent ), followed by smaller group of studies addressing social issues ( 24 percent ). In summary , the distribution of substantive topics among Swedish applications is consistent with the distribution of ACF applications globally , which are dominated by environmental and energy policy issues but with a growing number of social policy issues ( Jenkins-Smith et al . 2014 ).
While the ACF applies broadly in cases involving contentious and technically complex policy issues , it also hypothesizes that certain issuespecific attributes will influence the dynamics of learning across belief systems . Specifically , it asserts that issues involving natural systems are more conducive to learning compared to issues involving social or political systems . It also suggests that learning is affected by the quantity and subjective nature of scientific information ( Jenkins- Smith et al . 2014 ). However , results regarding these hypotheses are somewhat ambiguous , which calls for more comparative work across policy issues . The growing number of social issues covered is one step toward this goal , but — as we will demonstrate below — studies addressing the characteristics of learning remain limited .
Application Methods
The increasing number of applications has also displayed a variety of research methods . The ACF has been marked by methodological pluralism ( Weible et al . 2011 ), which is reflected in Table 1 . Note that multiple data collections and analysis are possible within the same application .
Document analysis has been the most common method of data collection , used in about half of all applications . This might be a reflection of the principle of public access in Sweden , which ensures access to various public documents and a high level of tractability in the study of the policy process . Although a diversity of methods have been applied with the ACF , interviews and surveys are generally among the most common methods ( Weible , Sabatier , and McQueen 2009 ). Of the Swedish applications , three rely on interviews and eight use surveys . Content analysis has typically been used as an ancillary to another form of data collection .
In their review of ACF applications in 2009 , Weible , Sabatier , and McQueen ( 2009 , 126 ) found that nearly half of the applications used unspecified methods and drew upon “ unsystematic collection and analysis of existing documents and reports ”. Unspecified methods also remain common in Swedish applications ( n = 9 ). In keeping with the prevalence of content analysis as a method of data collection in Swedish applications , analysis through interpretive or mixed methods was relatively common and represented 64 percent of the authors ’ choice of method of analysis ( n = 18 ). Interpretive analysis through process tracing was used in nine applications , usually in conjunction with content analysis . Mixed methods often drew upon interviews and surveys . There was only one quantitative study ( Storbjörk 2014 ), which utilized content analysis of more than 200 written comments on a proposal
27