Understanding Policy Entrepreneurship in Public Policy of Iran: A Phenomenographic Study

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Public administration, University of Tehran, college of Farabi, Qom, Iran

2 Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/ijms.2024.345505.675205

Abstract

This study has been conducted to explore, understand and categorize policy entrepreneurship to achieve a deeper understanding of this phenomenon. The research strategy adopted was phenomenography, and the data collection instrument was the semi-structured interview. To select the participants, the maximum variation and snowball sampling methods were used. The sample size was determined through the principle of theoretical saturation, resulting in 20 participants. Consequently, 20 people were interviewed who had hands-on experience with policy entrepreneurship and their contributions to policy innovations in 11 policies. The results indicated that there exist six descriptive categories in policy entrepreneurship, namely "creating innovative ideas", "making the innovative idea understood", "promoting the innovative idea", "persuading the institutional structure", "mainstreaming based on the innovative idea", and "monitoring the implementation of innovative policy". Based on the identified descriptive categories, the outcome space of policy entrepreneurship was formed, and its hierarchical model was presented.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Anderson, E. (2013). Policy entrepreneurs and institutional change: the politics of   nineteenth-century child labor reform in Germany and the US [Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University].
Ashworth, P., & Lucas, U. (2000). Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in higher Education, 25(3), 295-308.
Bakir, C., & Jarvis, D. S. (2017). Contextualizing the context in policy entrepreneurship and institutional change. Policy and Society, 36(4), 465-478.
Brouwer, S., Huitema, D., & Biermann, F. (2009). Towards adaptive management: The strategies of policy entrepreneurs to direct policy change. In Proceedings of the 2009 Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (Vol. 2).
Christopoulos, D. C. (2006). Relational attributes of political entrepreneurs: A network perspective. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(5), 757-778.
Cohen, N., & Naor, M. (2013). Reducing dependence on oil? How policy entrepreneurs utilize the national security agenda to recruit government support: The case of electric transportation in Israel. Energy Policy, 56, 582-590.
Cohen, N. (2016). Policy entrepreneurs and agenda setting. In Handbook of public policy agenda setting. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative (pp. 146-166). Upper Saddle River.
Crow, D. A. (2010). Policy entrepreneurs, issue experts, and water rights policy change in Colorado. Review of Policy Research, 27(3), 299-315.
Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city. Yale University Press.
Dahlgren, L. O., & Fallsberg, M. (1991). Phenomenography as a qualitative approach in social pharmacy research. Journal of social and administrative pharmacy: JSAP, 8(4), 150-156.
Felsher, R. A. (2015). Policy entrepreneurship: A descriptive portrait of higher education leaders. Florida Atlantic University.
Frisch‐Aviram, N., Beeri, I., & Cohen, N. (2020). Entrepreneurship in the policy process: Linking behavior and context through a systematic review of the policy entrepreneurship literature. Public Administration Review, 80(2), 188-197.
Kang, B. (2007). Policy entrepreneurs and school choice in South Korea [Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York].
Khan, S. H. (2014). Phenomenography: A qualitative research methodology in Bangladesh. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 5(2), 34-43.
King, P. J. (1988). Policy entrepreneurs: Catalysts in the policy innovation process. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota].
Kingdon, J. W., & Thurber, J. A. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown. 45, 165-169.
Lupson, J. (2007). A phenomenographic study of British civil servants' conceptions of accountability- [PhD Thesis].
Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Hillstdale.
Marton, F., & Pong, W. Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher education research & development, 24(4), 335-348.
Matier, D. A. (2001). A cross-national study of policy entrepreneurship on the part of technical-professional bureaucrats in national environmental agencies: The case of household waste reduction policy in Germany, France and the United States [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois].
McCown, T. L. (2004). Policy entrepreneurs and policy change: Examining the linkages between TANF, domestic violence and the FVO  [Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University].
Mintrom, M. A. (1994). Policy entrepreneurship in theory and practice: A comparative state analysis of the rise of school choice as a policy idea [Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York].
Mintrom, M. (1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American journal of political science, 41(3), 738-770.
Mintrom, M., Vergari, S., (1998). Policy networks and innovation diffusion: The case of state education reforms. Journal of Politics, 60(4), 126–148.
Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649-667.
Mintrom, M. (2013). Policy entrepreneurs and controversial science: Governing human embryonic stem cell research. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(3), 442-457.
Nay, O. (2012). How do policy ideas spread among international administrations? Policy entrepreneurs and bureaucratic influence in the UN response to AIDS. Journal of Public Policy, 32(1), 53-76.
Ringius, L. (2000). Radioactive waste disposal at sea: public ideas, transnational policy entrepreneurs, and environmental regimes. MIT Press.
Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs: Their activity structure and function in the policy process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(2), 147-175.
Salganik, M. J., & Heckathorn, D. D. (2004). Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent‐driven sampling. Sociological Methodology, 34(1), 193-240.
Sandberg, J. (2005). How do we justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches?. Organizational research methods, 8(1), 41-68.
Schneider, M., & Teske, P. (1992). Toward a theory of the political entrepreneur: evidence from local government. American Political Science Review, 86(3), 737-747.
Shockley, G. E. (2005). The function of policy entrepreneurship in American politics: The return of stability to federal arts policy. George Mason University.
Petridou, E., & Mintrom, M. (2021). A research agenda for the study of policy entrepreneurs. Policy Studies Journal, 49(4), 943-967.
Timmermans, J., van der Heiden, S., & Born, M. P. (2014). Policy entrepreneurs in sustainability transitions: Their personality and leadership profiles assessed. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13, 96-108.
Weber, J. (2017). Policy entrepreneurs and opportunities: Establishing a model of policy change through bicycle infrastructure at the municipal level. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 25(101), 252-263.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Management Studies (Formerly known as Iranian Journal of Management Studies)
Volume 17, Issue 4
October 2024
Pages 1097-1108

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics