Mat Hope | University of Bristol (original) (raw)

Papers by Mat Hope

Discursive institutionalism is the ‘newest’ of the new institutionalisms. The majority of work em... more Discursive institutionalism is the ‘newest’ of the new institutionalisms. The majority of work employing discursive institutionalism as a framework has so far focused on how it contributes to understanding policy change. Until now, however, little attention has been paid to how discursive institutionalism can help to explain the equally significant phenomenon of policy stasis. This imbalance is addressed here through a discursive institutionalist analysis of two cases of policy stasis: Estonian fiscal policy and United States climate change policy. It is argued that policy stasis – far from being a passive and inactive state – actually involves a large amount of discursive activity by multiple actors. This activity creates, legitimates and perpetuates policy discourses, which ultimately entrench governmental commitments to policy stasis. The article proceeds in three parts. First, a theoretical model is advanced which builds on existing discursive institutionalist literature to modify the theory towards explaining policy stasis. This model is then applied to the two case studies and it is shown how, and to what extent, ‘discourse’ operates as a causal factor. Finally, it is shown how different institutional contexts affect the causal processes whereby the policy discourse becomes streamlined or complexified depending on the ‘simple’ or ‘compound’ characteristics of the polity. It is concluded that discursive institutionalism is a useful theory for understanding policy stasis in its various forms in both simple and compound polities, and that the role of ‘discourse’ in explaining such situations is deserving of greater scholarly attention.

This paper analyses the way in which discourses of American decline manifest within the campaign ... more This paper analyses the way in which discourses of American decline manifest within the campaign television advertisements of Republican Presidential hopefuls in the 2011/12 primary race. This paper does not make analytical judgements as to the reality of American ‘decline’, focussing instead on the effects of the declinist discourse itself, asking how it is produced in the ‘political spectacle’ (see Edelman 1988) of electoral political communication and operates co-constitutionally with national identity debates (for example, Campbell 1992). Through an analysis of all candidate-approved Republican primary campaign tv advertisements, we argue that accounts of decline are central within the discourses of all candidates, offering a prism through which subject positions, values, ideals and identities become articulated. However, there were differences in how decline was produced by each of the candidates. Firstly, we explore how some candidates present American decline in the past-tense, while others suggest that American ‘decline’ is a process which is underway but yet to reach its end-state. Next, we analyse the (re)production of American identity within these discourses of decline, showing how some candidates construct America in predominantly economic terms, while others present it as a nation built on particular essentialist values and symbols. We then discuss how the discourses of decline are rooted within the identification of different ‘problem origins’, with some candidates focussing on President Obama as the source of decline, and others taking aim at Washington more generally. Finally, we analyse how the candidates present themselves as the ultimate solution to American ‘decline’ by performing the image of America that they construct.

At a time where evidence of the material advantages of comprehensive action on climate change is ... more At a time where evidence of the material advantages of comprehensive action on climate change is ever-growing, the United States remains a laggard at home and an obstacle abroad. The high-profile failure of two recent bills - the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, and the American Clean Energy and Security Act - shows the ongoing inability of Congress to pass legislation which will “save our planet from the ravages of climate change” (President Obama 2009). This paper serves to illuminate the obstructive role that issue-definition can play within the policy process in Congress. A frame analysis of relevant legislative debates between 1992 and 2008 is conducted to ascertain the effect of four variables on the issue definition of climate change: party, ideology, chamber, and constituency. It is shown how the multiple framings of ‘climate change’ by members in both chambers on all sides of the partisan and ideological divide entrenches particularly complex ‘policy images’ (see Baumgartner and Jones 1993) and ‘causal stories’ (Stone 2002) whereby the definition of ‘climate change’ as a policy issue incorporates too many other controversial issues – from the economy, to the ‘national interest’ and homeland security – so as to make legislating impracticable.

Discursive institutionalism is a useful theory for understanding and explaining institutional cha... more Discursive institutionalism is a useful theory for understanding and explaining institutional change, overcoming obstacles that the “older institutionalisms posit as insurmountable” (Schmidt 2008: 304). However, here it is argued that it makes an equally valuable contribution to understanding institutional and policy stasis. The paper traces the effect of discourse and ideational factors parallel to material factors throughout the policy process; from the inception of an issue through its evolution as a policy item. As institutional discourses evolve they can be a force for anti-change as much as progress, an as yet under-developed aspect of discursive institutionalism’s contribution to institutionalist theory. Rather than painting discursive institutionalism in the same light as the ‘older’ new institutionalisms – each criticised for struggling to account for policy change under conditions of disequilibrium (Hay 2006a, 2006b) – the paper conceptualises the ability of discursive institutionalism to explore cases of policy stasis in all their complexity as a key strength of the theory.
Employing the example of climate change policy within the United States’ Congress, the paper explores how framing and issue-definition can establish and perpetuate institutional discourses to cause fragmentation, gridlock, and policy stasis. In a time where evidence of the material advantages of comprehensive action on climate change is ever-growing, the United States remains a laggard at home and an obstacle abroad. Congress is an important actor for the establishment of a comprehensive, national climate change strategy for the US but the recent failure of the Kerry-Boxer climate change bill in the Senate shows the ongoing inability of the institution to catalyse the implementation of such policy. Under such circumstances, seeming inaction is in fact significant action in itself, and discursive institutionalism advances on other institutional theories to illuminate the nuances of this process.

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill was described by President Obama as the “greatest environmental d... more The Deepwater Horizon oil spill was described by President Obama as the “greatest environmental disaster ... in our history”. It is shown here that despite such assertions, the responses of three actors – President Obama, the New York Times, and the BP CEOs – were framed predominantly in social, not natural, terms. In this paper, a frame analysis is conducted of these three actors’ responses to the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion. It is shown that all the actors predominantly framed the event in social terms; that Tony Hayward took the role of ‘technical expert’ rather than a crisis-response leader, creating frame-conflict; and that President Obama was himself primarily responsible for perpetuating a narrative of executive responsibility, building pressure on his already strained administration. This paper shows how the ‘politics of signification’ affects the politics of the environment, and how social narratives of the environment can become translated into ecological modernisation policy-talk with potentially long-term influences on the future of US environmental policy.

The US is a country ill at ease with the issue of climate change; ‘high-minded words’ teamed with... more The US is a country ill at ease with the issue of climate change; ‘high-minded words’ teamed with ‘low-down behaviour’ form the basis of an ‘American paradox’ on environmental issues. Among the US’ political elite there is an increasing recognition that the US must do something, but deciding what that ‘something’ is proves problematic. With the election of President Obama supposedly came a ‘new day for environmentalists’. In a country so troubled and confused by the challenges that climate change brings, though, will President Obama’s leadership really be enough to stimulate concerted federal action on climate change? In other words, on climate change, does it really matter who is President? This paper proceeds to argue that it does not through a comparison of Congressional out during the President Clinton and President George W. Bush years. Furthermore, it shows that the institution that is actually most important for progress on this issue, Congress, has been nothing short of an immovable object in this area. A number of explanations for this are explored before concluding that Congressional stasis is, in this case, qualitatively more complex than it first appears. As such, an alternative approach to analysis – framing– is necessary for fresh insight into the politics of US climate change policy.

Frame analysis is a discourse analysis method that is principally concerned with dissecting how a... more Frame analysis is a discourse analysis method that is principally concerned with dissecting how an issue is defined and problematised, and the effect that this has on the broader discussion of the issue. Here, there is a brief discussion of the theoretical groundings of ‘frame analysis’, before a model of the framing process is proffered. Next, there is some discussion of ‘frame analysis’ methods before the model is applied (through those methods) to three key texts within the climate change politics literature. Ultimately, the analysis seeks to uncover and better understand what climate change politics ‘is’ in the context of the three texts. The analysis undertaken here serves to illustrate the usefulness of frame analysis as a research method within the broader discourse analysis schema. The paper concludes with a brief summary of the results and some reflections on the success of using frame analysis in this context, before considering some possible next steps for future research.