Studying Substantive Democracy

Abstract

Within the last decade, the amount and quality of research on the relationship between public opinion and policy making has taken a dramatic step forward. This research contributes to the development of democratic theory and to the (re)organization of political science as a profession. Further development of opinion-policy research, however, will require addressing several critical limitations.What Has Been DoneStatistical analyses and interpretative case studies have reported (both in the United States and Western Europe) a systematic relationship between public opinion and decision making on a range of issues—from national security to social security (for a review see Shapiro and Jacobs 1989 and Shapiro and Young 1989). These results have emerged from several distinct research designs.The first relies on in-depth investigations of public opinion's impact on formulating specific policies. These case studies rely on closely examining public opinion as gauged through polling results and policy decisions. Many of these studies offer cross-national studies; they discuss issues central to international relations, American politics, and comparative politics (Jacobs 1992a, 1992b, and 1993; Risse-Kappen 1991; Deese 1994 for essays by Shapiro and Page, Graham, and Bennett; Jasper 1990; Eichenberg 1989; Russett 1990; Graham 1989; Kusnitz 1984; Burstein 1985; Sobel 1993; Mattes 1993). For instance, Jacobs (1993) uses interviews and archival evidence to investigate the formulation of American and British health care policy.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 119 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.