Why David sometimes defeats Goliath

Abstract

Since the 19th century, Danish policies regarding land use in the wider countryside have been strongly influenced by two competing policy networks. In the period 1866–1970, a strong ‘land reclamation network’ was privileged at the expense of a weak ‘nature protection network’. In contrast, during the last couple of decades, the situation has been turned on its head. Here, a strong nature protection network has been privileged at the expense of a weaker ‘land reclamation network’. In each of the above stable periods, however, a detailed case study of decision-making regarding a rejected project shows that sometimes the weaker network is able to defeat a stronger network in relation to concrete project decisions regarding the use of water bodies. Why is it that even very strong policy communities cannot expect to have all projects they support implemented? Adding the concepts of policy venue and policy image [Baumgartner, F.R., Jones, B.D., 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London] to the rather static policy network approach provides an explanation—a theoretical framework which, for example, can be applied to decisions/non-decisions regarding nature restoration projects in those countries who during recent years have been trying to move beyond water body protection to restoration of water bodies to their natural state.

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 — 6 citations exist upstream.

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