Interdependency, beliefs, and coalition behavior: A contribution to the advocacy coalition framework

The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), developed by Paul Sabatier, is gene rally considered one of the most promising theories of the policy process ( see, for instance, Parsons, 1995; Eberg, 1997; Schlager and Blomquist, 1996 ; Grin and Hoppe, 1997). The framework considers policy change as the resul t of learning processes within and between advocacy coalitions. However, in explaining policy change, the ACF focuses almost exclusively on the struct ure, content, stability, and evolution of the policy belief systems of advo cacy coalitions. There is no attempt to account for how actors with certain policy belief systems develop and maintain these advocacy coalitions. From the literature on interorganizational relations and policy networks, we kn ow that the extent and structure of interdependencies between actors are im portant determinants of the behavior of the actors in interorganizational r elations. Differences in interdependencies are supposed to lead to differen t types of interorganizational arrangements. In this article, a hypothesis is developed that explains the development and maintenance of advocacy coal itions by looking at both the interdependencies and the policy belief syste ms of the actors. The importance of this approach is demonstrated by applyi ng it to the debate on oil and gas leasing in the outer continental shelf o f the United States. It turns out that the attention for interdependency co ntributes significantly to the possibilities of explaining the behavior of single actors and advocacy coalitions.