2021/08/03 by Caroline Schlaufer, Dilyara Gafurova, Ekaterina Zhiryakova +2 · 1 voice · 5 citations
Social Sciences · #Policy Transfer and Learning #Public Policy and Administration Research #Urban Planning and Governance
paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/psj.12445
openalex publication_date 2021/08/03 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/25
Abstract The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) explains the role of narratives in policy processes. The NPF was developed for democratic contexts and has not been systematically applied in a nondemocratic setting. This study fills this gap with an empirical analysis of narrative strategies used by governmental and oppositional actors in urban policy debates in Moscow. Results show how governmental actors consistently use angel shifts, contain issues, and avoid using causal mechanisms, while actors opposing governmental policy use devil shifts, expand issues, and use intentional causal mechanisms. The findings suggest that narrative strategies differ depending on whether policy actors seek to promote policy reforms or draw attention to problems. We argue that policy actors’ objectives are a well‐suited predictor for narrative strategies in both democratic and nondemocratic contexts.