Policy subsystems and belief systems
Sabatier (1988) argued that policy is made within policy subsystems in which many actors interact over long periods. A water quality subsystem, for example, includes agency officials, legislators, environmental groups, industry, scientists and journalists. These actors divide into two or three advocacy coalitions according to shared beliefs. Belief systems have three tiers. Deep core beliefs are fundamental values, such as views of human nature or the priority of freedom versus equality, and rarely change. Policy core beliefs concern the causes of problems and the proper role of government in a policy area and serve as the glue that holds coalitions together. Secondary aspects concern specific instruments and budgets and change relatively easily. The framework connects with the pluralist tradition's emphasis on competition among groups.
Paths to policy change
The framework identifies several paths to policy change. First, policy-oriented learning occurs when coalitions revise secondary aspects of their beliefs in light of experience and new information, which is facilitated when coalitions meet in professional forums; learning alone, however, rarely changes the policy core. Second, external shocks such as economic crises, shifts in public opinion, changes in governing coalitions or decisions in other subsystems can alter the balance of power among coalitions and produce major change. Later work added internal shocks, such as crises within a subsystem, and negotiated agreements after long stalemates as major paths (Weible et al., 2011). Jenkins-Smith and colleagues (1991) found support for the hypothesis that coalition membership remains relatively stable over time.
Applications and critiques
Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) refined the framework through case studies, and Sabatier (1998) revised it while assessing its relevance to European politics. Weible, Sabatier and McQueen (2009) and Pierce and colleagues (2017) reviewed numerous applications and reported its use across many countries and policy areas. Critics argue that how to draw coalition boundaries and measure beliefs is ambiguous, and that the framework fits poorly where strong belief conflicts are absent. The advocacy coalition framework is regarded, together with the multiple streams framework and punctuated equilibrium theory, as a major theory of the policy process.
FAQ
- What is the advocacy coalition framework in simple terms?
- It holds that politicians, officials, civic groups, experts and journalists who share beliefs form a team, or coalition, and compete with other teams over long periods, and that policy changes through this competition. Because deep values rarely change, coalitions tend to last.
- When does major policy change happen in the advocacy coalition framework?
- Major change happens when external or internal shocks, such as economic crises, changes of government or major accidents, shift the balance of power among coalitions, or when coalitions negotiate an agreement after a long stalemate. Learning alone mostly produces minor change.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2–3), 129–168. The founding article — subsystems, belief systems and policy learning.
- Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds.). (1993). Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Case studies that consolidated the framework.
- Jenkins-Smith, H. C., St. Clair, G. K., & Woods, B. (1991). Explaining change in policy subsystems: Analysis of coalition stability and defection over time. American Journal of Political Science, 35(4), 851–880. Tests coalition stability and defection over time.
- Sabatier, P. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: Revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 98–130. Revisions and applicability to Europe.
- Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 121–140. Reviews some 80 applications — where and how the framework is used.
- Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., Jenkins-Smith, H. C., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A. D., & deLeon, P. (2011). A quarter century of the advocacy coalition framework: An introduction to the special issue. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 349–360. Twenty-five years on — including the four paths to major policy change.
- Pierce, J. J., Peterson, H. L., Jones, M. D., Garrard, S. P., & Vu, T. (2017). There and back again: A tale of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Studies Journal, 45(S1), S13–S46. A systematic review of 160+ applications and how well hypotheses hold up.