000 02099naa a2200181uu 4500
001 0042711104037
003 OSt
005 20190211171249.0
008 100427s2000 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100 1 _aSHEINGATE, Adam D.
_927592
245 1 0 _aAgricultural retrenchment revisited :
_bissue definition and venue change in the United States and European Union
260 _aMalden :
_bWiley-Blackwell,
_cJuly 2000
520 3 _aThe case of agriculture in the United States and the European Union indicates that retrenchment opportunities wax and wane. In the first half of the 1990s, both the U.S. and the EU instituted significant farm policy reforms. But as the 1990s came to an end, subsidies in both countries increased as policymakers became less enthusiastic about reducing benefits for farmers. This variability highlights the shortcomings of current political science explanations of retrenchment: the literature has yet to explain why policy change occurs in some circumstances but not others. In this paper, I employ the concepts of issue definition and venue change in order to explain why the United States and the European Union fluctuate in their capacity to reduce farm subsidies. I argue that, in agriculture, retrenchment advocates must redefine the issue of subsidies in a manner that highlights the negative externalities associated with farm policy. Second, retrenchment advocates must also exploit opportunities for strategic venue change so that policy decisions in agriculture do not rest solely with those who benefit from the status quo. By adding the concepts of issue definition and venue change to studies of retrenchment, we gain a better understanding of the conditions that make policy change possible, as well as an account of the mechanism through which retrenchment takes place.
773 0 8 _tGovernance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions
_g13, 3, p. 335-363
_dMalden : Wiley-Blackwell, July 2000
_xISSN 09521895
_w
942 _cS
998 _a20100427
_b1110^b
_cDaiane
998 _a20100428
_b1643^b
_cCarolina
999 _aConvertido do Formato PHL
_bPHL2MARC21 1.1
_c32640
_d32640
041 _aeng