Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article furthers previous attempts at integrating narratology in policy analysis. Embracing an open-ended definition of narrative, it stresses the importance of maintaining distinct narrative levels and, more generally, of taking into account the pragmatic dimension of narration as an activity, including the often-implicit role and focalization of the policy analyst. Developing a conceptual analogy between storytelling and the exercise of power, it argues for a critical use of practical imagination in ‘cold’ situations of ‘narrative salience’, characterized by the absence of controversy or uncertainty, an uneven distribution of the power of scenarization. These propositions for a ‘revisited’ approach to policy narratives, equidistant from the positivist and post-positivist dichotomy, are tested on the case of ‘narrative salience’ where a particular storyline, national innovation systems, is so dominant that there appears to be no ‘counter-story’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Claisse et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: