Examining experts' discourse in South Korea's nuclear power policy making: An advocacy coalition framework approach to policy knowledgePalabras Clave(sic)(sic)(sic)

In disputes over public policy, public debates often hinge on the argument involving policy knowledge. One approach for studying policy knowledge is the Advocacy Coalition Framework, which theorizes that advocacy coalitions form around coherent beliefs partly about policy knowledge and invest in policy knowledge by working with expert allies. This article examines the role of academics, a type of expert, in discourse about South Korea's adversarial nuclear energy policy debates. Using Discourse Network Analyzer, we collect and analyze text from 502 South Korean newspaper articles from 2016 through 2019. We find that academics align with distinctive discourse involving policy knowledge in coalitions. However, we also show that there exist weak or inconsistent associations between some academics' centrality and the intensity of policy conflict. The findings contribute to understanding policy knowledge, the distinctive discourse of experts, and a systematic study of controversial policy making in a non-Western country. Related ArticlesHeo, Inhye. 2022. "Energy Democratization Policy without Democratization of Policy Governance in South Korea: A Participatory Democracy Perspective." Politics & Policy 50(4): 834-50. .Lantis, Jeffrey S. 2019. "'Winning' and 'Losing' the Iran Nuclear Deal: How Advocacy Coalitions and Competition Shape U.S. Foreign Policy." Politics & Policy 47(3): 464-505. .Nowlin, Matthew C., Maren Trochmann, and Thomas M. Rabovsky. 2022. "Advocacy Coalitions and Political Control." Politics & Policy 50(2): 201-24. .