Can advocacy coalitions be difference-making in Canadian policy processes? Evidence from Canadian firearms policy

Abstract

This paper investigates whether advocacy coalitions can have much policy influence in Canadian policy processes, where decision-making power tends to be highly centralized in the executive. The question is investigated through a diachronic case study of firearms policy-making that compares policy processes in 1976-77 and 1994-95 using a most-similar logic. Content analysis and social network analysis show that the 1976-77 process involved only a gun rights advocacy coalition, while the 1994-95 process involved both gun rights and gun control advocacy coalitions. Comparative analysis further shows that these advocacy coalitions had difference-making influence in these policy processes, contributing to the adoption of relatively minor gun control reforms in 1977 and major reforms in 1995.