{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01895306859205776, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008122743682310469, 'mean_word_length': 5.721212121212122, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Advocacy Coalition Resources and Strategies in Colorado Hydraulic Fracturing Politics

ABSTRACT This article examines how members of competing coalitions seek to influence public policy. Past research examined coalitions and policy change, but offered limited understanding about the relationships between coalitions’ resources, strategies, and policy change. The case study focuses on the establishment of various regulations related to hydraulic fracturing in Colorado. Data were collected using interviews (n = 14) and a survey (n = 137) of policy actors asking about their beliefs, resources, and strategies in April 2013. This study found that members of the coalition proposing stricter regulations were successful. This winning coalition more frequently engaged in a wider range of strategies and had greater public support compared to their opponents. The study also found that among the winning coalition members, leadership and information technology resources were associated with the majority of their strategies, but financial resources did not have a significant relationship with any strategy.