Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion

7Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This article investigates the relationship between policy conflict and trust-erosion. It concludes that in a context of trust-erosion, practices to deal with conflict may backfire and lead to further conflict escalation. The article draws on an in-depth analysis of 32 interviews with key actors in the conflict over a contested multibillion-euro highway project in Antwerp (Belgium). It concludes that while all actors draw on the policy repertoire of “managing public support” to explain the conflict, their perspectives of what it means for a policy to have public support differ. Practices to “manage public support” that made sense from one perspective, contributed to the erosion of trust from those holding a different perspective, thus further escalating the conflict. Practices intended to end conflict proved to be fatal remedies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wolf, E. E. A., & Dooren, W. V. (2021). Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion. In Governance (Vol. 34, pp. 1097–1114). John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12630

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free