F
Frank R. Baumgartner
Researcher at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Publications - 184
Citations - 15393
Frank R. Baumgartner is an academic researcher from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The author has contributed to research in topics: Politics & Public policy. The author has an hindex of 48, co-authored 179 publications receiving 14334 citations. Previous affiliations of Frank R. Baumgartner include University of Michigan & Texas A&M University.
Papers
More filters
Book
Agendas and instability in American politics
TL;DR: Baumgartner and Jones as mentioned in this paper extended their work to illuminate the workings of democracies beyond the United States and pointed out that short-term, single-issue analysis cast public policy too narrowly as the result of cozy and dependable arrangements among politicians, interest groups, and the media.
Journal ArticleDOI
Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems
TL;DR: The authors showed that rapid change in public policy outcomes often occurs, but most theories of pluralism emphasize only incrementalism. Yet from a historical view, it can easily be seen that many policies go through lo...
Book
The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems
TL;DR: Jones and Baumgartner as discussed by the authors studied how politicians manage the flood of information from a wide range of sources, and which issues do they pay attention to and why, in American politics.
Book
Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and in Political Science
TL;DR: Baumgartner and Leech as mentioned in this paper reviewed hundreds of books and articles about interest groups from the 1940s to today; examine the methodological and conceptual problems that have beset the field; and suggest research strategies to return interest-group studies to a position of greater relevance.
Book
Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why
TL;DR: For example, the authors found that sixty percent of recent lobbying campaigns failed to change policy despite millions of dollars spent trying, and that resources explain less than five percent of the difference between successful and unsuccessful efforts.