Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why does the combination of policy entrepreneur and institutional entrepreneur roles matter for the institutionalization of policy ideas?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public administration, public policy, and political economy literatures are increasingly preoccupied with the role of agency in policy and institutional change, and the effects of institutions on the agency of individual actors. However, linkages between policy and institutional entrepreneurship in processes of institutionalization remain a black box. This article aims to fill this void. It contributes to our understanding of processes underlying the institutionalization of policy ideas in the public sector that have not been investigated adequately. Based on an exploratory case study of the introduction and institutionalization of macroprudential policies to contain macro-financial risks in Turkey, this article argues that policy and institutional entrepreneurship processes are inextricably intertwined and fundamental to the institutionalization of policy ideas: the institutionalization of new policy ideas that resolve conflicting institutional logics and facilitate cooperation and/or collaboration in inter-bureaucratic policy formulation and implementation is most likely when an individual agent with the requisite resources and capabilities builds coalitions through combining the policy and institutional entrepreneur roles while undertaking discursive and powering strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. “Rowing agencies” are responsible for the supervision and/or regulation of a sector, whereas “steering agencies” (both organizations and individuals) are responsible for setting broad policy directions in policy areas (Osborne & Plastrik, 1997).

  2. Authors thank a referee for bringing Heclo’s concepts of “puzzling” and “powering” to our attention.

  3. Ali Babacan served as minister of economic affairs (2002–2007), minister of foreign affairs (2007–2009) and the deputy prime minister for economic and financial affairs (2009–2015) in the 61st and 62nd governments of the Republic of Turkey, see https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/develop/owa/milletvekillerimiz_sd.bilgi?p_donem=26&p_sicil=6063, accessed on March 14, 2017.

  4. There were two other members of the FSC which were not directly involved in the macroprudential policy framework: the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund, the key authority on the bank resolution framework, and the Capital Markets Board, a disclosure regulator.

References

  • Aysan, A.F., Fendoglu, S., & Kılınc, M. (2014). Macroprudential Policies as Buffer against Volatile Cross-border Capital Flows. CBRT Working Paper No.14/04. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara.

  • Bakir, C. (2003). Who needs a review of the financial system in Australia? The case of the wallis inquiry. Australian Journal of Political Science, 38(3), 511–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, A. (2013). The new political economy of the macroprudential ideational shift. New Political Economy, 18, 112–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, A. (2018). Macroprudential regimes and the politics of social purpose. Review of International Political Economy, 25, 293–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2009a). Policy entrepreneurship and institutional change: Multi-level governance of central banking reform. Governance, 22, 571–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2009b). The governance of financial regulatory reform: The Australian experience. Public Administration, 87, 910–922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2013). Bank Behavior and Resilience: The Effect of Structures. Institutions and Agents.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2019). Actions, contexts, mechanisms and outcomes in macroprudential policy design and implementation. Public Policy and Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076719827057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2020). The Turkish state’s responses to existential COVID-19 crisis. Policy and Society, 39(3), 424–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Coban, M. K. (2018). Policy Analysis in the Central Bank of Turkey. In C. Bakir & G. Ertan (Eds.), Policy Analysis in Turkey (pp. 215–234). Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Coban, M. K. (2019). How can a seemingly weak in the financial services industry act strongly? The role of organisational policy capacity in monetary and macroprudential policy. New Perspectives on Turkey, 61, 71–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Gunduz, A. (2017). When, why and how institutional change takes place: a systematic review and a future research agenda on the importance of policy entrepreneurship in macroeconomic bureaucracies. Policy and Society, 36(4), 479–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Gunduz, A. (2020). The importance of policy entrepreneurs in developing countries: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration and Development, 40(1), 11–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017a). Institutional Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change in Public Policy: Linking ideas, actors and institutions Special Issue. Policy and Society., 36, 465–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017b). Contextualising the context in policy entrepreneurship and institutional change. Policy and Society., 36, 465–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (Eds.). (2018). Institutional Entrepreneurship and Policy Change: Theoretical and Empirical Explorations. Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Öniş, Z. (2010). The regulatory state and Turkish banking reforms in the age of post-Washington consensus. Development and Change, 41, 77–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Woo, J. J. (2016). Financial sector reform and policy design in an age of instability. Policy and Society, 35, 193–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Başçı, E., & Kara, H. (2011). Finansal Istikrar ve Para Politikası [Financial stability and monetary policy]. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 26, 9–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: the enabling role of individuals social position. Organization, 13(5), 653–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & D’Aunno, T. (2009). Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency. In T. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional Work: A New Agenda for Institutional Studies of Organization (pp. 31–58). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3, 65–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. (1991). Agenda dynamics and policy sub-systems. Journal of Politics, 53(4), 1044–1074.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Cox, H. R. (Eds.). (2011). Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Cox, H. R. (2016). Ideas as coalition magnets: coalition building, policy entrepreneurs, and power relations. European Journal of Public Policy, 23, 428–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016a). How solutions chase problems: instrument constituencies in the policy process. Governance, 29, 393–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016b). The role and impact of the multiple-streams approach in comparative policy analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 18(3), 221–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2007). Powering, puzzling, or persuading? The mechanisms of building institutional orders. International Studies Quarterly, 51, 761–777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2013). Paradigms and paradox: the politics of economic ideas in two moments of crisis. Governance, 26, 197–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2009). Krizden Istikrara Türkiye Tecrübesi [From Crisis to Stability: Turkey’s Experience]. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2012). Financial Markets Report December 2011. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2013a). Financial Markets Report December 2012. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2013b). Annual Report 2013. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2016). Annual Report 2016. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRSA. (2019). Strategic Plan 2019–2021. Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Central Bank. (2014). Quarterly Bulletin, No. 32, September. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/4022a461-569c-4b55-b7df-fa7b0606c5ed/Bulletin32.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-4022a461-569c-4b55-b7df-fa7b0606c5ed-m3fB9N4.

  • Central Bank. (2016a). Inflation Report 2016-IV, Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/14445d21-9875-4bc3-9c09-5ab88375ab54/inflation2016-iv.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-14445d21-9875-4bc3-9c09-5ab88375ab54-m3fw8G9

  • Central Bank. (2016b). Financial Stability Report, Volume 23, November, Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/5be2943e-955e-4754-93cc-392904f8c811/fulltext23.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-5be2943e-955e-4754-93cc-392904f8c811-m3fw7As

  • Central Bank. (2016c). 2017 Monetary and Exchange Rate Policy, December, Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/f186a672-e81b-423e-a92b-9ec4491a8863/2017MonetaryandExchangeRatePolicy.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-f186a672-e81b-423e-a92b-9ec4491a8863-m4ucajm

  • Central Bank. (2017). Financial Stability Report, No. 25, Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/6c95b5fe-4815-4064-a9a4-80ff33b51906/fulltext25.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-6c95b5fe-4815-4064-a9a4-80ff33b51906-m52f977

  • Central Bank. (2019a). Financial Stability Report, No. 39, November. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/ef7c0960-1e2d-4c94-bc43-36b959dea47c/Tam+Metin.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-ef7c0960-1e2d-4c94-bc43-36b959dea47c-mWS4mm1

  • Central Bank. (2019b). Inflation Report, 2019-IV, October. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/4e3bfb78-e60c-400b-956a-f0c34b21e18a/enfekim2019_iv_tam.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-4e3bfb78-e60c-400b-956a-f0c34b21e18a-mWibKVR

  • Central Bank. (2020a). Inflation Report, 2020-I, January. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/f7034ea1-e714-4144-8a0b-24f9173a1e41/ki20-1.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-f7034ea1-e714-4144-8a0b-24f9173a1e41-m.Rt1D8

  • Cairney, P., & Jones, M. D. (2016). Kingdon’s multiple streams approach: what is the empirical impact of this universal theory? Policy Studies Journal, 44(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional Change and Globalization. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, D. R. (2007). The Study of Critical Junctures. Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Institutional Analysis. World Politics, 59(3), 341–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M., & Schmidt, V. A. (2016). Power through, over and in Ideas: Conceptualizing Ideational Power in Discursive Institutionalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 23, 318–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopoulos, D., & Ingold, K. (2015). Exceptional or just well connected? Political entrepreneurs and brokers in policy making. European Political Science Review, 7, 475–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. Journal of Finance, 25, 383–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Financial Stability Board. (2015). Peer Review of Turkey: Review Report, November 19. http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/Turkey-peer-review-report-19Nov15.pdf.

  • Fligstein, N. (1997). Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(4), 397–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • FSB, IMF., & BIS. (2011). Macroprudential Policy Tools and Frameworks Progress Report to G20. http://www.fsb.org/wpcontent/uploads/r_111027b.pdf.

  • Garcia-Escribano, M., & Han, F. (2015). Credit Expansion in Emerging Markets: Propeller of Growth? IMF Working Papers No. 15/22. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.

  • Gidron, N., & Hall, P. A. (2017). The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right. British Journal of Sociology, 68(S1), S57–S84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gülten, G. (2010). Skandal Tartışma [Scandalous Dispute]. Vatan, February 10. http://www.gazetevatan.com/skandal-tartisma-290185-ekonomi/AA

  • Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. (1974). Social policy in Britain and Sweden. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R. (2010). The Governance of Problems: Puzzling, Powering, and Participation. Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2014). From the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy Sciences., 47, 187–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2019). Policy design in the contemporary era: Principles and Instruments. In M. Howlett (Ed.), Designing Public Policies (pp. 23–40). London Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., McConnell, A., & Perl, A. (2017). Moving policy theory forward: Connecting multiple stream and advocacy coalition frameworks to policy cycle models of analysis. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 76(1), 65–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2013). Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design. Politics and Governance, 2, 170–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hürriyet. (2011). Babacan 5 Yıl Bekledi Çıkrıkçılar’dan Arkadaşını Merkez’in Başına Taşıdı [Babacan Waited for 5 Years to Carry His Friend to the Top of the Central Bank]. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/babacan-5-yil-bekledi-cikrikcilar-dan-arkadasini-merkez-in-basina-tasidi-17550789.

  • IMF. (2010). Central Banking Lessons from the Crisis. International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMF. (2011). Recent Experiences in Managing Capital Inflows—Cross-Cutting Themes and Possible Policy Framework. International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMF. (2012). Turkey: Financial System Stability Assessment. IMF Country Report No. 12/261. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.

  • IMF. (2017a). Increasing Resilience to Large and Volatile Capital Flows: The Role of Macroprudential Policies: Case Studies. International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMF. (2017b). Financial Sector Assessment Program IMF Country Report No. 17/35, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.

  • Kara, H. (2011). Monetary Policy under Global Imbalances: The Turkish Experience. Address at the BIS Chief Economists Meeting, 4 April, Basel. http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/4204c11e-fd6b-4d21-a779-785619baf446/H.Kara_BIS.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-4204c11e-fd6b-4d21-a779-785619baf446-m3fxAXG.

  • Kara, H. (2012). Monetary Policy in Turkey after the Global Crisis. CBRT Working Paper No. 12/17. Central Bank of Republic of Turkey, Ankara.

  • Kara, H. (2016). Turkey’s experience with macroprudential policy. BIS Papers, 86, 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd ed.). HarperCollins College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J., & North, D. (1997). Explaining economic change: The interplay between cognition and institutions. Legal Theory, 3, 211–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2020). Bankacılık Sektörel Bakış [Banking Industry Outlook]. KPMG Turkey. 2020.

  • Lawrence, T. B., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2002). Institutional effects of interorganisational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 281–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies (pp. 215–254). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2009). Introduction: Theorizing and -studying institutional work. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations (pp. 1–27). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, C., Columba, F., Costa, A., Kongsamut, P., Otani, A., Saiyid, M., Wezel, T., & Wu, X. (2011). Macroprudential Policy: What Instruments and How to Use Them? Lessons from Country Experiences. IMF Working Papers No. 11/238. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2010). Explaining Institutional Change: Agency, Ambiguity and Power. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, S. (2008). Corporate governance as political insurance: firm-level institutional creation in emerging markets and beyond. Socio-Economic Review, 6, 69–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, A., Grealy, L., & Lea, T. (2020). Policy success for whom? A framework for analysis. Policy Sciences, 53, 589–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minsky, H. (1977). The financial instability hypothesis: An interpretation of Keynes and an alternative to ‘standard’ theory. Nebraska Journal of Economics and Business, 16, 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (1999). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. The Policy Studies Journal, 37, 649–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, D., & Plastrik, P. (1997). Banishing Bureaucracy: The Five Strategies for Reinventing Government. Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petridou, E., & Mintrom, M. (2000). A research agenda for the study of policy entrepreneurs. Policy Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N. L., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29, 635–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 493–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sil, R., & Katzeinstein, P. (2010). Analytic eclecticism in the study of world politics: Reconfiguring problems and mechanisms across research traditions. Perspectives on Politics, 8(2), 411–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, M., Chin-A-Fat, N., Vink, M., & Twist, M. (2016). Puzzling, powering and perpetuating: Long-term decision-making by the Dutch Delta Committee. Futures, 76, 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stock, R., Vij, S., & Ishtiaque, A. (2021). Powering and puzzling: climate change adaptation policies in Bangladesh and India. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23, 2314–2336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies (pp. 1–39). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 801–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uysal, M. (2017). Financial stability and macroprudential policy in Turkey. BIS Papers, 94, 349–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weible, C. M., Heikkila, T., & Pierce, J. (2018). Understanding rationales for collaboration in high-intensity policy conflicts. Journal of Public Policy, 38, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yagci, M. (2017). Institutional entrepreneurship and organisational learning: Fnancial stability policy design in Turkey. Policy and Society, 36, 539–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yılmaz, D. (2011). Speech at the Euromoney Central and Eastern European Forum. 18 January, Vienna. http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/EN/TCMB+EN/Main+Menu/Announcements/Remarks+by+Governor/2011/doro.

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis, N. (2007). The multiple streams framework: structure, limitations, prospects. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process (2nd ed., pp. 65–92). Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis, N. (2016). Powering over puzzling? Downsizing the public sector during the Greek sovereign debt crisis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 18(6), 464–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zietsma, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2010). Institutional work in the transformation of an organisational field. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 189–221.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thanks to the three referees of the journal, Michael Barzelay, David Judge, and Aliakbar Jafari for comments and encouragement on previous drafts of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Relations Department, Koc University, Rumelifeneri Yolu, 34450, Istanbul, Turkey

    Caner Bakir

  2. Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Sinan Akgunay

  3. Center for Globalisation, Peace and Democratic Governance, Koc University, Rumelifeneri Yolu, 34450, Istanbul, Turkey

    Kerem Coban

Authors
  1. Caner Bakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sinan Akgunay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kerem Coban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Caner Bakir.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bakir, C., Akgunay, S. & Coban, K. Why does the combination of policy entrepreneur and institutional entrepreneur roles matter for the institutionalization of policy ideas?. Policy Sci 54, 397–422 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-021-09417-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-021-09417-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation