<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hoberg, George</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Phillips, Jeffrey</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Playing defence: Early responses to conflict expansion in the oil sands policy subsystem</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Canadian Journal of Political Science</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Can J Pol Sci</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">environmental regulation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">multi-stakeholder</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">oil sands</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">9/2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://cons425.forestry.ubc.ca/files/2011/12/Playing-Defence-accepted-version-for-course.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">44</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">507 - 527</style></pages><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This article examines how powerful policy actors defend themselves against opponents' strategies of conflict expansion through a case study on the oil sands of Alberta. In response to an escalation of criticism of its performance on environmental regulation and related issues, the government of Alberta has pursued a strategy of engaging in several multi-stakeholder consultations. We argue that in examining subsystem change, it is essential to go beyond an examination of formal institutional mechanisms to examine policy impacts. Thus far, despite a significant pluralisation of consultative mechanisms on the oil sands, there is little or no evidence of a shift in power away from pro-oil sands interests. This strategy of selective opening is designed to bolster the legitimacy of the policy process while maintaining control over decision rules and venues.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">03</style></issue><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Alberta oil sands</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/776620151</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CEMA </style></custom4></record></records></xml>