Recent critiques of the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) have described the framework as a hybrid – and perhaps contradictory – platform using postpositivist theory in the service of positivistic methods. While the NPF has done much to advance what one might term its positivist hypotheses-testing orientation, the ongoing relationship between the NPF and its postpositive, interpretative foundation is – to date – unclear.
This article explores the relationship between the NPF and interpretivism. In our exploration, we detail NPF dimensions of ontology, epistemology, socio-theoretic choice, disciplinary boundaries, generalizing versus particularizing styles and normativity, as these dimensions relate to interpretivism. We find the NPF and interpretivism to be quite compatible along our analyzed dimensions – albeit with major epistemological differences. We conclude with a discussion outlining what the NPF has to offer interpretivism and what interpretivism has to offer the NPF.
Jones, M. and Radaelli, C. 2015. The Narrative Policy Framework: child or monster? Critical Policy Studies, Vol. 9, (3), pp.