The phrase "agenda phase" is not a standard expression in written English and may cause confusion.
It could be used in contexts discussing stages or periods related to planning or meetings, but it is not commonly recognized.
Example: "During the agenda phase of the meeting, we will outline the topics to be discussed."
Alternatives: "planning stage" or "schedule phase".
This stage of the policy process is referred to as the agenda setting phase during which issues get selected and prioritised to come onto the policy agenda [ 42, 43].
Although the policy was not yet finalised, exploring the processes around its development offered insight into the agenda setting phase of policy making [ 35].
Yothasamut et al. reflect a wider body of evidence in showing how the agenda setting phase of policy development is often influenced by contestation between national and international policy actors supporting different policy options, evidence around those options and the timing of these debates in relation to a national political window of opportunity [ 12].
It is very much Hacker's place, as well, and just in time for the agenda-setting phase of the 2008 campaign, he has delivered his most ambitious work yet.
The agenda-setting phase and the use of research evidence were dependent on interviews, as most of the countries did not have records on the decisions made in the agenda-setting phase, whereas the policymaking phase was often described in policies or related background documents.
Theoretically, in the agenda-setting phase, priorities are set out for the policymaking process and in the actual policymaking development phase the research evidence should support the issues to be considered, chosen, and selected as part of the policy.
The agenda-setting phase and the use of research evidence were mostly traced through interviews and the use of research evidence in the policymaking process through policies or other supporting documents.
While funders and development partners acted opportunistically, particularly during the agenda-setting phase, an actor within the ministry leveraged behavioural and structural attributes to successfully overcome gridlock and achieve policy change.
(I1) This paper examines the challenge of sustaining commitment to existing policies in politics-as-usual circumstances, rather than focusing on the agenda-setting phase of policy reform, as is more common in the field of policy analysis.
External actors contributed in the agenda-setting phase and provided technical expertise, but the actual policy formulation was a domestic affair with 10 ministries, representatives from 18 provincial health offices, representatives of various professional groups of the industry, the Lao Women's Union and some NGOs involved in the process (Paphassarang et al. 1995).
