Sarah R. Trousset

University of Oklahoma
Political Science

University of Oklahoma, Center for Risk and Crisis Managment
3100 Monitor Ave., Suite 100
Norman, OK

Search Google Scholar
Search for Google Scholar Profile

Sarah Trousset is a doctoral candidate in Political Science at the University of Oklahoma. She received a BA in Public Affairs and Administration (2008) and a Masters in Political Science (2012) from the University of Oklahoma. Her studies have focused on Public Opinion and Policy, Risk and Public Policy, and Public Administration. Sarah is a graduate affiliate with the Center for Risk and Crisis Management at OU. Her research interests focus primarily on the role of belief systems in explaining individual policy preferences. Her dissertation examines the role of belief systems in explaining individual preferences for stakeholder involvement in siting hazardous facilities.

Trousset, S., Gupta, K., Jenkins-Smith, H., Silva, C. L. and Herron, K. (2015), Degrees of Engagement: Using Cultural Worldviews to Explain Variations in Public Preferences for Engagement in the Policy Process. Policy Studies Journal, 43: 44–69.
Abstract: Scholars have been studying the concept of public engagement and its role in the policy process for some time. Scholars have argued that understanding the interests and motivations of the public and engaging them in the decision-making process can lead to better policy designs and, ultimately, better policy outcomes. However, studies of public engagement often assume that people have a desire to get involved in the policy process. This paper tests this key assumption using the case of nuclear facility siting in the United States to ask: what factors influence an individual's stated willingness to want to engage in the policy process? Using data from a national web survey fielded in 2013, we ask the public if and to what extent they would likely engage in the siting process if given the opportunity. Findings indicate that the likelihood of engagement varies rather substantially across individuals. We find that an individual's cultural belief system and existing level of political activity account for some of this variation. These findings suggest that public engagement programs may vary across groups and communities. In other words, the prospects of engagement are likely to appeal to some members of the population and not others.
DOI: doi: 10.1111/psj.12083
Jenkins-Smith, Hank, Urban Strandburg and Sarah Trousset. 2010. "New Perspectives on Nuclear Waste Management." Risk, Hazards and Crisis in Public Policy 1 (4).
Abstract: This paper outlines the evolution of the global public policy debate concerning the management and disposal of used nuclear fuel, with particular attention to the central points of contention that have shaped that debate. Utilizing the experience in Sweden and the U.S., we provide a frame for the application of a diverse range of social science perspectives (including law) to the used nuclear fuel policy debate, and introduce a set of papers that apply those perspectives.
Jenkins-Smith, Hank C., Carol L. Silva, Kerry G. Herron, Sarah R. Trousset, and Rob P. Rechard. 2012. "Enhancing the Acceptability and Credibility of a Repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel." The Bridge: Linking Engineering and Society 42 (2):49-58.
Abstract: Public attitudes about the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level waste (HLW) are closely related to general attitudes about nuclear energy. Thus, understanding how perceptions and preferences about nuclear energy have evolved in recent years provides a necessary context for making sense of public beliefs, concerns, and preferences for managing SNF. This article describes some of the lessons learned about public acceptance of nuclear storage and disposal facilities in the United States over the past several decades.
Jenkins-Smith, H.C. and Sarah Trousset, Eds. 2010. Policy Studies Journal 2010 Public Policy Yearbook. 38:xi-xiii.
DOI: doi:10.111/j.1541-0072.2010.00350.x
Jenkins-Smith, Urban Strandburg and Sarah Trousset, Guest Editors. 2010. Risk, Hazards and Crisis in Public Policy 1 (4).

Substantive Focus:
Energy and Natural Resource Policy PRIMARY
Environmental Policy
Science and Technology Policy SECONDARY

Theoretical Focus:
Policy Process Theory PRIMARY
Public Opinion SECONDARY