In the last 10 years, policy networks have become a popular concept to analyze policy making in muli-actor settings. This article argues that although stimulating and interesting, the research that has been done in this field can be improved in three ways. The first way to improve the usefulness of the concept network is to pay more attention to the dynamics of policy making. In this article, the concept game is used to conceptualize this dynamic character of policy processes. Second, the concept network stresses the context of policy making, buta coherent theoretical framework on how this coextisformed and changed is lacking. This article attempts to make some steps toward such a theoretical framework.Central in this framework is the idea of the duality of structure proposed by Giddens and the notion of rules. Finally, the literature on networks could gain relevance by directing more systematic attention on how complex policy processes in these networks can be managed Building on earlier work, especially in interorganization theory some management strategies are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, H. A. (1979). Oiwzations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2.
Aldrich, H. A. , & Whetten, D. A. (1981). Organization-sets, action-sets and networks: making the most out of simplicity. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of oigantzational design (pp. 385-408). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
Allison, G. T. (1971) The essence of decision. Boston: little, Brown.
4.
Argyris, C. (1976). Single loop and double loop models in research on decision making. Public Adninistration Review, 21, 363-375.
5.
Benson, J. K. (1978). The interorganizational network as a political economy. In L Karpik (Ed.), Organization and environment (pp. 69-102). London: Sage.
6.
Benson, J. K. (1982) A framework for policy analysis. In D. L Rogers & D. A. Whetten (Eds.), Interorganizational coordination: Theory, research, and implementation(pp. 137-170). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
7.
Blau, P. M. (1982) Structural sociology and networkanalysis: an overview. In P. V. Marsden & N. Lin (Eds.), Social structure and network analysis (pp. 273-280). London: Sage.
8.
Bryson, J. Ki , & Crosby, B. (1992). Leadership for the common good Tackling public problems i a shared power world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
Burns, T. R. , & Flam, H. (1987). The shaping of social organization: Social rule system theory with application. London: Sage.
10.
Cohen, I. J. (1989). Structurationtheory:Anthony Giddens and the constitutionofsocial lfe. Basingstroke/London: St. Martin's.
11.
Cohen, M. D. , March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.
12.
Cook, K. S. (1977). Exchange and power in networks of interorgamzatonal relations. Sociological Quarterly, 18(1), 66-82.
13.
Crozier, M. , & Friedberg, E. (1980). Actors and systems: The politics of collective action. Chicaga/London: University of Chicago Press.
14.
Duintjer, O. D. (1977). Rondom regels: Wijsgerige gedachten omtrent regel-geleid gedrag [About rules: Filosophical thoughts about rule guided behavior]. Meppel/Amsterdam.Boonm
15.
Elster, J. (1986). Rational Choice. Oxford: Blackwell.
16.
Freeman, J. L. (1965). The politicalprocess. New York.
17.
Freeman, J. L. , & Parris Stevens, J. P. (1987). Atheoretical and conceptual re-examination of subsystem politics. Public Administration, 2, 9-24.
18.
Friend, J. K. , Power, J. M., & Yewlett, C.J.L. (1974). Public planning: The inter-corporate dimension. London: Tavistock.
19.
Gage, I. R. W. , & Mandel, M. N. P. (1990). Strategies for managing intergovernmental policies and networks. New York-London: Praeger.
20.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. London: Macmillan.
21.
Giddens, A. (1984). The conststution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
22.
Godfroy, A.J.A. (1981). Netwerken van organiaties: Strategieft spelen structuren [Networks of organisations: Straegies, games and struures]. 's-Gravenhage, The Netherlands: VUGA.
23.
Grant, W. P. , Paterson, W., & Whitson, C. (1988). Government and the chemical industry. Oxford: Clarendon.
24.
Guba, E. G. (Ed.). (1990). The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park: Sage.
25.
Hajer, M. K. A. (1989). Discours-coalitiesin politieken beleid: De interpretatie van be stuurlijke herorienteringen in de Amsterdamse gemeenteraad [Discourse coalitions in politics and policy: An interpretation of the administrative reorientation in the city council of Amsterdam]. Beleidswetenschap, 3, 242-263.
26.
Hanf, K. , &Schampf, F. W. (1978). Interorganiational policy making: Limits to coordiation and central control. London: Sage.
27.
Hanf, K. , & Toonen, Th. A. J. (Eds.). (1985). Policy implementation infederal and unitary systems. Dordrecht: Nyhoff.
28.
Hjern, B. , & Porter, D. O. (1981). Implementation structures: Anew unit for administrative analysis. Organizational Studies, 3, 211-237.
29.
Hufen, J. A. M. , & Ringeling, A. B. (Eds.). (1990). Beleidsntwerken: Overheids, semiover heids, en particuliere organisaties in wisselwerking [Policy networks: Governmental, semi-governmental and private organizations in interaction]. 's-Gravenhage, the Netherlands: VUGA.
30.
Hunt, J. (1972). The restless organization. Sydney: Wiley.
31.
Jordan, G. (1990). Sub-governments, policy communities and networks: Refilling the old bottles?Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2, 319-338.
32.
Jordan, G. , & Schubert, K. (1992, Febuary). A preliminary ordening of policy network labels. European Journal of Political Research, 21, 1-2.
33.
Keuning, D., & Eppink, D. J. (1985). Management en organisatie: Theorie en praktijk. Leiden/Antwerpen: Stenfert Kroeze.
34.
Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown.
35.
Kiser, L. L. , & Ostrom, E. (1982). The three worlds of action: A metatheoretical synthesis of institutional approaches. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
36.
Klijn, E. H. (1990). De vis senen het aas: De toepassing van tweefinanceringsinst enten in de volkshuisvesting [The fish and the bait: The implementation of two financial instruments in housing policy]. In J.A.M. Hufen & A. B. Ringeling (Eds.),Beleidsnetwerken: Overheids, senioverheids, en particuliere organisaties in wisselwerking [Policy networks: Governmental, semi-governmental and private organizations in interaction] (pp. 157-175). 's-Gravenhage, the Netherlands: VUGA.
37.
Klijn, E. H. , & Teisman, G. R. (1991). Effective policy making in a multi actor setting:networks and steering. In R. Veldin 't, L Schaap, C. J. A. M. X. Termeer, & M J. W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering(pp. 99-112). Dordrecht: Klawer.
38.
Klijn, E. H. , & Teisman, G. R. (1992). Besluitvormingin beleidsnet werken: Eentheoretische beschotuwing over het analyseren en verbeteren van beleidsprocessen in complexe beleidsstelsels [Decisionmaking in policy networks: A theoretical model for analysing and managing policy processes in complex policy systems]. Beleidswetenschap, 6, 32-51.
39.
Laumann E. O. , & Pappi, R U. (1976). Networks of collective action: A perspective on community influence system. New York: Academic Press.
40.
Laumann, E. O. , & Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state: Social choice in national policy domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
41.
Levine, S. , & White, P. E. (1961). Exchange as a conceptual framework for the study of interorganizational relationships. Administration Science Quarterly, 5, 583-601.
42.
Lindblom, C. E. , & D. K. Cohen. (1979) Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43.
Litwak, E. , & Hylton, L. R. (1962). Interorganizational analysis: A hypothesis on co-ordinating agencies. Adninistration Science Quarterly, 6, 395-420.
44.
Long, N. E. (1958). Ihe local community as an ecology of games. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 139-155.
45.
Lynn, L E. (1981). Managing the public business. New York: Basic Books.
46.
Mandell, M. P. (1990). Network management: Strategic behavior in the public sector. In R. W. Gage & M. P. Mandell, Strategies for managing intergove rnmental policies and networks. New York/London: Praeger.
47.
March, J. G. (1978). Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. Bell Journal of Economics, 9, 557-608.
48.
March, J. G. , & Olsen, J. P. (1976). Attention and the ambiguity of self interest. In J. G. March & J. P. Olsen, Ambiguity and choice in organizations (pp. 38-53). Bergen, Norway: Universiteitsforlaget.
49.
March, J.G. , J.P. Olsen, (1976), Ambiguity and choice in organizations, Bergen, Norway: Universiteits for laget.
50.
March, J. G. , & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New Yorlc: Free Press.
51.
Marsh, D. , & Rhodes, R.A.W. (Eds.). (1992). Policy networks in British government. Oxford: Clarendon.
52.
Milward, H. B. , & Wamsley, G. L. (1985). Policy subsystems, networks and the tools of public management. In K. Hanf & Th.A.J. Toonen (Eds.), Policy implementation in federal and unitary systems (pp. 105-130). Dordrecht: Nyhoff.
53.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. London: Sage.
54.
Negandi, A. R. (1975). Interorganization theory. Ohio: Kent State University Press.
55.
Ostrom, E. (1986). Amethod of institutional analysis. In F. X. Kaufman, G. Majone, & V. Ostrom (Eds.), Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector: The bielefeld interdiciplinairy project (pp. 459-479). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
56.
O'Toole, J. L. (1986). Policy recommendations for multi-actor implementation: An assessment of the field. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 181-210.
57.
O'Toole, L J. (1988). Stategies for intergovernmental management:Implementing programs in interorganizaiona networks. Journal of Public Administration, 11, 417-441.
58.
Pressman, J. L. , & Wildavsky, A. (1983). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
59.
Rein, M. , & Schon, D. (1986). Frame-reflective policy discourse. Beleidsanalyse 1986, 3, 4-18.
60.
Rhodes, R.AW. (1981) Control and power in central and local relations. Farborough: Gower.
61.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (1988). Beyond Weitminster and Whitehall: The sub-central goverments of Britain. London: Unwin Hyman.
62.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (1990). Policy networks: A British perspective. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2, 293-317.
63.
Richardson, J. , & Jordan, G. (1979). Governing under pressure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
Ripley, R. B. , & Franklin, G. (1987). Congress, the bureaucracy and public policy. Belmont, CA: Dorsey.
65.
Robbins, S. P. (1980). The administrative process (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
66.
Rogers, D. L. , & Whetten, D. A. (Eds.). (1982). Interorganizational coornation: Theory, research, and implementation. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
67.
Scharpf, F. W. (1978). Interorganizational policy studies: Issues, concepts and perspectives. In K. Hanf & F. W. Scharpf, Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination, and central control (pp. 345-370). London: Sage.
68.
Scharpf, F. W. (1989). Decision rules, decision styles and policy choices. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1, 149-176.
69.
Scharpf, R. W. (Ed.) (1993). Games in hierarchies and networks: Analytical and empirical approaches to the study of governmental institutions. Boulder, CO, and Frankfut am Main: Westview/Canps Verlag.
70.
Scharpf, F. W. , Reissert, B., & Schnabel, F. (1978). Policy effectiveness and conflict avoidance in intergovernmental policy formation. In K. Hanf & F. W. Scharpf, Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination and central control (pp. 57-114).London: Sage.
71.
Scott, J. (1991). Social network anlysis: A handbook. Newbury Park: Sage.
72.
Teisman, G. R. (1992). Complexe Besluitvorming: Een pluricentrisch perspectief op besluitvorming over ruimtelijke investeringen [Complex decisionmaking: A puricentric perspective on decisionmaling on environmental investments]. 's-Gravenhage, The Netherlands: VUGA.
73.
Termeer, C.J.A.M. (1993). Dynamiek en inertie ronom mestbeleid. Een studie naar veranderingsprocessen in het varkenshouderijnetwerk [Dynamics and inertia around manure policy: A study on changeprocesses in the agricultural network]. 's-Gravenhage, The Netherlands: VUGA.
74.
Toonen, Th.A.J. (1981). Gemeentelijke invloed in eenvervlochten bestu [Local influence in an entangled ainistration]. Beleid en Maatschappij, 8, 334-341.
75.
Tsebelis, G. (1990). Nested games: Rational choice in comparative politics. Berkeley, CA: University of Californa Press.
76.
van Twist, M. J. W. & Terneer, C.J.A.M. (1991). Introduction to configuration approach: A process theory for societal steering. In R. Veld in 't, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 19-30). Dordrecit: Klawer.
77.
van Waarden, F. (1992). Dimensions and types of policy networks. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1-2), 29-52.
78.
Wamsley, G. L. (1985). Policy subsystems as a unit of analysis in implementation studies: A struggle for theoretical synthesis. In K. Hanf & Th. A. J. Toonen (Eds.), Policy implementation infederal and unitary systems (pp. 71-96). Dordrecht: Nyhoff.
79.
Warren, R. L. , Burgunder, A. R., Newton, J. W., & Rose, S. M. R. (1975). The interaction of community decision organizations: Some conceptual considerations and empirical findings. In A. R. Neghandi (Ed.), Interorganization theory (pp. 167-181). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
80.
Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.
81.
Whetten, D. A. (1982). Issues in conducting research. In D. L. Rogers & D. A. Whetten (Eds.), Interorganizational coordinon, Theory, research and implementation (pp. 97-121). Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
82.
Wilks, S. , & Wright, M. (1987). Comparative government industry relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
