Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Network-based arrangements are increasingly used for policy implementation. Arguments are made for the potential benefits of this approach, but evidence of their efficiency is inconclusive. Recent methodological innovations, incorporating social network analysis, are building the evidence base. This article contributes to a growing area of study by exploring the relationship between the efficient implementation of European Union cohesion policy projects, and the characteristics of the networks involved in the implementation process. The research combined quantitative analysis of implementation of projects in Scotland in 2007–2013 and semi-structured interviews. The research finds that the involvement of many partners can have a negative impact on implementation. Rather, the strategic position of key actors in the network is important for efficient implementation. The results stress the importance of network governance and the role of key agents as nodes that bridge structural gaps and facilitate exchange of knowledge and resources.

Keywords

cohesion policy implementation networks network analysis performance Scotland structural funds

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akkerman

Torenvlied

Schalk

(2012) Two-level effects of interorganizational network collaboration on graduate satisfaction: A comparison of five intercollege networks in Dutch higher education. The American Review of Public Administration 42(6): 654–77.

Bachtler

Mendez

Wishlade

(2010) Challenges, Consultations and Concepts: Preparing for the Cohesion Policy Debate. Available at: https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/15950/1/EPRP_74_ChallengesConsultationsandConceptsPreparingfortheCohesionPolicyDebate.pdf

Bachtler

Polverari

Oraže

, et al. (2009) Ex Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2000–2006: Co-Financed by the ERDF (Objective 1 and 2) (Work Package No. No 2007 CE 16 0 AT 034). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/pdf/expost2006/wp11_final_report_26082009.pdf

Blair

(2002) Policy tools theory and implementation networks: Understanding state enterprise zone partnerships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12(2): 161–90.

Bubbico

(2013) Administrative Continuity: Enhancer or Constraint for Regional Governments’ Efficiency? (No. ersa13p493). Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa13p493.html

Burt

(2001) Structural Holes Versus Network Closure as Social Capital. Available at: https://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-readings/burt00capital.pdf

Cairney

McGarvey

(2013) Scottish Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Christensen

Lægreid

(2007) The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review 67(6): 1059–66.

Cooley

Ron

(2002) The NGO scramble: Organizational insecurity and the political economy of transnational action. International Security 27(1): 5–39.

10.

Dąbrowski

(2012) Shallow or deep Europeanisation? The uneven impact of EU cohesion policy on the regional and local authorities in Poland. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 30(4): 730–45.

11.

Danson

Fairley

Lloyd

, et al. (1997) The governance of European structural funds: The experience of the Scottish regional partnerships. Scotland Europa papers. Available at: https://www.scotlandeuropa.com/~/media/SDI/Scotland%20Europa/Resources%20Public/General%20EU%20funding/Paper10%20The%20Governance%20of%20European%20Structural%20Funds.pdf

12.

Davies

Bachtler

Gross

, et al. (2007) The impact of structural funds programmes in Scotland 1994–2006. European policy research papers, no 60. Available at: http://www.eprc.strath.ac.uk/eprc/Documents/PDF_files/R60_Impact_of_SF_Programmes_in_Scotland_1994-2006.pdf

13.

Dotti

(2016) Unwritten factors affecting structural funds: The influence of regional political behaviours on the implementation of EU cohesion policy. European Planning Studies 24(3): 530–50.

14.

European Commission (2011) Analysis of Errors in Cohesion Policy for the Year 2006–2009: Actions Taken by the Commission and the Way Forward (No. SEC(2011) 1179). Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/doc/errors_analysis_2011_en.pdf

15.

European Policies Research Centre and Metis (2014) An Assessment of Multilevel Governance in Cohesion Policy 2007–2013 – Think Tank. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL-REGI_ET(2014)514004

16.

Feiock

Lee

Park

(2012) Administrators’ and elected officials’ collaboration networks: Selecting partners to reduce risk in economic development. Public Administration Review 72(Suppl. 1): S58–68.

17.

Ferry

Bachtler

(2013) Reassessing the concept of policy termination: The case of regional policy in England. Policy Studies 34(3): 255–73.

18.

Granovetter

(1994) Business groups. In: Smelser

Swedberg

(eds) The Handbook of Economic Sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 453–75.

19.

Grant

Keohane

(2005) Accountability and abuses of power in world politics. The American Political Science Review 99(1): 29–43.

20.

Haarich

(2018) Building a new tool to evaluate networks and multi-stakeholder governance systems. Evaluation 24(2): 202–19.

21.

Henry

Lubell

McCoy

(2011) Belief systems and social capital as drivers of policy network structure: The case of California regional planning. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(3): 419–44.

22.

Isett

Mergel

LeRoux

, et al. (2011) Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(Suppl. 1): i157–73.

23.

Jordana

Mota

Noferini

(2012) The role of social capital within policy networks: Evidence from EU cohesion policy in Spain. International Review of Administrative Sciences 78(4): 642–64.

24.

Kapucu

(2006) Interagency communication networks during emergencies: Boundary spanners in multiagency coordination. The American Review of Public Administration 36(2): 207–25.

25.

Kapucu

Khosa

(2014) The state of network research in public administration. Administration & Society 49: 1087–120.

26.

Keating

Cairney

Hepburn

(2009) Territorial policy communities and devolution in the UK. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 2: 51–66.

27.

Kenis

Schneider

(1991) Policy networks and policy analysis: Scrutinizing a new analytical toolbox. In: Marin

Maynt

(eds) Policy Networks: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Considerations. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, pp. 25–59.

28.

Kickert

WJM

Klijn

E-H

Koppenjan

JFM

(1997) Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

29.

Kim

Song

Park

(2018) The network effect on the performance of local economic development. Public Performance & Management Review 42(3): 732–54.

30.

Klijn

E-H

Edelenbos

(2007) Meta governance as network management. In: Sørensen

Torfing

(eds) Theories of Democratic Network Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 199–214.

31.

Lahdelma

Laakso

(2016) Network analysis as a method of evaluating enterprise networks in regional development projects. Evaluation 22(4): 435–50.

32.

Lecy

Mergel

Schmitz

(2012) Networks in public administration: Current scholarship in review. SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 2097863. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2097863

33.

Lee

I-W

Feiock

Lee

(2012) Competitors and cooperators: A micro-level analysis of regional economic development collaboration networks. Public Administration Review 72(2): 253–62.

34.

Lovering

(1999) Theory led by policy: The inadequacies of the new regionalism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 23(2): 379–95.

35.

Marinetto

(2003) Governing beyond the centre: A critique of the Anglo-Governance School. Political Studies 51(3): 592–608.

36.

Marks

Hooghe

(2004) Contrasting visions of multi-level governance. In: Bache

Flinders

(eds) Multi-Level Governance. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–31.

37.

Milio

(2007) Can administrative capacity explain differences in regional performances? Evidence from structural funds implementation in Southern Italy. Regional Studies 41(4): 429–42.

38.

Nooy

Mrvar

Batagelj

(2011) Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek, Expanded edn. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

39.

O’Toole

Meier

(2011) Public Management: Organizations, Governance, and Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

40.

Lee

Bush

(2014) The role of dynamic social capital on economic development partnerships within and across communities. Economic Development Quarterly 28(3): 230–43.

41.

Paraskevopoulos

Leonardi

(2004) Introduction: Adaptational pressures and social learning in European regional policy – cohesion (Greece, Ireland and Portugal) vs. CEE (Hungary, Poland) countries. Regional & Federal Studies 14(3): 315–54.

42.

Park

Rethemeyer

(2014) The politics of connections: Assessing the determinants of social structure in policy networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24(2): 349–79.

43.

Polverari

Michie

(2009) New Partnership Dynamics in a Changing Cohesion Policy Context (No. 25(2)). Glasgow: EPRC, University of Strathclyde.

44.

Provan

Huang

(2012) Resource tangibility and the evolution of a publicly funded health and human services network. Public Administration Review 72(3): 366–75.

45.

Provan

Lemaire

(2012) Core concepts and key ideas for understanding public sector organizational networks: Using research to inform scholarship and practice. Public Administration Review 72(5): 638–48.

46.

Randma-Liiv

Kickert

(2017) The impact of fiscal crisis on public administration reforms in Europe. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 19(2): 91–9.

47.

Reckhow

(2013) The delegated state and the politics of federal grants. SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 2300594. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2300594

48.

Sørensen

Torfing

(2009) Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration 87(2): 234–58.

49.

Valente

(2010) Social Networks and Health: Models, Methods, and Applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

50.

Wasserman

Faust

(1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

51.

Yesilkagit

Blom-Hansen

(2007) Supranational governance or national business-as-usual? The national administration of EU structural funds in the Netherlands and Denmark. Public Administration 85(2): 503–24.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.30 MB

Networks and efficient policy implementation: Insights from cohesion policy

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material