Networks and Power: Why Networks are Hierarchical Not Flat and What Can Be Done About It

Abstract

Many scholars, policy makers and practitioners associate new, networked forms of collaboration and governance with positive attributes such as speed, flexibility, adaptability and ‘flatness’. This article contrasts the assumptions that networks essentially moderate external asymmetries of power with the network theoretical view that networks may amplify existing hierarchies. The case study network explored supports the network theoretical view that existing power relations may be increased when a multistakeholder partnership network is established. The use of Social Network Analysis facilitates the comparison of the structures and relationships into which global policy actors are organised (the formal network) with the relationships and relational structures into which they choose to organise themselves (informal network). In the conclusions, I introduce the practice of network rewiring that could overcome the network mechanisms that amplify existing power relations. Further research is required that adds more case study evidence in order to raise (and begin to answer) questions that will give a wider view of the social structuring of power in partnership networks in international development, such as those referred to in the recently‐adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Collaborative Governance and the Challenges of Network-Based Research

“…First, we notice that most studies (>70%), indeed, define the boundaries of the network by clearly describing the criteria for membership. Examples include Bodin and Nohrstedt (2016), who study the network of individuals engaged in the disaster response organization during the acute phase of a Swedish wildfire; Fischer et al.’s (2012) analysis of networks of actors in Swiss telecommunication policy; and Faul (2016), who identifies the actors that participate in a network of global education policy. Whether values exceeding 70% are high or low is, to a large extent, a matter of opinion.…”

“…Among the studies included in this review, researchers examined multiplex relationships in a variety of ways. For instance, Faul (2016) observes both formal and informal partnership ties, whereas Kapucu and Garayev (2013) examine different types of advice exchanged by actors in emergency situations (Kapucu & Garayev, 2013). Lee et al.…”

A disconnected policy network: The UK's response to the Sierra Leone Ebola epidemic

“…This is reminiscent of Meyer's work on the boundaries that exist between "amateurs" and "policy professionals" (Meyer, 2008). Moira Faul's research on global education policy networks proposes that far from being "flat," networks can augment existing power relations and knowledge hierarchies (Faul, 2016). This is worth considering when one observes how ERAP's supply of research knowledge and the SAGE sub-committee for anthropologists only increased the homophily of the social science sub-community, leaving it weakly connected to the core policy network (Fig.…”

“Localization” in Fragile Spaces: A Comparative Networks Evaluation of Community-Based Programmes in Pakistan and Afghanistan

“…'Clashing agendas' among stakeholders contribute to aid politicization (Carothers & De Gramont, 2013, p. 269). Collaborative efforts among policy networks (local, national, international) extend across diverse development sectors, creating the necessary bridging effects among governments, civil society organizations, or private sectors (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2017;Eyben, 2006;Faul, 2016;Pomerantz, 2004). Yet adverse effects result from technical assistance and information asymmetries among diverse actors (Easterly, 2013).…”

“…Yet adverse effects result from technical assistance and information asymmetries among diverse actors (Easterly, 2013). Powerful global hierarchies can 'amplify' the already existing hierarchies of local communities and neglect critical actors in the development process (Faul, 2016;Groves & Hinton, 2004;Murdie & Polizzi, 2017).…”