Policy Communities and Issue Networks

Marsh, David M.; Rhodes, R. A. W.

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198278528.003.0011

Cited by 150 publications

(147 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…'Policy community' was eventually described as a particular type of policy network characterised by close and insulated relationships between an exclusive elite (Marsh and Rhodes, 1992). Such classifications of networks were soon followed by theological debates on their nature and explanatory value (for example, Dowding, 1995;Marsh and Smith, 2000;Dowding, 2001;Fawcett and Daugbjerg, 2012).…”

Section: The Policy Communities Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the ‘dominant model’ of British policymaking? Comparing majoritarian and policy community ideas

Jordan

Cairney

2013

Br Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to help identify the fundamental characteristics of the British policymaking system. It highlights an enduring conflict of interpretation within the literature. On the one hand, most contemporary analysts argue that the 'Westminster model' is outmoded and it has been replaced by modern understandings based on 'governance'. On the other, key ideas associated with the Westminster Model, regarding majoritarian government and policy imposition, are still in good currency in the academic literature which holds firm to Lijphart's (1984;1999) description of the UK as a majoritarian democracy. These very different understandings of British government are both commonly cited, but without much recognition that their conclusions may be mutually incompatible. To address this lack of comparison of competing narratives, the article outlines two main approaches to describe and explain the 'characteristic and durable' ways of doing things in Britain: the 'policy styles' literature initiated by Richardson in Policy Styles in Western Europe (1982) and the Lijphart account found in Democracies (1984) and revised in 1999 as Patterns of Democracy. The article encourages scholars to reject an appealing compromise between majoritarian and governance accounts.

show abstract

Section: The Policy Communities Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the ‘dominant model’ of British policymaking? Comparing majoritarian and policy community ideas

Jordan

Cairney

2013

Br Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Atkinson & Coleman, 1989;Jordan & Schubert, 1992;Marsh & Rhodes, 1992;Richardson & Jordan, 1979;Van Waarden, 1992). Others argued that policy networks more than just a platform that facilitate interactions between a collection of public and private stakeholders.…”

Section: The First Cycle Of Policy Network Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the 1980s and 1990s, these two distinct types of state-industry relationships were taken up by a number of scholars and generally redefined as two poles of a continuum of policy network types (e.g. Atkinson & Coleman, 1989;Jordan & Schubert, 1992;Marsh, 1998b;Marsh & Rhodes, 1992;Rhodes, 1997;Richardson & Jordan, 1979;Smith, 1993;Van Waarden, 1992). Based on these different types of policy networks, the approach developed that conceives policy networks as platforms of interest intermediation (Börzel, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These different types of policy networks are derived from three dimensions along which the characteristics of policy networks vary. Jordan Perhaps the best known, and most often applied, typology of policy networks is the classification of networks developed by Rhodes (1988) and later refined by Marsh and Rhodes (Marsh, 1998b;Marsh & Rhodes, 1992). Marsh and Rhodes' fivefold typology builds on the concepts developed in the late 1970s of issue networks and policy communities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The emphasis placed by Jordan and Schubert (1992) on the level at which a policy network manifests is also stressed in the policy network typology developed by Atkinson and Coleman (1989). Similarly, Wilks and Wright (1987) pay particular attention to the dimension that both the typologies developed by Van Waarden (1992) and Marsh and Rhodes (Marsh & Rhodes, 1992;Marsh & Smith, 2000;Rhodes, 1988Rhodes, , 1997 stress as a key dimension along which policy networks vary. In line with these two previously mentioned typologies, Wilks and Wright specifically focus on the degree to which the actors within a policy network share norms and values.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Networks : structure and action : steering in and steering by policy networks

Dassen¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis explores the opportunities to build a structural policy network model that is rooted in social network theories. By making a distinction between a process of steering in networks, and a process of steering by networks, it addresses the effects of network structures on network dynamics as well as on the production of policy outputs. Proceeding from actor-based models of network dynamics, it hypothesizes on the relations between initial network structures and their structural outcomes. The thesis also presents a set of hypotheses that describe which structural characteristics of policy networks are most likely to produce policy outputs, and what the utility of such outputs might be for both individuals in the network and for governments. PrefaceIt is hard to believe my days as a PhD student are over and that these are the last pages to be written. After four years of hard, but rewarding work it is time to thank those that have played a crucial role in the process leading up to the completion of this thesis. The freedom to manoeuvre that I was granted and your confidence in my capabilities to write a theoretical thesis are much appreciated. I have enjoyed working with you both.

show abstract

Defeating the Austerians of the warfare state: French arms policy through the lens of the Programmatic Action Framework

Faure

2020

European Policy Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the development of the Programmatic Action Framework (PAF) based on the case study of the procurement of the French Rafale fighter jet rather than the American F‐18 by the French government in the 1980s. This decision making dilemma is explained by revealing the competition between two “programmatic cliques.” The “sovereignist” programmatic clique that defends the French option embodies the Custodians of the nation state. The “liberal” programmatic clique that supports the American alternative represents the Austerians of the nation state. The defeat of the Austerians of the French nation warfare state is explained by the ties weakness available to the liberal programmatic clique at the political level of decision making. To this end, 89 semi‐structured interviews were conducted with the political‐military and industrial arms actors.

show abstract

Policy Communities and Issue Networks

Cited by 150 publications

References 0 publications

What is the ‘dominant model’ of British policymaking? Comparing majoritarian and policy community ideas

What is the ‘dominant model’ of British policymaking? Comparing majoritarian and policy community ideas

Networks : structure and action : steering in and steering by policy networks

Defeating the Austerians of the warfare state: French arms policy through the lens of the Programmatic Action Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About