Underperforming policy networks: The biopesticides network in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Loosely integrated and incomplete policy networks have been neglected in the literature. They are important to consider in terms of understanding network underperformance. The effective delivery and formulation of policy requires networks that are not incomplete or underperforming. The biopesticides policy network in the UK is considered and its components identified with an emphasis on the lack of integration of retailers and environmental groups. The nature of the network constrains the actions of its agents and frustrates the achievement of policy goals. A study of this relatively immature policy network also allows for a focus on network formation. The state, via an external central government department, has been a key factor in the development of the network. Therefore, it is important to incorporate such factors more systematically into understandings of network formation.Feedback efforts from policy have increased interactions between productionist actors but the sphere of consumption remains insufficiently articulated.

The development, regulation and use of biopesticides for integrated pest management

“…To make IPM work in the total system concept, institutional arrangements would be required that: provide a market for natural pest regulation as an ecosystem service; promote biopesticides and other environmentally benign technologies in agriculture; value human and natural capital in rural areas; and synthesize knowledge on natural science, economics, and the social dimension of agriculture and the rural environment (see, for example, [93]). Such a holistic system for pest management would require far better integration of the existing policy network [94]. This may seem like an ambitious proposition, but it is becoming increasingly necessary.…”

Does the Government Selection Process Promote or Hinder Pluralism? Exploring the Characteristics of Voluntary Organizations Invited to Public Consultations

“…Instead, inviting voluntary organizations is merely symbolic (Uhrwing, 2001) and a way for the government to recognize the legitimate spokespersons within the policy network. In addition, the selectivity applied by the government in the remiss procedure highlights its agenda-setting role that may be furthered by the networks between voluntary organizations and government departments (Greaves & Grant, 2010;Marsh & Smith, 2000;Rhodes, 2007). By selecting well-known organizations that are already involved in different policy networks and considered as legitimate by the government, government is able to influence which ideas are selected out while others are discarded and thereby to push the agenda forward in a specific direction (Kingdon, 1995).…”

Untitled

“…Die Literatur legt einen direkt-positiven Zusammenhang zwischen Finanzausstattung und politischer Organisationsfähigkeit nahe. So zeigt eine Fallstudie des ökologischen Pflanzenschutzes in Großbritannien, dass das politische Netzwerk der Produzenten verglichen mit jenem der Hersteller synthetischer Pflanzenschutzmittel "relatively immature and weakly developed" ist und ohne Unterstützung der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde, die gegenwärtig als kommunikativer Knotenpunkt fungiert, keine Konsolidierung zu erwarten ist (Greaves/Grant 2010). Einige Felder sind dauerhaft von staatlicher Förderung abhängig, weil sie ihre Institutionalisierung nicht selbst finanzieren können (z.B.…”