Advertisement

Policy Networks and the Roles of Public Administrations

  • Frédéric VaroneEmail author
  • Karin Ingold
  • Manuel Fischer
Chapter
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)

Abstract

This chapter shows how public administrations, in order to maintain influence over the conduct of public policies, assume new roles, at least when compared to the tasks and sovereign competencies under an ideal-typical Weberian bureaucracy. Empirical evidence from Switzerland indicates that an administrative entity can cast itself in turn as a policy broker and mediator in political conflicts (during policy formulation) but also as a co-producer of administrative services and network facilitator (during policy implementation). The results of a formal social network analysis (SNA) suggest that these new roles do not entail a loss of public administration influence. On the contrary, it is by adapting and also abandoning a state-centric vision and hierarchical position, as well as finding a place within a policy network as a broker, facilitator, or co-producer, that public administrations are able to maintain their ability to significantly influence the content of public policies.

Keywords

Network Decision-making Implementation Policy broker Regulation 

References

  1. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berardo, R., & Scholz, J. T. (2010). Self-organizing policy networks: Risk, partner selection, and cooperation in estuaries. American Journal of Political Science, 54(3), 632–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bressers, H. T. A., & O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (1998). The selection of policy instruments: A network-based perspective. Journal of Public Policy, 18(3), 213–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fischer, M. (2014). Coalition structures and policy change in a consensus democracy. Policy Studies Journal, 42(3), 344–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fischer, M. (2017). Institutions and policy networks in Europe. In J. N. Victor, M. Lubell, & A. Montgomery (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political networks (pp. 833–854). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Fischer, M., Ingold, K., Sciarini, P., & Varone, F. (2012). Impacts of market liberalization on regulatory network: A longitudinal analysis of the Swiss telecommunications sector. Policy Studies Journal, 40(3), 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ingold, K. (2011). Network structures within policy processes: Coalitions, power, and brokerage in Swiss climate policy. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 435–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ingold, K., & Fischer, M. (2014). Drivers of collaboration to mitigate climate change: An illustration of Swiss climate policy over 15 years. Global Environmental Change, 24, 88–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ingold, K., & Varone, F. (2012). Treating policy brokers seriously: Evidence from the climate policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), 319–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ingold, K., Varone, F., & Stokman, F. (2013). A social network-based approach to assess de facto independence of regulatory agencies. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1464–1481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kapucu, N., Hu, Q., & Khosa, S. (2017). The state of network research in public administration. Administration & Society, 49(8), 1087–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kenis, P., & Schneider, V. (1991). Policy networks and policy analysis: Scrutinizing a new analytical toolbox. In B. Marin & R. Mayntz (Eds.), Policy networks: Empirical evidence and theoretical considerations (pp. 25–59). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  13. Klijn, E. (2005). Designing and managing networks: Possibilities and limitations for network management. European Political Science, 4(3), 328–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klijn, E., Steijn, B., & Edelenbos, J. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public Administration, 88(4), 1063–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Hill, M., & Varone, F. (2011). Public policy analysis. Bristol: The Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Knoke, D., Pappi, F. U., Broadbent, J., & Tsujinaka, Y. (1996). Comparing policy networks: Labor politics in the US, Germany, and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Laumann, E. O., & Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state: Social choice in national policy domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lecy, J. D., Mergel, I. A., & Schmitz, H. P. (2014). Networks in public administration: Current scholarship in review. Public Management Review, 16(5), 643–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leifeld, P., & Schneider, V. (2012). Information exchange in policy networks. American Journal of Political Science, 56(3), 731–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy. New York: Russel Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Lubell, M., Robins, G., & Wang, P. (2014). Network structure and institutional complexity in an ecology of water management games. Ecology and Society, 19(4), 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maggetti, M., Ingold, K., & Varone, F. (2013). Having your cake and eating it, too: Can regulatory agencies be both independent and accountable? Swiss Political Science Review, 19(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McGuire, M., & Agranoff, R. (2011). The limitations of public management networks. Public Administration, 89(2), 265–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Provan, K. G., & Milward, B. H. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). Policy change and learning. An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  27. Schalk, J., Torenvlied, R., & Allen, J. (2010). Network embeddedness and public agency performance: The strength of strong ties in Dutch higher education. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(3), 629–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shrestha, M. K. (2013). Self-organizing network capital and the success of collaborative public programs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(2), 307–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scandinavian Political Studies, 28(3), 195–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2009). Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration, 87(2), 234–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stovel, K., & Shaw, L. (2012). Brokerage. Annual Review of Sociology, 38(1), 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Varone, F., & Ingold, K. (2011). L’indépendance des agences nationales de régulation. In F. Bellanger & T. Tanquerel (Eds.), Les autorités administratives indépendantes (pp. 37–61). Zurich: Schulthess Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Varone, F., Ingold, K., & Fischer, M. (2016). Administration et réseaux d’action publique. In D. Giauque & Y. Emery (Eds.), L’acteur et la bureaucratie (pp. 115–140). Québec: Presses de l’Université de la Laval.Google Scholar
  34. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frédéric Varone
    • 1
    Email author
  • Karin Ingold
    • 2
  • Manuel Fischer
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Political Science and International RelationsUniversity of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute of Political ScienceUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department Environmental Social SciencesEawagDübendorfSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations