Public Policy Network in Governance: German School's Argumentative Stance
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The study of network policy presents a significant challenge in academic literature. This is due to the diverse conceptual frameworks employed, encompassing disparate concepts, methodologies, analytical tools, and theoretical underpinnings. This lack of consensus extends to fundamental aspects of network policy, necessitating a critical examination of the knowledge base through the lens of scholars. This article aims to synthesize insights from academic literature, with a particular focus on the German governance school of thought in contrast to the dominant Anglo-Saxon school of thought. While Anglo-Saxon scholars prioritize the traditional framework of state-private sector interactions, the German governance school of thought offers a contrasting perspective that emphasizes the governance dimension of network policy. This leads to the identification of distinct patterns, such as command-and-control models and market-oriented models, within network policy analysis. However, the article also raises objections, suggesting that the content of network policies proposed by the German-style school of thought transcends mere analytical tools, diverging from the emphasis of their Anglo-Saxon counterparts.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Atkinson, M., & Coleman, W. D. (1989). Strong states and weak states: Sectoral policy networks in advanced capitalist economies. British Journal of Political Science, 14(1), 46-67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400005317
Benson, K. J. (1982). A framework for policy analysis. In D. Rogers, D. Whitten, & Associates (Eds.), Interorganizational co-ordination: theory, research and implementation (pp. 137-176). Iowa State University Press.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R.A.W. (2003). Interpreting British Governance. Routledge.
Börzel, T. A. (1998). Organizing Babylon - On the Different Conceptions of Policy Network. Public Administration, 76(2), 253-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00100
Burley, Anne-Marie and Mattli, W. (1993). Europe before the Court: A political theory of legal integration. International Organization, 47(1), 41-77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300004707
Callon, M. (1986). The sociology of an actor-network: The case of electric vehicle. In M. Callon, H. Law, & A. Rip (Eds), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology, Sociology of science in the real world (pp. 19-34). Macmillan.
Campbell, I. C. (2017). Managing international river basins: successes and failures of the Mekong River Commission. In R. Q. Grafton & K. Hussey (Eds.), Water resources planning and management (pp. 724-740). Cambridge University Press.
Compston, H. (2009). Policy Networks and Policy Change: Putting Policy Network Theory to the Test. Palgrave Macmillan.
Frances, J., et al. (1991). Introduction. In G. Thompson, J. Frances, R. Levacic, & J. Mitchell (Eds), Markets, hierarchies and networks: The Co-ordination of Social Life. Sage.
Jordan, G., & Schubert, K. (1992). A preliminary ordering of policy network labels. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00286.x
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75(3), 424-440.
Kavanagh, D., Richards, D., Geddes, A., & Smith, M. (2006). British Politics (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Kenis, P., & Schneider, V. (1991). Policy networks and policy analysis: scrutinizing a new analytical toolbox. In B. Marin & R. Mayntz (Eds.), Policy network: empirical evidence and theoretical considerations (pp. 25-59). Westview Press.
Kenis, P., & Knoke, D. (2002). How organizational field networks shape interorganizational tie-formation rates. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 275–293. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 4134355
Klijn, Erik-Hans, & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2000). Public management and policy networks: foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management, 2(2), 135=158. https://doi.org/10.1080/146166700411201
Lehmbruch, G. (1991). The organization of society, administrative strategies, and policy network. In R.M. Czada & A. Windhoff-Heritier (eds), Political choice, institutions, rules and the limits of rationality. Routledge.
Marsh, D., & Smith, M. (2000). Understanding Policy Network: Towards a dialectical approach. Political Studies, 48(1), 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00247
Offerdal, K. C. (2019). The effectiveness of the Mekong River commission: Information sharing and cooperation mechanisms in a regional riparian regime. Master's thesis, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo.
Poocharoen, O., & Boossabong, P. (Eds.). (2023). Policy analysis in Thailand. Bristol University Press.
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12(1), 295-336.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (1997). Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability. Open University Press.
Rhodes, R.A.W and Marsh, D. (1992a). Policy communities and issue networks: Beyond typology. In D. Marsh & R.A.W. Rhodes (Eds.). Policy Networks in British Government. Oxford University Press.
Rhodes, R.A.W. and Marsh, D. (1992b). Policy Networks in British Politics: A Critique of Existing Approaches. In D. Marsh & R.A.W Rhodes (Eds.), Policy Networks in British Government. Oxford University Press.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (2006). Policy network analysis. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford University Press.
Riggs, F.W.(1966). Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity. East-West Center Press.
Santhitiwanich, A. (2023). Methods of policy analysis in Thailand: bureaucratic, managerial, academic and participatory orientations. In Policy Analysis in Thailand (pp.28-45). Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.51952/9781447367109.ch002
Schmitter, P. C. (1970). Still the century of corporatism?. The Review of Politics, 36(1), 85-96. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0034670500022178
Schmitter, P. C. (1979). Still the century of corporatism?. In P.C. Schmitter & G. Lehmbruch (Eds.), Trends towards corporatist intermediation (pp.7-48). Sage.
Sikkink, K. (1993). Human rights, principled issue-networks, and sovereignty in Latin America. International Organization, 47(3), 411-41. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028010
Thorelli, H.B. (1986). Networks: Between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 7(1), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070105
Ubonloet, P. (2020). Capacity of the planning agency and national development plan implementation effectiveness: A comparative study of Thailand and Malaysia. Doctoral dissertation, National Institute of Development Administration.
Ungsuchaval, T. and Ariyasirichot, W. (2023). The role of the community sector and civil society in policy analysis. In Policy Analysis in Thailand (pp. 230-247). Policy Press. https://doi.org/ 10.51952/9781447367109.ch002
Waarden, F. V. (1992). Dimensions and types of policy networks. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1), 29-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00287.x