Policy Network

Policy networks consist of governmental and societal actors whose interactions with one another give rise to policies. Typically, these actors are linked through informal practices as well as formal institutions, or even instead of such institutions. Typically, they are interdependent; they can secure the outcomes for which they hope only by collaborating with one another. Policy networks can vary widely, however. At one extreme, we find “policy communities.” Policy communities have a limited number of participant groups, with some others being deliberately excluded. The participants share broad values, beliefs, and preferences. They usually meet frequently, with all of them interacting closely on any topic related to the policy area. All of them have significant resources or power, so their interactions consist of institutionalized forms of negotiation and bargaining. They are usually organized hierarchically so the leaders can secure the acquiescence of the members in whatever policies are agreed upon. At the other extreme, we find “issue networks.” Issue networks typically have far more participants. The participants disagree with one another so conflict, not consensus, is the norm. They also have unequal levels of power and widely varying degrees of access, so their interactions are often primarily consultative.

Concepts such as policy network, policy community, and issue network all refer to government links with other state and societal actors. Other related concepts include epistemic communities, iron triangles, and policy subsystems. All these concepts can be situated within a broader research program of network analysis, which can be found throughout the social sciences. Network analysis has been used to discuss diverse phenomena, including the information revolution, technological innovation, and urban villages. Policy network analysis is the species of network analysis most relevant to governance. It emphasizes how networks decide which issues will be included and excluded from the policy agenda, shape the behavior of actors, privilege certain interests, and even substitute private forms of government for public accountability.