Structural and Institutional Determinants of Influence Reputation: A Comparison of Collaborative and Adversarial Policy Networks in Decision Making and Implementation

The central assumption in the literature on collaborative networks and policy networks is that political outcomes are affected by a variety of state and nonstate actors. Some of these actors are more powerful than others and can therefore have a considerable effect on decision making. In this article, we seek to provide a structural and institutional explanation for these power differentials in policy networks and support the explanation with empirical evidence. We use a dyadic measure of influence reputation as a proxy for power, and posit that influence reputation over the political outcome is related to vertical integration into the political system by means of formal decision-making authority, and to horizontal integration by means of being well embedded into the policy network. Hence, we argue that actors are perceived as influential because of two complementary factors: (a) their institutional roles and (b) their structural positions in the policy network. Based on temporal and cross-sectional exponential random graph models, we compare five cases about climate, telecommunications, flood prevention, and toxic chemicals politics in Switzerland and Germany. The five networks cover national and local networks at different stages of the policy cycle. The results confirm that institutional and structural drivers seem to have a crucial impact on how an actor is perceived in decision making and implementation and, therefore, their ability to significantly shape outputs and service delivery.

Innovation and policy networks:the social shaping of BSE-related technologies and the inadequate assessmant of related risks

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR CONSULTATION

EU Environmental Policy under Pressure: Chemicals Policy Change between Antagonistic Goals?

Until now, chemicals policy was unable to find a method to establish a sound balance between the benefits and risks of chemical substances. Policy learning within the European Union (EU) resulted in the formulation of an alternative approach to future chemicals policy in some quarters. The Commission's proposal for new chemicals legislation - presented as 'paradigmatic' policy change - led to a highly controversial lobbying debate. This paper deals in particular with the influence of structures, policy networks, multi-level governance and the influence of new modes of governance on chemicals policy-making. It argues that future policy will not represent the paradigmatic change announced by the Commission but only one incremental, cost-effective step towards such a reform. The final proposal is criticised as a neo-liberal interpretation of the Lisbon strategy which includes a dangerous shift in environmental policy making.

Social Network Analysis and Qualitative Comparative Analysis: Their mutual benefit for the explanation of policy network structures

By switching the level of analysis and aggregating data from the micro-level of individual cases to the macro-level, quantitative data can be analysed within a more case-based approach. This paper presents such an approach in two steps: In a first step, it discusses the combination of Social Network Analysis (SNA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in a sequential mixed-methods research design. In such a design, quantitative social network data on individual cases and their relations at the micro-level are used to describe the structure of the network that these cases constitute at the macro-level. Different network structures can then be compared by QCA. This strategy allows adding an element of potential causal explanation to SNA, while SNA-indicators allow for a systematic description of the cases to be compared by QCA. Because mixing methods can be a promising, but also a risky endeavour, the methodological part also discusses the possibility that underlying assumptions of both methods could clash. In a second step, the research design presented beforehand is applied to an empirical study of policy network structures in Swiss politics. Through a comparison of 11 policy networks, causal paths that lead to a conflictual or consensual policy network structure are identified and discussed. The analysis reveals that different theoretical factors matter and that multiple conjunctural causation is at work. Based on both the methodological discussion and the empirical application, it appears that a combination of SNA and QCA can represent a helpful methodological design for social science research and a possibility of using quantitative data with a more case-based approach.

The European Community and innovation policy : reorienting towards diffusion

This study aims to explore the position of diffusion oriented support mechanisms in European Community (EC) innovation policy. With the shift from the traditional linear model towards an integrative approach to innovation, the role of diffusion of technologies and knowledge, achieved greater weight. This shift in both the thinking of academic experts, and of national policy makers, induced EC policy makers to appeal for similar changes in Community innovation policy. From the mid-1980s, the Commission of the European Communities, the key actor in EC policy making, thought to move its innovation policy away from the traditional science push approach. This study shows that in the implementation of programmes for research, technology and innovation, the traditional linear model is still dominant. The core research and technological development programmes still operate from a science push concept of innovation, mainly due to their pre-competitive nature. The case of SPRINT illustrates that policy programmes with an integrated innovation perspective can be successful at Community level. However the programme operates in a relatively isolated position from overall research and technological development policy. The case of BRITE-EURAM illustrates the difficulties of collaborative research programmes, the bulk of EC support mechanisms, to move away from the traditional model. The study shows how conflicting policy objectives arising from the different policy networks that shape EC policy making, in combination with a lack of co-ordination in those policy domains, hinder the emergence of the integrated approach. Consequently EC diffusion policy, implemented from the perspective of the linear model, will have a sub-optimal impact on the competitiveness of European industries.

Globalization and suburbanization : can creative industries develop in outer urban zones? the Australian case

The creative cities literature gives an emphasis to developing cultural amenity and creative clusters in inner city areas, in order to attract both international visitors and what Richard Florida termed the “creative class”. But many creative workers live in outer urban zones (suburbs). How do creative industries policies meet their needs? This paper reports on a three-year study supported by the Australian Research Council into creative workforce in Australian suburbs in the cities of Melbourne and Brisbane.

A participação dos stakeholders em processos de decisão da União Europeia – o caso da Estratégia da União Europeia para a cibersegurança

A incompreensão sobre como funcionam os processos que conduzem às decisões na União Europeia (UE) e que representam hoje, principalmente, uma panóplia legislativa com impacto significativo no dia-a-dia dos cidadãos, das empresas e dos governos, é reconhecida pela própria Comissão Europeia a par duma existente desconfiança das pessoas na política, e o seu consequente distanciamento entre elas e as instituições. Para esta situação muito contribui o complexo xadrez de instituições da UE (Comissão Europeia, Parlamento Europeu, Conselho Europeu, Conselho da União Europeia, Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia, Banco Central Europeu, Comité das Regiões, agências da União Europeia, etc.) com fronteiras pouco claras entre si no que respeita às áreas de intervenção, responsabilidades e competências, assim como a forma como são nomeados e/ou eleitos os seus representantes. Todas estas dúvidas por parte dos cidadãos acentuam não só um legítimo desconhecimento pelos mecanismos de decisão, pois variam de instituição para instituição e a informação e regras de funcionamento encontram-se dispersas por vários documentos, bem como enraízam uma desconfiança sobre os verdadeiros interesses nas decisões tomadas e, ainda, sobre os actores que nelas estão envolvidos. Procurámos no nosso estudo, em primeiro lugar, estabelecer a relação entre os processos de decisão na UE e a forma como com ele interagem redes de partes interessadas – stakeholders. Em segundo lugar, à luz dum quadro teórico desenvolvido em torno do estudo do ciclo político das decisões no quadro comunitário, tentámos fazer a correlação deste com um processo de decisão específico. Foi nossa intenção perceber se o decurso e o envolvimento dos stakeholders no processo de decisão estudado se coaduna com a bibliografia que aponta os processos de decisão da UE como sendo abertos e inclusivos.