Policy Networks and Governance Networks: Towards Greater Conceptual Clarity

Ismael Blanco, Vivien Lowndes, Lawrence Pratchett

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    53 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Networks are central to both the practice and understanding of contemporary governance. But there is a tendency to conflate and confuse different concepts. Concepts of ‘policy network’ (PN) and ‘governance network’ (GN) are often used interchangeably, with an assumption that the latter has evolved from the former. Such indiscriminate borrowing fails to recognise the different antecedents, and distinctive analytical offer, of specific network theories. The article develops a systematic distinction between PN and GN theories, enabling those engaging with networks to select from, and even combine, alternative perspectives as they confront a new wave of change in policy making and governance. The more sceptical account provided by PN theory provides a valuable counterbalance to the ‘optimistic’ character of the GN literature, which tends to underestimate the continued hold of (albeit multi-sector) elites on policy making, and overstate the extent to which networks represent a new ‘stage’ in the evolution of governance.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)297-308
    Number of pages12
    JournalPolitical Studies Review
    Volume9
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    governance
    elite

    Cite this

    @article{3dc798d1120d43cc98dcd0e6ce935b54,
    title = "Policy Networks and Governance Networks: Towards Greater Conceptual Clarity",
    abstract = "Networks are central to both the practice and understanding of contemporary governance. But there is a tendency to conflate and confuse different concepts. Concepts of ‘policy network’ (PN) and ‘governance network’ (GN) are often used interchangeably, with an assumption that the latter has evolved from the former. Such indiscriminate borrowing fails to recognise the different antecedents, and distinctive analytical offer, of specific network theories. The article develops a systematic distinction between PN and GN theories, enabling those engaging with networks to select from, and even combine, alternative perspectives as they confront a new wave of change in policy making and governance. The more sceptical account provided by PN theory provides a valuable counterbalance to the ‘optimistic’ character of the GN literature, which tends to underestimate the continued hold of (albeit multi-sector) elites on policy making, and overstate the extent to which networks represent a new ‘stage’ in the evolution of governance.",
    keywords = "Policy Networks, Governance, Institutionalisation",
    author = "Ismael Blanco and Vivien Lowndes and Lawrence Pratchett",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00239.x",
    language = "English",
    volume = "9",
    pages = "297--308",
    journal = "Political Studies Review",
    issn = "1478-9299",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
    number = "3",

    }

    Policy Networks and Governance Networks: Towards Greater Conceptual Clarity. / Blanco, Ismael; Lowndes, Vivien; Pratchett, Lawrence.

    In: Political Studies Review, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2011, p. 297-308.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Policy Networks and Governance Networks: Towards Greater Conceptual Clarity

    AU - Blanco, Ismael

    AU - Lowndes, Vivien

    AU - Pratchett, Lawrence

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - Networks are central to both the practice and understanding of contemporary governance. But there is a tendency to conflate and confuse different concepts. Concepts of ‘policy network’ (PN) and ‘governance network’ (GN) are often used interchangeably, with an assumption that the latter has evolved from the former. Such indiscriminate borrowing fails to recognise the different antecedents, and distinctive analytical offer, of specific network theories. The article develops a systematic distinction between PN and GN theories, enabling those engaging with networks to select from, and even combine, alternative perspectives as they confront a new wave of change in policy making and governance. The more sceptical account provided by PN theory provides a valuable counterbalance to the ‘optimistic’ character of the GN literature, which tends to underestimate the continued hold of (albeit multi-sector) elites on policy making, and overstate the extent to which networks represent a new ‘stage’ in the evolution of governance.

    AB - Networks are central to both the practice and understanding of contemporary governance. But there is a tendency to conflate and confuse different concepts. Concepts of ‘policy network’ (PN) and ‘governance network’ (GN) are often used interchangeably, with an assumption that the latter has evolved from the former. Such indiscriminate borrowing fails to recognise the different antecedents, and distinctive analytical offer, of specific network theories. The article develops a systematic distinction between PN and GN theories, enabling those engaging with networks to select from, and even combine, alternative perspectives as they confront a new wave of change in policy making and governance. The more sceptical account provided by PN theory provides a valuable counterbalance to the ‘optimistic’ character of the GN literature, which tends to underestimate the continued hold of (albeit multi-sector) elites on policy making, and overstate the extent to which networks represent a new ‘stage’ in the evolution of governance.

    KW - Policy Networks

    KW - Governance

    KW - Institutionalisation

    U2 - 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00239.x

    DO - 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00239.x

    M3 - Article

    VL - 9

    SP - 297

    EP - 308

    JO - Political Studies Review

    JF - Political Studies Review

    SN - 1478-9299

    IS - 3

    ER -