1 “Public networks” say Americans, “public networks” reply Europeans, but are they talking about the same issue? Daniela Cristofoli Assistant Professor in Public Management University of Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland e-mail [email protected]Myrna Mandell Professor Emeritus, California State University, Los Angeles, US Adjunct Faculty, Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia e-mail: [email protected]Marco Meneguzzo Full Professor in Public Management University of Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy University of Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland e-mail: [email protected]
35
Embed
Cristofoli Public Networks Say Americans, Public Networks Reply Europeans But Are They Talking About the Same Issue
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
“Public networks” say Americans, “public networks” reply Europeans, but
Marsh, 2003; Voets, 2008). More specifically, whereas the community of American scholars
seem to prefer taking a managerial approach at the networks for the provision of public
services, to investigate how to make them really work and to use quantitative data analysis
techniques, the European scholars seem to prefer assuming a governance approach at policy-
making networks, to investigate their formation and main characteristics and to use qualitative
and interpretative data analysis techniques.
Insert Table 6 about here
The longitudinal analysis conducted on the American and the European public network
communities from 1979 to 2011 does not seem to lead to significantly different results. As far
as the evolution of the characteristics of the two communities are considered, in fact, the
American and the European communities seem to remain consistent with their main spirit,
and seem to weakly invest in the development of a common field. Since its origin, the
American community seems to be managerial-oriented, concerned by the problems of
network performance and quantitative in nature. From 1979 to 2011, it seems to develop by
strengthening those characteristics. The number of articles taking the public management
approach remained always higher than that of articles taking the policy network or
governance network approach; on top of it, it has been growing tremendously since 1996.
Similarly, since 2000 the number of articles focusing on the network performance has been
significantly increasing. Concerning methods, the American community has always been
21
focused on quantitative data analysis techniques, even if the number of qualitative studies has
significantly increased during the last years (Figure 1). A similar history can be told if we
consider the European community, developing by strengthening its own characteristics, even
if some signals of a greater openness toward the American approach can also be identified. As
Figure 2 shows the European community developed by strengthening its own characteristics
as community focused on network governance, investigating above all the network
establishment and qualitative in nature. Nevertheless, during the last years the number of
studies focusing on the network outcome and employing quantitative data analysis techniques
seem to have been significantly increased.
Insert Figure 1 and Figure 2 about here
Conclusion
The results of our study witness the existence of at least two distinct scholar communities
in the world: American the former and European the latter, each one with its own theoretical
framework, main interests and research methods.
This can be explained by taking into consideration the peculiarities of the American
public administration (Peters 1998) and the distinctiveness of the European one (Kickert
2005).
In this perspective, the development of the managerial approach to public networks in
America, and of the governance approach to public networks in Europe can be explained
against the historical nature of the public administration and state-society relationships in
those countries. In the US, the minimalist State normally engages in public-public and public-
private networks to jointly provide public services, thus leading to a prevalent focus on
service delivery networks and problems related to their functioning in the network literature.
On the other side, the prominent role of European governments in the welfare state in Europe
and of the strength interest groups in these societies (Kooiman, 1993; Schmitter & Lembruch,
22
1979) naturally lead to focus on actors’ role within policy networks and their power to
influence policy-making.
What is more difficult to explain is the manifest separation between the two communities,
that seem to have no or few points of contact, when, as Berry et al (2004) and Klijn (2008)
argue, there are many point of contacts between the different theoretical and methodological
traditions at public networks that should be positively merged and contaminated.
To follow such invitation, initiatives as the Transatlantic Dialogue Conference organized
every year within the framework of the European Group of Public Administration (EGPA) to
foster the dialogue between American and European scholars seem to be particularly
important. On top of it, internationally co-authored articles can be useful to facilitate the
contamination among the existent network communities, but are traditionally neglected. In
our data base, in fact, only the 14% of the selected articles are international (i.e. co-authored
by authors of different countries). Fostering the collaboration among scholars working in
different Universities around the world is, in this perspective, another instrument to encourage
the dialogue and build a bridge between the existent and independent public network
academic communities.
23
Table 1 – Public network articles published from 1979 to 20011
available on publisher web‐site
Total no. of articles retrieved
Total no. of articles screened as relevant
% of relevant articles
US ‐ American Journals
The American review of public administration 1917‐2011 27 12 11%
Journal of Policy Analisys and Management 1981‐2011 8 0 0%
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
1991‐2011 57 33 31%
Public Administration 1923‐2011 117 44 41%
Public Administration Review 1940‐2011 61 18 17%
US ‐ American Journals Total 270 107 100%
EU ‐ European Journals
Governance 1988‐2011 35 11 21%
International Public Management Journal 2005‐2011 11 6 11%
Local Government Studies 1975‐2011 14 7 13%
Public Money and Management 1988‐2011 19 7 13%
Public Management Review 2000‐2011 35 22 42%
EU ‐ European Journals Total 114 53 100%
US + EU Total 384 160
24
Table 2 – Methods for data analysis
Keywords Public network Databases Journal publisher web site Search criteria
“network” in the abstract
Results
Total # of articles retrieved: 384 Total # of articles screened as relevant: 160 Total # of empirical studies: 108 Total # of normative/theoretical paper: 52 Total # of US-authored articles: 62 Total # of EU-authored studies: 87 Total # of articles from other countries: 11
Coding system
Author origin country: affiliation of the article first author Theoretical framework Policy network approach: (Rhodes 1988; Marsh and Rhodes 1992; Marsh 1998) Public management network approach (Mandell 1994; Provan and Milward 1995; Agranoff 1998) Governance network approach (Kickert et al. 1997; Koppenjan and Kickert 2004; Klijn, 2008) Main topics Network formation (network establishment, network structural characteristics and their predictors, rationales for networks against market and hierarchy, role of government in policy network, network development) Network functioning (network management, competences and skills of the network managers, control and accountability issue) Network performance (effectiveness of service-delivery network, predictors of public network effectiveness, policy outcomes, network effects on policy outcomes, network impact on democracy) Methods Qualitative approach (interpretative data analysis techniques, discourse analysis) Quantitative approach (social network analysis, regression models, correlation tests)
25
Table 3 – Sample description and article characteristics
Total no. of articles screened as relevant 160 US-authored articles 38.8% EU-authored articles 54.4% Others 6.9% Normative/theoretical papers 32.5% Empirical papers 67.5% Theoretcal framework Policy network theory 29.4% Public Management network theory 33.8% Governance network theory 28.1% Organization and economic theory 8.8% Main topics Network formation 37.5% Network functioning 15.6% Network performance 39.4% Literature review 7.5% Methods Quantitative approach 31.5% Qualitative approach 68.5%
Table 4 – Geographical distribution of public network articles
US-authored articles 38.8% EU-authored articles 54.4% Others 6.9% EU-authored articles UK 44.8% Netherlands 21.8% Nordic Countries 19.5% Italy 1.1% Germany 4.6% France 2.3% Spain 2.3% Belgium 2.3% Turkey 1.1%
26
Table 5 – US and EU authored articles – target journals
Total no. of articles
screened as relevant
US-authored articles
EU-authored articles
Others
US - American Journals The American review of public administration 12 11.29% 5.75% 0.00% Journal of Policy Analisys and Management 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
33 41.94% 8.05% 0.00%
Public Administration 44 9.68% 41.38% 18.18% Public Administration Review 18 22.58% 3.45% 9.09% US - American Journals Total 107 EU - European Journals Governance 11 1.61% 5.75% 45.45% International Public Management Journal 6 6.45% 2.30% 0.00% Local Government Studies 7 0.00% 8.05% 0.00% Public Money and Management 7 0.00% 8.05% 0.00% Public Management Review 22 6.45% 17.24% 27.27% EU - European Journals Total 53 US + EU Total 160 100% 100% 100%
Table 6 - US and EU authored articles – main characteristics
US - authored articles
EU - authored articles
Theoretical framework Policy network theory 17.74% 33.33% Public Management network theory 64.52% 13.79% Governance network theory 4.84% 45.98% Organization and economic theory 12.90% 6.90% X2
Figure 1 – Evolution of the American community on public networks
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Policy network theory
Public Managementnetwork theory
Governance networktheory
Organization andeconomic theory
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Network establishment
Network functioning
Network performance
Review
28
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Qualitative studies
Quantitative studies
Figure 2 - Evolution of the European community on public networks
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Policy network theory
Public Managementnetwork theory
Governance networktheory
Organization andeconomic theory
29
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Network establishment
Network functioning
Network performance
Review
0
5
10
15
20
25
1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011
Qualitative studies
Quantitative studies
30
References
Agranoff R. (1986). Intergovernmental Management: Human Services Problem Solving In Six Metropolitan Areas. State University of New York Press: Albany. NY.
Agranoff R. (2001). Big Questions in Public Network Management Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 11(3): 295–326.
Agranoff R. (2003). Collaborative Public Management: New Strategies for Local Governments. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Agranof. R. (2003). Leveraging networks: A guide for public managers working across organizations. Washington. D.C.. IBM endowment for the Business of Government (March).
Agranoff R. (2006). Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review. Special Issue. Supplement to Issue 66:6.
Agranoff R. & McGuire M. (1998). Multinetwork Management: Collaboration and the Hollow State in Local Economics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 8(1): 67–92.
Agranoff. R. & McGuire M. (2001). After the network is formed: Process. Power and performance. In M. P. Mandell (Ed). Getting results through collaboration: Networks and network structures for public policy and management. pp11-29. Quorum Books. Westport. Ct.
Agranoff R. & McGuire M. (2003). Collaborative public management. Washington. D.C.. Georgetown University Press.
Aiken. M.. & Hage J. (1968). Organizational interdependence and intraorganizational structure. American Sociological Review. 33. 912-930.
Aldirch. H. (1977). Visions and villains: The politics of designing interorganizational relations. Organization and Administrative Sciences. 8: 23-40.
Aldirch. H. (1979). Organizations and environments. Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey. Aldrich. H. & Whetten. D.A. (1981). Organization sets. action sets and networks: Making the most
of simplicity. In P.C. Nystrum and W.H. Starbuck (Eds) Handbook of Organizational Design. Vol. 1 (pp385-408). Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Berry F. & Berry W. (1990). State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis. American Political Science Review 84(2): 395–415. Berry F.S., Brower R.S., Choi S.O., Goa W.X., Jang H., Kwon M. & Word J. (2004), Three
Traditions of Network Research: What the Public Management Research Agenda Can Learn from Other Research Communities. Public Administration Review, 64: 539–552
Börzel T.A. (2011). Networks: reified metaphor or governance panacea?. Public Administration, 89: 49–63.
Dahl R.A. (1961). Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dahrendorf R. (1959). Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Emery F.E.. & Trist E.L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations. 18. 21-32.
Evan W.M. (1966). The Organization set: Toward a theory of interorganizational relations. In J.D. Thompson (Ed) Approaches to organizational design. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Ferlie E. & Pettigrew A. (1996). Managing Through Networks: Some Issues and Implications for the NHS, British Journal of Management, 7, March, 81-99.
Ferlie E., Fitzgerald L., McGivern G., Dopson, S. & Bennett C. (2011), Public policy networks and ‘wicked problems': a nascent solution?. Public Administration, 89.
Gage R.W. & Mandell M.P. (1988). Strategies for managing intergovernmental policies and networks. Praeger. Westport. Ct.
31
Gray B. (1989). Collaborating: finding common ground for multiparty problems. Jossey-Bass Publishers. San Francisco.
Gage R.W. & Mandell M.P. eds. (1990). Strategies for Managing Intergovernmental Policies and Networks. New York: Praeger.
Granovetter M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology. 78(6): 1360–80.
Granovetter M. (1974). Getting a Job: A Study of Contracts and Careers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Granovetter M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91(3): 481–510
Hage. J. (1973). A strategy for creating interdependent delivery systems to meet complex needs. . In A. R. Negandhi (Ed). Organization theory and interorganizational analysis. Kent Comparative Research Institute: Kent State University. Kent. Ohio.
Hanf. K. and F. W. Scharpf (Eds) (1978). Interorganizational policy making. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Hanf. K. Hjern. B. & Porter D.O. (1978). Local networks of manpower training in the Federal Republic of Germany and Sweden. In K. Hanf & F. W. Scharpf. Eds. Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination and central control. pp 303-344. Sage Publications. London & New York.
Hjern. B. & Porter D.O. (1981). Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative analysis. Organization Studies. 2(3): 211-227.
Horwich. M. & Prahalad. C.K. (1981). Managing multiorganization enterprises: The emerging strategic frontier. Sloan Management Review. Winter: 1-16.
Huang K. & Provan K.G. (2007a). Resource Tangibility and Patterns of Interaction in a Publicly Funded Health and Human Services Network. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: 17(3): 435-454.
Huang K. & Provan K.G. (2007b). Structural embeddedness and organizational social outcomes in a centrally governed mental health services network. Public Management Review. Volume 9, Issue 2: 169 - 189
Huxham. C. (2000). The challenge of collaborative governance. Public Management. 2(3): 337-357.
Huxham. C. & Vangen S. (1996). Key themes in the management of relationships between public and non-profit organizations. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 9(7): 5-17.
Innes. J.E. & Booher D.E. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. Routledge. London and New York.
Isett K.R. & Provan K.G. (2005). The Evolution of Dyadic Interorganizational Relationships in a Network of Publicly Funded Nonprofit Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 15(1): 149-165,
Isett K.R, Mergel I.A., LeRoux K., Mischen P.A., & Rethemeyer R.K. (2011). Networks in Public Administration Scholarship: Understanding Where We Are and Where We Need to Go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: 21(suppl 1): 57-73
Keast. R. (2004). Integrated public services: The role of networked arrangements. Unpublished PhD thesis. School of Management. Queensland University of Technology. Australia.
Keast. R.. Mandell. M.P.. Brown. K. and G. Woolcock (2004). Network structures: Working differently and changing expectations. Public Administration Review. 64(3): 363-371.
Kickert. W.J. M. Klijn. E-H. & Koppenjan J. (1997). Managing complex networks: Strategies for the public sector. Sage Publications: London.
Kickert. W.J.M. (2005). Distinctiveness in the Study of Public Management in Europe. Public Management Review. 7(4): 537-563.
Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policy. Boston: Little, Brown.
32
Klijn E.H. (2008). Governance and Governance Networks in Europe An assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public Management Review. 10 (4): 505 – 525.
Klijn E.H. & Skelcher C. (2007), Democracy and governance networks: compatible or not?. Public Administration, 85: 587–608.
Klijn E.H. &. Koppenjan J.F.M. (2000). Public Management and Policy Networks. Foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management Review. 2(2): 135 – 158.
Klijn E.H. &. Koppenjan J.F.M. (2006). Institutional design. Changing institutional features of networks. Public Management Review. 8 (1): 141 – 160.
Klijn E.H., Steijn B. & Edelenbos J. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public Administration, 88: 1063–1082.
Kooiman, J. (1993). Modern Governance: New Government–Society Interactions. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
Koppenjan. J. and Klijn E.H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks. Routledge. London & New York.
Laumann. E.O., Galaskiewicz. J & Marsden P.V. (1978). Community structures as interorganizational linkages. Annual Review of Sociology. 4: 455-484.
Lawless. M.W. (1981). Directed interorganizational systems: Network strategy making in public service delivery. Unpublished manuscript. California state University. Northrdige. California.
Mandell. M.P. (1988). Intergovernmental management in interorganizational networks: A revised perspective. International Journal of Public Administration. 11(4): 393-416.
Mandell. M.P. (1994). Managing interdependencies through program structures: a revised paradigm. American Review of Public Administration. 24(1): 99-121.
Mandell. M.P. (Ed) (2001). Getting results through collaboration: Networks and network structures for public policy and management. Quorum Books. Westport. Ct.
Mandell. M.P. (2008). Understanding the realities of collaborative networks. In M. Considinhe and S. Giguere (Eds). The theory and practice of local governance and economic development. pp 63-79. Palgrave Macmillan. New York.
Mandell. M.P., Keast R. (2008). Evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational relations through networks. Developing a framework for revised performance measures. Public Management Review. 10(6): 715 – 731
Marsh D. ed. (1998) Comparing Policy Networks in British Government Oxford: Clarendon Press. Marsh D. & Rhodes A. (1992). Policy Networks in British Government. London: Oxford University
Press. Mintrom M. (2000). Policy Entrepreneurs and School Choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press. Mitchell J.C. (1969). The Concept and Use of Social Networks. In Social Networks in Urban
Situations, edited by J.C. Mitchell, 1–50. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. Moreno J. (1934). Who Shall Survive? New York: Beacon Press. Nadel S.F. (1957). The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen and West. North D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. McGuire M. (2002). Managing Networks: Propositions on What Managers Do and Why They Do
It. Public Administration Review, 62: 599–609. McGuire M. & Agranoff R. (2011). The Limitations of public management networks. Public
Administration, 89(1): Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. Milward H.B. (1982). Interorganizational policy systems and research on public organizations.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 13(4):457-478.
33
Milward H.B., Provan K.G. (1998). Principles for Controlling Agents: The Political Economy of Network Structure. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 8 (2): 203-221.
Milward, H.B. and Provan, K.G. (2003), Managing the hollow state. Collaboration and contracting. Public Management Review. 5(1): 1 – 18.
Milward H.B., Provan K.G., Fish A., Isett K.R. & Huang K. Governance and Collaboration: An Evolutionary Study of Two Mental Health Networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 20(suppl 1): 25-41.
Meier K.J. & O'Toole L.J. (2003), Managerial Strategies and Behavior in Networks: A Model with Evidence from U.S. Public Education. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theroy. 11(3): 271-294
Meier, K.J. & O'Toole, L.J. (2003), Public Management and Educational Performance: The Impact of Managerial Networking. Public Administration Review. 63: 689–699.
Meier, K.J. & O'Toole, L.J. (2010), Beware of managers not bearing gifts: how management capacity augments the impact of managerial networking. Public Administration, 88: 1025–1044.
Molnar J.J. & Rogers. D.L. (1979). A comparative model of interorganizational conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24: 405-425.
Negandhi. A.R. (1980). Interorganization Theory. The Kent State University Press. Kent. Ohio. Nystrom. P.C. and Starbuck. W.H. (Eds) (1984). Handbook of organizational design. Volume I and
II. Oxford University Press. Oxford. O’Leary. R.. Bingham B.L & Gerard C. (2006). Special Issue on collaborative public management.
Public Administration Review. Supplement. 66:6. O'Toole L.J (1996). Hollowing the Infrastructure: Revolving Loan Programs and Network
Dynamics in the American States. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 6(2): 225-242.
O’Toole. Jr. L.J. (1997). Treating networks seriously: Practical and research based agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review. 57(1): 45-52.
O'Toole L.J. & Meier, K.J. (1995). Rational Choice and Policy Implementation: Implications for Interorganizational Network Management. The American Review of Public Administration. 25 (1): 43-57.
O'Toole L.J. & Meier, K.J. (1999). Modeling the Impact of Public Management: Implications of Structural Context. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: 9(4): 505-526.
O'Toole L.J. & Meier, K.J. (2004). Public Management in Intergovernmental Networks: Matching Structural Networks and Managerial Networking. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 14(4): 469-494
O'Toole L.J. & Meier, K.J. (2004). Desperately Seeking Selznick: Cooptation and the Dark Side of Public Management in Networks. Public Administration Review, 64: 681–693.
O'Toole L.J. & Meier, K.J. (2006). Networking in the Penumbra: Public Management, Cooptative Links, and Distributional Consequences. International Public Management Journal. 9 (3): 271 – 294.
Pedersen A.B. (2010). The fight over Danish nature: explaining policy network change and policy change. Public Administration, 88: 346–363.
Pennings. J. M. (1981) Strategically interdependent organizations. In J. P. Nystrom and H. Starbuck (Eds). Handbook of organizational design. vol I. pp433-455. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Perucci. R. and M. Pilsuk (1970). Leaders and ruling elites: The interorganizational bases of community power. American Sociological Review. 35: 1040 – 1057.
Porter. D. O. and Warner. D. C. (1979). Organizations and implementation structures. Unpublished manuscript. University of Texas. Austin.
34
Porter. D. O. (1980). Accounting for discretion and local environments in social experimentation and program administration: Some proposed alternative conceptualizations. Austin Texas. Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs.
Provan. K. G. (1983). The federation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review. 8(1):78-89.
Provan. K.G. & Milward H.B. (1991). Institutional-Level Norms and Organizational Involvement in a Service-Implementation Network Institutional-Level Norms and Organizational Involvement in a Service-Implementation Network. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: (1) 4: 391-417.
Provan. K.G. &. Milward H.B. (1995). Theory of interorganizational effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly. 40: 1-13.
Provan. K.G. & Milward H.B. (2001). Do networks really work? Public Administration Review. 51(4):414-423.
Provan K.G. & Sebastian J.G. 1998. ‘Network Within Networks: Service Link Overlap, Organizational Cliques, and Network Effectiveness’, Academy of Management Journal. 41(4): 453–63.
Provan K.G., Veazie M.A., Staten L. K. & Teufel-Shone, N.I. (2005), The Use of Network Analysis to Strengthen Community Partnerships. Public Administration Review, 65: 603–613.
Provan K.G., Huang K., & Milward H.B. (2009). The Evolution of Structural Embeddedness and Organizational Social Outcomes in a Centrally Governed Health and Human Services Network. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19(4): 873-893.
Raab J. (2002). Where Do Policy Networks Come From? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 12(4): 581-622.
Rogers. E. M. & Argawala-Rogers R. (1976). Communication in organizations. Free Press: New York.
Rogers D. L. & Whetten, D.A. eds (1982) Interorganizational Coordination: Theory, Research, and Implementation, Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Sabatier P. & Hank Jenkins-Smith. 1999. The Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Assessment.In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by PaulSabatier, 117–67. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Schneider M., Scholz J., Lubell M., Mindruta D., & Edwardsen M. 2003. Building Consensual Institutions: Networks and the National Estuary Program. American Journal of Political Science. 47(1): 142–57.
Schmitter, P.C. & Lehmbruch G. (1979). Trends toward corporatist intermediation, edited by Philippe C. Schmitter and Gerhard Lehmbruch Sage.
Skelcher C. (2005), Jurisdictional Integrity, Polycentrism, and the Design of Democratic Governance. Governance, 18: 89–110.
Skelcher C. (2010). Fishing in Muddy Waters: Principals, Agents, and Democratic Governance in Europe. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20(suppl 1): 61-75.
Stern. R. N. (1979). The development of an interorganizational control network: The case of intercollegiate athletics. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24(2): 243-266.
Taylor, A. J. (1992), Issue networks and the restructuring of the British and west German coal industries in the 1980s. Public Administration, 70: 47–66.
Thompson. J.D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tichy. N.M. (1984). Networks as organizations. In P.C. Nystrum and W.H. Starbuck (Eds)
Handbook of organizational design: Volume 2. pp 225-249. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Tichy. N.M., Tushman. M.L. & S. Fombrun (1979). Social network analysis for organizations. Academy of Management Review. 4(4): 507-519.
Toke D. & Marsh, D. (2003), Policy networks and the GM crops issue: assessing the utility of a dialectical model of policy networks. Public Administration, 81: 229–251.
35
Toke D. (2010), Politics by heuristics: policy networks with a focus on actor resources, as illustrated by the case of renewable energy policy under new labour. Public Administration, 88: 764–781.
Turk. H. (1970). Interorganizational networks in urban society: Initial perspectives and comparative research. American Sociological Review. 35: 1-9.
Turk H. (1973). Comparative urban structures from an interorganizational perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly. 18: 37-55.
Turk. H. (1977). Organizations in modern life. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. Voets J., Van Dooren W., De Rynck F. (2008). A Framework for Assessing the Performance of
Policy Networks. Public Management Review. 10 (6): 773 – 790. Üsdiken B. & Pasadeos Y. 1995. Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A
Comparison of Co-Citation Networks, Organization Studies, 16(3), pp. 503–27. Warren. R.L. (1967). The interorganizational field as a focus for investigation. Administrative
Science Quarterly. 12(3): 396-419. Warren. R.L. (1973). The community in America. Rand McNally: Chicago. Warren. R.L. Burgunder. A.F. & Rose S.M. (1974). The structure of urban reform. Heath:
Lexington. Massachusetts. Walker J. (1969). The Diffusion of Innovations among the American States. American Political
Science Review 63(3): 880–99. Williamson O. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies. New York: Free Press. Williamson O. (1981). The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach. American
Journal of Sociology. 87(3): 548–77. Zald. M. (1966). Organizations as policies: An analysis of community organization agencies. Social
Forces. 2:56-65. Zeitz. G. (1980). Interorganizational relationships and social structure: A critique of some aspects.
In A. R. Negandhi (Ed). Interorganization Theory. pp 39-48. Kent Comparative Research Institute: Kent State University. Kent. Ohio.
Wright. D. S. (1983). Managing the intergovernmental scene: The changing drama of federalism. intergovernmental relations. and intergovernmental management. In W. P. Eddy (Ed). Handbook of organizational management. 417 -454. Marcel Dekker. New York.