Search results

While Chapter 3 highlights contextual conditions that foster the formation of policy networks, Chapter 5 highlights contextual conditions that impede the formation of policy networks. The overarching question of this chapter is the following: What are the factors that hinder cross-sectoral arrangements from becoming collaborative in complex policy settings such as low- and middle-income countries with a tradition in centralized policy making? In an attempt to address this question, this study provides a detailed assessment of all cross-sectoral arrangements within the Turkish health sector focusing on the post-2003 period. Within this framework, three types of networks will be examined including (a) consultative networks where stakeholders come together primarily to legitimize certain government policies within national level health policy platforms; (b) cluster networks where stakeholder interaction falls short of becoming collaborative due to diverging interests and persistent competition at the regional level; and (c) patronage networks where governmental actors and a selected number of NGOs linked by clientelism serve as a bridge between the ruling party and its constituency at the community level. Unlike policy networks, these actor constellations observed at different levels of governance do not serve the purpose of policy collaboration. On the contrary, they have the potential to trigger politicization, fragmentation, and even polarization at the social level, especially through the distribution of selective benefits. Ultimately, this chapter aims to rise to the challenge of policy collaboration by assessing the impediments to network collaboration based on insights from the Turkish case.

This study is an attempt to (a) introduce Turkey as a country case with statist policy tradition and authoritarian political culture, yet, a growing importance of cross-sectoral collaboration in various policy areas, as an opportunity to conduct network research beyond advanced democracies (Chapter 1); (b) develop an integrated framework for the study of policy networks across country cases and policy settings at the sub-national level through the utilization of Network Collaborative Capacity Index (Chapter 2); (c) trace the contextual conditions that led to the formation of policy networks within the health sector from 2011 to 2015 in Turkey (Chapter 3); (d) examine those mechanisms that maximize collaboration along the structural, relational, and institutional dimensions of networks (Chapter 4); and (d) assess the cultural and structural impediments that inhibit cross-sectoral arrangements from becoming collaborative and influencing policy processes and outcomes (Chapter 5). This concluding chapter focuses on the theoretical significance as well as the practical effectiveness of the policy networks under consideration in an attempt to link the local practice of network collaboration with more general theories of governance.

Women's movements played a significant role in the recent campaigns for constitutional reform in the UK. Their aim was to overturn the prevailing male domination in politics. This article explores this process in Wales, a polity where the women's movement was comparatively weak and fragmented. In contrast to more familiar patterns of mass mobilization, “strategic women” used elite advocacy and “insider strategies” to engender the process of constitutional reform. Thus, this case study tests three widely held theoretical assumptions: that engendering state restructuring must be combined with broader activism; that insider strategies are more effective in influencing state actions; and, that the elite nature of such strategies means they can be neither democratic nor inclusive. The research findings detail the ensuing rise of state feminism and gains in women's representation and provide evidence of a paradox whereby elite action may translate into greater democratization in contexts where women's movements are comparatively underdeveloped.

This book is aimed at extending the study of network collaboration beyond the context of advanced democracies through the exploration of policy networks in Turkey – a country with statist policy style and authoritarian political culture. The focus here will be on cross-sectoral collaboration taking place within the Turkish health sector – a policy area that has been steadily improving with the initiation of the Health Transformation Programme (HTP) in 2003. To date, many scholars have studied the outcomes of the HTP reforms on the healthcare system including indicators such as healthcare access, health insurance coverage and healthcare services. However, despite the transformative nature of the program, a limited number of studies have assessed the impact of HTP reforms on changing policy and governance patterns in Turkey. Considering this gap in the literature, the aim of this book is to empirically examine the context, capacity and consequences of cross-sectoral collaboration within the health sector in Turkey through a micro- and meso-level investigation of policy networks developed in the sub-areas of public health, medical industry, and health tourism covering the years between 2011 and 2015. Furthermore, this book provides an account of those factors that impede cross-sectoral arrangements from turning into venues of policy collaboration. Such juxtaposition is designed to enhance the understanding of policy networks as conceptual devices and practical tools of collaboration in public policy.

This paper seeks to set out a framework for assessing whether and how to intervene in the standardisation of new technologies, based on the experience of Ofcom, the UK converged communications regulator.

As part of its duties to promote the interests of consumers and citizens, Ofcom needed to decide whether or not to intervene in the standardisation of wholesale access to superfast broadband, in the context of the roll out of the next generation of telecommunications access networks.

Ofcom found that the case for intervention was finely balanced between, on the one hand, the risk to innovation and, on the other, the consumer welfare generated by the right combination of standardisation and network effects. Ofcom identified four basic models of intervention: take no formal action; require that infrastructure providers use open standards, without specifying which standards should be used; mandate a particular standard to be used; and specify the standard to be used. Ofcom developed a policy framework that assesses interventions in terms of prospects for innovation and network effects. This led it to choose an approach that initially involves no formal action. Instead, Ofcom facilitates industry leadership of standardisation whilst monitoring the emerging competitive environment and signalling both its desired outcomes and its determination to take action if competition does not develop.

It is too early to say whether this approach will ultimately prove successful, however the framework allows for progressive strengthening of intervention if competition is not forthcoming.

The paper delivers value in conceptualising and clarifying the overall approach to standardisation.

Networks are by now popular inter-organizational coordination modes. However, there is still much to know regarding how networks are governed and how their governance develops and changes through time.

This paper addresses the research question how does the governance form of networks develops over time by empirically studying the European telecommunications regulatory network using a case study approach.

We find that the network’s governance system is determined by the dialectical tension between network members (National Regulatory Agencies) and an external very influential body (the European Commission).

This tension unifies the group in the classic external conflict–internal cohesion fashion. We also identify a second dialectical tension internal to the network among its members. The tensions are triggered by evaluations carried out by an external actor (the European Commission). In general, the process observed confirms the propositions that predict a formalizing of the governance as the network grows older.

This research is based on a single case, a broader analysis of other regulatory networks among network industries at the European Union level will help researchers to establish a more comprehensive picture on the development of the governance form of this specific subset of goal-directed networks.

Team management and teamwork are critical in the cockpit of a jet aircraft. The crew manage a complex set of interactions on which numerous people depend for their safety. Airlines worldwide have now recognised the need to train aircrew in team management principles. Until recently attention to the management side of flight operations has limited itself to the rostering arrangements and backroom office systems and procedures that support aircrew. The Aircrew Team Management Programme (ATM) designed by the authors for Trans Australia Airlines consists of a three‐day workshop with follow‐up sessions and simulator training. The prevailing culture in airlines is examined. An action research approach to gathering data for the management programme, its educational design and development, its key elements and implementation and tuition are discussed. It has been accepted by the crew as a valid and relevant form of training.

The key features of the Air‐crew Team Management Workshop, designed for and in consultation with Australian Airlines, is described. The programme was decided on to introduce special training for crew members on teamwork issues, given the evidence that human factors are a major cause of aviation accidents and are regularly mentioned in incident reports. The design and development of the programme are examined, followed by an evaluation and assessment.

This paper aims to report “positively deviant” experiences of three public sector networks seeking to enhance organizational and system level capacities. It is the authors' thesis that the knowledge base concerning the true benefits and pitfalls of networks can be captured and interpreted only through intense, ongoing learning effort embedded in practice on the ground, combined with sustained in‐depth observation and collaborative research.

The paper describes through case examples why and how different kinds of networks within different jurisdictional contexts and different organizational cultures are being used to enhance the climate for change towards better health care and improved health. The authors describe the contexts, structures, processes and impacts of three “positively deviant” networks.

The network form can provide opportunity for nurturing changes and innovations within large organizational and complex system environments. This opportunity to create additional and different pathways for improved decision making and service provision comes with challenges that should be recognized.

The authors' experiences indicate that, for networks, a key component of success relates to pulling and pushing at the edges of multiple connections and boundaries in “positively deviant” ways. This pushing and pulling is intrinsically evidence of organizational and intraorganizational learning – in the examples presented – for the improvement of health care and health.

Other networks can learn from the reported experiences and add their own cases to the empirical understanding of how networks can make a difference; this in turn can help the conceptual and theoretical understanding of them.