Policy Subsystems, Networks and the Tools of Public Management

Milward, H. Brinton; Wamsley, Gary L.

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-5089-4_7

Cited by 38 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Milward & Walmsley, 1984;Burstein, 1991;Rhodes, 1997;Marsh, 1998). Derived from the rich body of literature emanating from critical discussions of Pluralist and Corporatist theories of policy formulation (e.g.…”

Section: Tourism Network and Destination Managementmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In this context, enduring networks of actors, committed to a particular set of ideas, continuously engage in the identification, framing, discussion and negotiation of policy issues, problems and opportunities (e.g. Milward & Walmsley, 1984;Ham & Hill, 1993;de Leon, 1998). Networks have also become attractive metaphors for explaining policymaking across public-private sector divides where power and responsibility are diffused.…”

Section: Tourism Network and Destination Managementmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tourism Network and Destination Managementmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Tourism Network and Destination Managementmentioning

confidence: 98%

Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Nonetheless, most of the networks themselves can readily be viewed as publicsector networks, since much of the funding that is received by participating agencies is public. While some authors have focused on policy networks, mostly involving relations among federal, state, and local government entities (Derthick 1970;Laumann and Knoke 1987;Milward and Wamsley 1985), we focus on networks of service providers operating in local communities. The recent devolution movement in the U.S. federal government (Smith and Lipsky 1993) and other governments around the world has reinforced the importance of dealing with and paying for problems at the local level.…”

Section: Issues For Evaluating Network Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Networks Really Work? A Framework for Evaluating Public‐Sector Organizational Networks

Provan

Milward

2001

Public Administration Review

Self Cite

1,056

405

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although cooperative, interorganizational networks have become a common mechanism for delivery of public services, evaluating their effectiveness is extremely complex and has generally been neglected. To help resolve this problem, we discuss the evaluation of networks of community-based, mostly publicly funded health, human service, and public welfare organizations. Consistent with pressures to perform effectively from a broad range of key stakeholders, we argue that networks must be evaluated at three levels of analysis: community, network, and organization/participant levels. While the three levels are related, each has its own set of effectiveness criteria that must be considered. The article offers a general discussion of network effectiveness, followed by arguments explaining effectiveness criteria and stakeholders at each level of analysis. Finally, the article examines how effectiveness at one level of network analysis may or may not match effectiveness criteria at another level and the extent to which integration across levels may be possible.

show abstract

“…Policy networks have, therefore, emerged as powerful organising perspectives to understand relational conceptions of policymaking (e.g., Burstein, 1991;Dredge, 2001Dredge, , 2003 Kerr, 2003;Marsh, 1998;Milward & Wamsley, 1985;Rhodes, 1997;Tyler & Dinan, 2001). Actor or stakeholder networks are considered to provide a key role in our understanding of how policy systems learn, innovate and act upon themselves (Dluhy, 1981 cited by Considine, 1994, p. 104).…”

Section: Identifying Policy Networkmentioning

confidence: 98%

Policy communities, networks and issue cycles in tourism destination systems

Wray

2009

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper demonstrates how concepts derived from policy community, policy network and issues management theories can be used to understand the roles, activities and interactions of government, corporate and pressure group stakeholders engaged in tourism policy, planning and management in destination contexts. It shows the relevance and utility of an "integrated issue lifecycle approach" to trace the evolution of tourism policy, planning and destination management within specific destination contexts. The application of this approach is demonstrated through a case analysis of the tourism policy and planning system that underpins the destination system of Byron Bay, a significant domestic and international destination on the East Coast of Australia. The underlying premise adopted for this study is that the examination of the antecedents of tourism policy and planning processes, within particular destination contexts, can lead to an understanding of the driving values and ideas that have led to contemporary tourism policy issues and problems.

show abstract

Policy Subsystems, Networks and the Tools of Public Management

Cited by 38 publications

References 11 publications

Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism

Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism

Do Networks Really Work? A Framework for Evaluating Public‐Sector Organizational Networks

Policy communities, networks and issue cycles in tourism destination systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About