|
|
|
| Research on the Identification of Heterogeneous Network Policy Collaboration Groups in Complex Situations |
| Guo Hua, Jiang Ying, Hou Baiyi, Pang Ruoxin, Liu Liwen |
| Business School of Hohai University, Nanjing 211100 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Diverse actors construct collaborative networks to formulate and implement policies in complex policy situations. Policy collaboration groups are small, cohesive subsets of actors who engage in collaborative actions involving specific policy goals or tools. Identifying and understanding these groups is crucial for clarifying collaborative structures and interpreting collaborative patterns. However, existing research often separates policy networks from policy processes, making it difficult to perform a holistic analysis of policy information. This situation leads to poor handling of conflicts and ambiguities within groups. This paper presents a systematic perspective and proposes a method for identifying heterogeneous network policy collaboration groups based on a “network+process” two-dimensional framework aimed at analyzing diverse actors, policy goals, tools, and collaborative relationships in complex policy situations. A case study verifies the feasibility of the proposed method, which characterizes the heterogeneity of groups and their boundaries, composition, and connotations and provides new ideas and empirical support for a deeper understanding of policy collaboration system features and models.
|
|
Received: 23 April 2024
|
|
|
|
1 McGee Z A, Jones B D. Reconceptualizing the policy subsystem: integration with complexity theory and social network analysis[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2019, 47(S1): S138-S158.
2 张剑, 李鑫. 复杂情境下系统性政策问题的应对: 政策组合理论的研究评述[J]. 公共管理与政策评论, 2022, 11(3): 155-168.
3 吴江, 王凯利. 社会技术融合: 政策信息学的由来、范畴与框架[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2024, 50(4): 53-70.
4 Angst M. Bottom-up identification of subsystems in complex governance systems[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2020, 48(3): 782-805.
5 Jones B D, Theriault S M, Whyman M C. The great broadening: how the vast expansion of the policymaking agenda transformed American politics[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019.
6 Wu J, Wang K L, He C C, et al. Characterizing the patterns of China’s policies against COVID-19: a bibliometric study[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2021, 58(4): 102562.
7 Delreux T, Earsom J. Missed opportunities: the impact of internal compartmentalisation on EU diplomacy across the international regime complex on climate change[J]. Journal of European Public Policy, 2024, 31(9): 2960-2985.
8 Teisman G, van Buuren A, Gerrits L. Managing complex governance systems: dynamics, self-organization and coevolution in public investments[M]. New York: Routledge, 2009.
9 李文钊. 倡导联盟框架: 探究政策过程中的子系统效应[J]. 行政论坛, 2023, 30(1): 94-107.
10 Baumgartner F R, Jones B D, Mortensen P B. Punctuated equilibrium theory: explaining stability and change in public policymaking[M]// Theories of the Policy Process. 4th ed. New York: Routledge, 2018.
11 Burstein P. Policy domains: organization, culture, and policy outcomes[J]. Annual Review of Sociology, 1991, 17: 327-350.
12 Marsh D, Rhodes R A W. Policy networks in British government[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
13 O’Toole L J. Rational choice and policy implementation: implications for interorganizational network management[J]. The American Review of Public Administration, 1995, 25(1): 43-57.
14 John P, Cole A. Models of local decision-making networks in Britain and France[J]. Policy & Politics, 1995, 23(4): 303-312.
15 Sternkopf M. International actors and national policies: the introduction of the national care system in Uruguay[J]. Policy Sciences, 2024, 57(3): 639-661.
16 Milhorance C, Le Coq J F, Sabourin E. Dealing with cross-sectoral policy problems: an advocacy coalition approach to climate and water policy integration in northeast Brazil[J]. Policy Sciences, 2021, 54(3): 557-578.
17 Koebele E A, Crow D A. Mitigating conflict with collaboration: reaching negotiated agreement amidst belief divergence in environmental governance[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2023, 51(2): 439-458.
18 Metz F, Lieberherr E, Schmucki A, et al. Policy change through negotiated agreements: the case of greening Swiss agricultural policy[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2021, 49(3): 731-756.
19 Weible C M, Ingold K, Nohrstedt D, et al. Sharpening advocacy coalitions[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2020, 48(4): 1054-1081.
20 Yl?-Anttila T, Gronow A, Karimo A, et al. Breaking the treadmill? Climate change policy networks and the prospects for low carbon futures in Australia and Finland[J]. Society & Natural Resources, 2020, 33(11): 1380-1398.
21 Ansell C, Reckhow S, Kelly A. How to reform a reform coalition: outreach, agenda expansion, and brokerage in urban school reform[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2009, 37(4): 717-743.
22 Ingold K. Network structures within policy processes: coalitions, power, and brokerage in Swiss climate policy[J]. Policy Studies Journal, 2011, 39(3): 435-459.
23 曹玲静, 张志强. 政策信息学视角下政策文本量化方法研究进展[J]. 图书与情报, 2022(6): 70-82.
24 曹蓉, 刘彦芝, 王铮. 中国慈善政策合作网络与主题热点演化研究——基于SNA和LDA的大数据分析[J]. 社会保障研究, 2023(1): 41-52.
25 张敏, 刘华玮, 沈嘉裕, 等. 变与不变: 我国乡村振兴政策主题、府际关系和扩散态势的变迁研究[J]. 图书情报知识, 2022, 39(5): 56-66.
26 王健, 杨柳, 安实. 政府数据开放政策主体协同网络演化研究——基于中央层面政策文本量化分析[J/OL]. 北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版), (2022-09-21) [2025-02-23]. https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.13766/j.bhsk.1008-2204.2022.0725.
27 裴瑞敏, 姜影, 肖尤丹. 科技人才政策变迁与政策主体协同网络演化研究——基于对1978—2020年政策文本的分析[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2022, 43(8): 32-46.
28 张桂蓉, 雷雨, 周付军. 社会网络视角下政府应急组织协同治理网络结构研究——以中央层面联合发文政策为例[J]. 暨南学报(哲学社会科学版), 2021, 43(11): 90-104.
29 李永立, 刘超, 张涵钧, 等. 面向政策信息学与政策智能的网络分析技术[J]. 中国科学基金, 2021, 35(5): 726-741.
30 吕立远, 黄萃. 网络分析方法在公共管理与公共政策研究中的应用[J]. 公共管理评论, 2022, 4(4): 149-178.
31 张维冲, 王芳, 赵洪. 基于全要素网络构建的大规模政策知识关联聚合研究[J]. 情报学报, 2023, 42(3): 289-303.
32 张鑫蕊, 张海涛, 栾宇, 等. 突发事件信息协同超网络的构建方法研究[J]. 情报学报, 2023, 42(9): 1040-1051.
33 段忠贤, 刘强强, 黄月又. 政策信息学: 大数据驱动的政策科学发展趋势[J]. 电子政务, 2019(8): 2-13.
34 曹玲静, 张志强. 政策信息学的发展与前瞻[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(21): 38-50.
35 周毅, 陈必坤, 马江华, 等. 基于文本量化分析的我国公共数据治理政策发展研究[J]. 情报学报, 2023, 42(4): 436-452.
36 Lom M, Pribyl O. Smart city model based on systems theory[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2021, 56: 102092.
37 Sun Y Z, Han J W, Yan X F, et al. Heterogeneous information networks: the past, the present, and the future[J]. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 2022, 15(12): 3807-3811.
38 Rousseau D. General systems theory: its present and potential[J]. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2015, 32(5): 522-533.
39 Huang C, Yang C, Su J. Policy change analysis based on “policy target-policy instrument” patterns: a case study of China’s nuclear energy policy[J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 117(2): 1081-1114.
40 Zhang S L, Yang L T, Feng J, et al. A tensor-network-based big data fusion framework for Cyber-Physical-Social Systems (CPSS)[J]. Information Fusion, 2021, 76: 337-354.
41 Salamon L M. The tools of government: a guide to the new governance[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
42 Leman C K, Nelson R H. The rise of managerial federalism: an assessment of benefits and costs[J]. Environmental Law, 1982, 12(4): 981-1029.
43 Stanton T H. A state of risk: will government sponsored enterprises be the next financial crisis?[M]. New York: HarperCollins, 1991.
44 May P, Burby R. Making sense out of regulatory enforcement[J]. Law & Policy, 1998, 20(2): 157-182.
45 Weiss J A. Ideas and inducements in mental health policy[J]. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1990, 9(2): 178-200.
46 Kelman S. Procurement and public management: the fear of discretion and the quality of government performance[M]. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1990.
47 Conlan T J, Wrightson M T, Beam D R. Taxing choices: the politics of tax reform[M]. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1990.
48 Steuerle C E, Ooms V D, Peterson G E, et al. Vouchers and the provision of public services[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000. |
|
|
|
