Pluralist model of public policy
Think tanks
Interest groups
Pre-election
party policy
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Public opinion
Lobbyists
Pluralist model of public policy
Interest groups
Pre-election
party policy
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Public oinion
Lobbyists
Pluralist model of public policy
Interest groups
Pre-election
party policy
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Lobbyists
Pluralist model of public policy
Interest groups
Pre-election
party policy
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Pluralist model of public policy
Interest groups
Pre-election
party policy
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Pluralist model of public policy
Interest groups
Post election
government policy
Public policy
Civil servants
Traditional model of executive power
Prime minister (directs overall policy)
Cabinet (directs individual departmental policy)
Civil service (implements policy)
The Core Executive
(Taken from Peter Dorey, Policy Making in Britain, Figure 3.1, p. 50)
Core executive relations
1. Actors possess resources
 legal
 constitutional
 political
 hierarchical
 technical
 informational
2. Bargaining between actors involves exchange of resources
3. Power is based on dependency – no one can act without support from other
actors
4. Structural and institutional constraints apply to actors
5. Dependency varies with circumstances
Further reading: M. J. Smith, The Core Executive in Britain (Palgrave, 1999),
ch. 4
Interest groups and policy networks
Origin of policy network theory:
‘Iron triangles’ of US policy making – 1960s
 Based on resource exchange
 Dependencies between actors
 Degree of dependence of each actor can
vary with circumstances

Policy communities & issue networks (1)
(D. Marsh and R A W Rhodes, ‘Policy networks in British politics’, in Marsh and
Rhodes (eds), Policy Networks in British Government (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1992)
Policy community:
Limited number of participants
 Close links between members based on
resource exchange
 Shared values
 Balanced power between members
e.g. NFU/Ministry of Agriculture

Policy communities & issue networks (2)
(D. Marsh and R A W Rhodes, ‘Policy networks in British politics’, in Marsh and
Rhodes (eds), Policy Networks in British Government (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1992)
Issue network:
Large number of participants
 Diverse values
 Based on consultation, not resource exchange
 Unequal power
e.g. fox hunting

Criticism of network theory



Problem of identifying actors
Descriptive, not analytic
Artificial patterns?
(e.g., is the NFU-Ministry of Agriculture relationship really
comparable to the relationship between the pro- and anti-foxhunting lobbies?)