User:Williamskel4/sandbox

Annotated Bibliography

Eckert, S. (2016). The Governance of Markets, Sustainability and Supply. Toward a European Energy Policy. Journal Of Contemporary European Research, 12(1), 502-517.

In this article the author examines the extent to which European policymakers have done well in gaining government capacity. Discovering the framework that Europe uses to addresses special interest groups will help us better understand the United States dealing with the same issues.

Kukk, C. L. (2001). Ties that bind: The effect of transnational issue networks on the international politics of water (Order No. 3021584). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (250785177). Retrieved from http://libproxy.txstate.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/250785177?accountid=5683

This dissertation examines why there are water scares in certain regions of the world and how to share fresh water. The author argues that transnational issue networks play significant roles in fostering interstate cooperation over international rivers in those water scare regions. It deals with three main topics: informing and educating indigenous experts on hydrological issues, conditioning technical and economic assistance upon levels of cooperation and coordinating state interests in order to negotiate and monitor agreements.

Marshall, N. (1995). Policy Communities, Issue Networks and the Formulation of Australian Higher Education Policy. Higher Education, 30(3), 273-293. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3447851

This articles discusses the changing style of government-interest group interaction in Australia over the decade. I think that exploring other countries and policies regarding issue networks can help better under the United States’.

Shim, J., Park, C., & Wilding, M. (2015). Identifying policy frames through semantic network analysis: an examination of nuclear energy policy across six countries. Policy Sciences, 48(1), 51-83. doi:10.1007/s11077-015-9211-3

This article discusses the network analysis to investigate energy policies in six different countries, including: United States, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Japan, and South Korea. It discusses the similarities and differences, and arguments which relate to the groups of issue networks talking about energy security, clean energy and nuclear safety. I am curious to see how this will help and be incorporated into our Wiki page.

Vaccaro, A., Santana, A., & Wood, D. (2009). Introduction to the Special Issue on the Impact of Network Ethics on Business Practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 441-446. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40863680

This article focuses on the issue networks and how they work with businesses. It examines how networks develop, enact and enforce ethical norms. In this particular scholarly source, there are 15 other sources that explore and support the claims made. We can use this in our Wiki page under a business tab, possibly.   

Article evaluation

The article I am evaluating is “Issue Network”, which is the alliance of various interest groups and individuals who come together to promote a certain government policy. In this article in particular, each fact is referenced with a reliable and appropriate source. Even though there are only five sources for the entire article, considering the article is short, they are still reliable. Two of the sources are links that you can follow on the internet, I feel like they are reliable because the information given isn’t bias and is from a .net website. The other three sources are found in textbooks and other books, again, the information that goes with these facts aren’t bias so I feel like they are reliable. Some of the sources are around 10 years old so maybe so newer information and facts would benefit this Wiki page.

I wouldn’t say I got distracted by this, but at first I didn’t understand the point of talking about iron triangles, but once I started reading the paragraph, I figured out why they included that in informing Wiki users about issue networks. Iron triangles are more of the relationship between private parties and government agencies. Basically, one seeks to help the public and one the private, so it’s important to learn about the other when talking about issue networks.

This article, I believe, does not have any heavy (or any at all) bias. Like stated earlier, the article’s sources come from legitimate and reliable sources so that we know they aren’t there to make us believe one thing, that is not a fact. A .net website is a neutral source and so are textbooks used for school, because these documents report facts to inform the public, not in hopes to persuade their viewpoints.

There might be a underrepresentation of information about the topic as a whole. The article is relatively short and I didn’t completely grasp the subject matter after reading the article. I think that the article needs to be updated, with more sources and even more examples. There could be links to examples of this happening in real life instances to help readers better understand issue networks. Some of the sources are a bit outdated, which I already touched on a little. One article is from 2004, which is over ten years ago of course, I’m sure the information in  this particular textbook has changed, considering that twelve years is a lot, especially in the world of public service and administration.

I clicked on the first source and was actually surprised that it didn’t have much to do at all with issue network, it was pretty much a google link to things with “issues”. Overall, I think this article has the potential to be good, but considering the outdated links and short length, people might overlook it when trying to find good information about issue networks. Since Wiki already has a bad reputation in the academic world, I think it’s key to help articles like these so that people get good, correct information about subjects were learning about.

Issue Network

*I re-did the intro and I think it's a little better. Tell me what you guys think.*

Sweet, the links WORK! I think that's way better than the original, awesome job! - Miranda

Issue networks are an alliance of various interest groups and individuals who unite in order to promote a common cause or agenda in a way that influences government policy. Issue networks can be either domestic or international in scope depending on their collective goal. With the rise of the internet, many interest groups have turned to online resources, such as blogs and social media, to promote and spread their cause because of its low cost and high efficiency in outreach. An interest group’s tactics vary depending on their goals and purpose. In developed countries, issue networks often push for a change in policy within the government bureaucracy. An example includes the wide ranging network of environmental groups and individuals who push for more environmental regulation in government policy. Other issue networks may revolve around such controversial issues as abortion, gun ownership rights, and drug laws. In the most extreme circumstances issue networks may seek to achieve their means through violence, such as terrorist organizations looking to overthrow existing governments all together. In the U.S, the most common tactic of effective issue networks is the role they play in what is called Iron Triangles. This is the term used to describe the three way back and forth communication process between Congress, Bureaucracies, and the interest groups that make up an issue network where they discuss policy and agendas in order to compromise on solutions to satisfy each others goals.

I wasn't 100% sure where to put this, and I'm also pretty awful with technology so this is a bit difficult for me but here is the part I redid, I kept some of the original because I wasn't sure where they found the information so I left it, just expanded and added another Source - Cole

Iron Triangles and Issue Networks

Iron triangles are three-pronged relationships that are used between interest groups, generally these interest groups are comprised of businesses, congressional committees, and Federal agencies set to deal with a certain issue. These Iron triangles do not have the general welfare of the public in mind, these are for the furthering of favorable policies for the interest group. For example, an iron triangle dealing with fossil fuels would be comprised of a business or corporation dealing in fossil fuels, a congressional committee who oversees fossil fuel laws and regulations, and a fossil fuel Federal Agency which makes sure these laws are obeyed. However, Iron triangles do not benefit the public, they only benefit the players within the Iron Triangle. Some cases these Iron Triangles not only benefit inside the ring, but often do so at the expense of the constituencies that Congress and these Federal bureaucracy’s are supposed to represent.

Issue networks, are not the same as Iron triangles for several reasons. One of the main differences between iron triangles and issue networks is that Issue Networks are generally free-forming groups of people in the public sector who form a coalition together, not through a congressional committee, or a Federal Agency but are bound together to accomplish a task at hand. These groups, most often, once the goal has been accomplished either A, break up and only form if the issue is brought back up, or B, find another issue similar in scope which they want to tackle. Another difference between Iron Triangles and Issue networks is that sometimes they can be at antagonistic with one another. Referring back to the paragraph above, if we take an Iron Triangle Issue network who wants to build a pipeline, an issue network can form as a group of citizens who oppose it. They may oppose it for various reasons, but what brings them together temporarily is to not allow it to be built. If the Issue Network is successful in blocking the Fossil Fuel pipeline, then the Issue Network may dissolve because the task has been accomplished. Another example is the case in regards to environmental issue networks that disagree with the lax environmental standards pursued by private energy companies. It is also important to note often different Issue networks can also compete with one another, as in the case of pro-life and pro-choice sides of abortion.

The source is this Gais, Thomas L., Mark A. Peterson, and Jack L. Walker. "Interest Groups, Iron Triangles and Representative Institutions in American National Government." British Journal of Political Science 14, no. 2 (1984):

Other countries

From a stable policy community, through a period of substantial change under firm government control, to a densely populated and competitive environment comprised of issue networks. In countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom, government is returning to a more interactive strategy regarding issue networks. In other countries, group input is a vital component of the policy-making process, through that process bureaucratic expertise is built-up and maintained. The existence of knowledgeable government agencies is necessary to balance the demands of competing groups and thereby ensure greater stability of policy outcomes. For example, in Australia, higher education is a good example of how the government is listening to clientele groups (issue networks) less than they were in the past due to the complexity of universities and the higher education system.