The Pros And Cons Of Policy Networks

Therefore, while the concept of stakeholders is more enshrined in individuals and institutions that take part in policy formulation and identification of alternatives, policy networks is more about the systems put in place that mediate in the public policy making process and identification of alternatives to existing policies.
Policy networks include special interest groups as well as citizen groups. In its inherent sense, special interest groups are communities operating within the context of a larger organization of persons and industries among others with the aim of advocating for a specific interest.
Like special interest groups, citizen groups also seek to achieve a specific interest though this is always perceived to be of public good,

This would solve the problem once and for all.
Consequences of the Alternative Methods
Replacing an existing policy as a source of policy alternative has its benefits though they tend to be more short-term in nature. The costs of such an approach are relatively lower compared to a policy approach that involves addressing the root causes of the problem. Therefore, in the short term, the benefits can be felt in terms of improved service delivery.
This serves as a major advantage the elected officials as part of the policy network. It is because, in the inherent nature of politics, policy imperatives with a short turnaround time tend to be well received when compared to those whose turnaround time is long.
However, some sections of the policy network such as citizen groups are negatively impacted. This is because failure to provide a permanent policy alternative will lead to the problem recurring

These factors make up the evaluation criteria. One of the most common evaluation criteria is the cost (Desmond, 2007). The cost of instituting a policy alternative has a direct bearing on its likelihood of adoption with those having a higher cost likely to be shot down by policy networks.
The ease of communicability of the policy alternative to the public is also an evaluation criterion. In its inherent sense, the public prefers policy alternatives that are simple to comprehend and ones that they can easily connect with their personal lives (Desmond, 2007). The extent to which a policy alternative is politically tenable is also a factor alongside its level of robustness.
However, it is cost and political tenability that are the most crucial elements of the evaluation criteria. This is because the public is generally averse to policy alternatives that attract high costs regardless of the level of robustness and cost. The fact that the process is driven by elected officials (they are a central part of the policy network) also means that a policy alternative that does not increase the probability of political survival is unlikely to be