Policy-making involves a wider set of actors than just the state. Important ways that governments interact with policy networks are through public consultations, engagements, and partnerships. Are you critical of such activities; or do you believe they are useful?
Rhodes defines policy networks as sets of informal and formal institutional linkages between governmental and non-government actors around shared if endlessly negotiated interests and beliefs in public policymaking and implementation. The importance of policy networking in any state or country cannot be ignored. In a democratic government, policy networking is a basic principle in the making of policies that touch on issues of public governance.
Democracy and policy networks are pairs. They work to complete and to provide good services to the citizens. Moreover, policy networks, or non-state actors such as the public, businesses, or anyone else who will be affected by the policies are panacea and useful for both the government and for the citizens because they both share the benefits of getting information in order to make policies. Since democracy is the power of the people, and policy networks include the public, policy-making only makes sense if the public is involved. The aim of this paper is to show how the interaction with policy networks through public consultations, engagement, and partnerships are useful and effective.
This is one of the policy networks that “places the citizens in the center of the policymaking, not as a target, but as agent.” Engagement as well makes the policy relevant to their circumstances, and design service that respond to individuals’ needs.
Engaging the citizens in policy making in any form of governance is vital and inevitable. Frankly, many countries have adopted public engagement as a mandatory course when reviewing the rules governing the people. As a matter of fact, those countries that have not adopted this procedure have been considered uncivilized and this has even seen natives of these countries come out in solidarity as activists against such form of governance.