Skip to main content Accessibility help

Interdependent policy instrument preferences: a two-mode network approach

  • Florence Metz (a1) (a2), Philip Leifeld (a3) and Karin Ingold (a2) (a4) (a5)


In policymaking, actors are likely to take the preferences of others into account when strategically positioning themselves. However, there is a lack of research that conceives of policy preferences as an interdependent system. In order to analyse interdependencies, we link actors to their policy preferences in water protection, which results in an actor-instrument network. As actors exhibit multiple preferences, a complex two-mode network between actors and policies emerges. We analyse whether actors exhibit interdependent preference profiles given shared policy objectives or social interactions among them. By fitting an exponential random graph model to the actor-instrument network, we find considerable clustering, meaning that actors tend to exhibit preferences for multiple policy instruments in common. Actors tend to exhibit interdependent policy preferences when they are interconnected, that is, they collaborate with each other. By contrast, actors are less likely to share policy preferences when a conflict line divides them.


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. Email:


Hide All

Cite this article: Metz F, Leifeld P, Ingold K. 2019. Interdependent policy instrument preferences: a two-mode network approach. Journal of Public Policy 39: 609–636,, doi:10.1017/S0143814X18000181



Hide All
Berardo, R (2014) Bridging and Bonding Capital in Two-Mode Collaboration Networks. Policy Studies Journal 42(2): 197225.
Berardo, R Scholz, J (2010) Self-Organizing Policy Networks: Risk, Partner Selection, and Cooperation in Estuaries. American Journal of Political Science 54(3): 632649.
Bodin, Ö Crona, B (2009) The Role of Social Networks in Natural Resource Governance: What Relational Patterns Make a Difference? Global Environmental Change 19, 366374.
Bodin, Ö Prell, C (2011) Social Networks and Natural Resource Management. Uncovering the Social Fabric of Environmental Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Börzel, T (1998) Organizing Babylon. On the Diffierent Conceptions of Policy Networks. Public Administration 76, 253273.
Bressers, H, Huitema, D Kuks, S (1995) Policy Networks in Dutch Water Policy. In Bressers H, O’Toole L and Richardson J (eds.), Networks for Water Policy. A Comparative Perspective. London: Frank Cass, 2451.
Bressers, H O’Toole, L (1998) The Selection of Policy Instruments: A Network-Based Perspective. Journal of Public Policy 18(3): 213239.
Bressers, H O’Toole, L (2005) Instrument Selection and Implementation in a Networked Context. In Eliadis P, Hill M and Howlett M (eds.), Designing Government: From Instruments to Governance. Montreal, Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 132153.
Bressers, H, O’Toole, L Richardson, J (1995) Networks for Water Policy: A Comparative Perspective. London: Frank Cass.
Briatte, F (2016) Network Patterns of Legislative Collaboration in Twenty Parliaments. Network Science 4(2): 266271.
Calanni, J, Siddiki, S Weible Cand Leach, W (2014) Explaining Coordination in Collaborative Partnerships and Clarifying the Scope of the Belief Homophily Hypothesis. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25(3): 901927.
Cranmer, S, Leifeld, P, McClurg, S Rolfe, M (2017) Navigating the Range of Statistical Tools for Inferential Network Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 61(1): 237251.
Crona, B John, P (2012) Learning in Support of Governance: Theories, Methods, and a Framework to Assess How Bridging Organizations Contribute to Adaptive Resource Governance. Ecology and Society 17(1): 3249.
Duxbury, S (2017) Diagnosing Multicollinearity in Exponential Random Graph Models. Master’s Thesis, The Ohio State University, (accessed 16 July 2018).
Fischer, M Leifeld, P (2015) Policy Forums: Why Do they Exist and What are they Used for? Policy Sciences 48(3): 363382.
Fischer, M Sciarini, P (2016) Drivers of Collaboration in Political Decision Making: A Cross-Sector Perspective. The Journal of Politics 78(1): 6374.
Gerber, E, Henry, A Lubell, M (2013) Political Homophily and Collaboration in Regional Planning Networks. American Journal of Political Science 57(3): 598610.
Gilardi, F (2016) Four Ways We Can Improve Policy Diffusion Research. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 16(1): 821.
Granovetter, M (1985) Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91, 481510.
Granovetter, M (1992) Economic Institutions as Social Construction: A Framework of Analysis. Acta Sociologica 35, 311.
Harward, B Moffett, K (2010) The Calculus of Cosponsorship in the U.S. Senate. Legislative Studies Quarterly 35(1): 117143.
Henry, A (2011) Ideology, Power, and the Structure of Policy Networks. Policy Studies Journal 39(3): 361383.
Hollender, J, Singer, H McArdell, C (2008) Polar Organic Micropollutants in The Water Cycle. In Hlavinek P, Bonacci O, Marsalek J and Mahrikova I (eds.), Dangerous Pollutants (Xenobiotics) in Urban Water Cycle. Dodrecht: Springer, 103116.
Howlett, M (2009) Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Science 42, 7389.
Howlett, M Ramesh, M (1995) Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems . Toronto, New York: Oxford University Press.
Hunter, D (2007) Curved Exponential Family Models for Social Networks. Social Networks 29(2): 216230.
Hunter, D, Handcock, M, Butts, C, Goodreau, S Morris, M (2008) ergm: A Package to Fit, Simulate and Diagnose Exponential-Family Models for Networks. Journal of Statistical Software 24(3): nihpa54860.
Ingold, K (2014) How Involved are they Really? A Comparative Network Analysis of the Institutional Drivers of Local Actor Inclusion. Land Use Policy 39, 376387.
Ingold, K Fischer, M (2014) Drivers of Collaboration to Mitigate Climate Change: An Illustration of Swiss Climate Policy Over 15 Years. Global Environmental Change 24, 8898.
Ingold, K, Varone, F Stokman, F (2013) A Social Network-Based Approach to Assess De Facto Independence of Regulatory Agencies. Journal of European Public Policy 20(10): 14641481.
Jasny, L (2012) Baseline Models for Two‐Mode Social Network Data. Policy Studies Journal 40(3): 458491.
Jasny, L Mark, L (2015) Two-Mode Brokerage in Policy Networks. Social Networks 41, 3647.
Jenkins‐Smith, H, Silva, C, Gupta, K Ripberger, J (2014) Belief System Continuity and Change in Policy Advocacy Coalitions: Using Cultural Theory to Specify Belief Systems, Coalitions, and Sources of Change. Policy Studies Journal 42(4): 484508.
Jones, C, Hesterley, W Borgatti, S (1997) A General Theory of Network Governance: Exchange Conditions and Social Mechanisms. Academy of Management Review 22(4): 911945.
Kammermann, L Dermont, C (2018) How Beliefs of the Political Elite and Citizens on Climate Change Influence Support for Swiss Energy Transition Policy. Energy Research & Social Science, available online 22 May, 2018.
Keohane, N, Revesz, R Stavins, R (1998) The Choice of Regulatory Instruments in Environmental Policy. Harvard Environmental Law Review 22(2): 313367.
Knill, C Tosun, J (2012) Public Policy: A New Introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Knoke, D (1994) Networks of Elite Structure and Decision Making. In Wasserman S and Galaskiewicz J (eds.), Advances in Social Network Analysis: Research in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 274295.
Landry, R Varone, F (2005) The Choice of Policy Instruments: Confronting the Deductive and the Interactive Approaches. In Eliadis F, Hill M and Howlett M (eds.), Designing Government. From Instruments to Governance. Montreal, Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 106131.
Lasswell, H (1958) Politics: who gets what, when, how. With postscript. New York: Meridian Books.
Laumann, E, Marsden, P Prensky, D (1983) The Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis. In Burt R and Minor M (eds.), Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 6188.
Leifeld, P (2013) texreg: Conversion of Statistical Model Output in R to LaTeX and HTML Tables. Journal of Statistical Software 55(8): 1–24.
Leifeld, P, Cranmer, S Desmarais, B (2018) Temporal Exponential Random Graph Models with btergm: Estimation and Bootstrap Confidence Intervals. Journal of Statistical Software 83(6): 136.
Leifeld, P Schneider, V (2012) Information Exchange in Policy Networks. American Journal of Political Science 56(3): 731744.
Linder, S Peters, G (1989) Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts. Journal of Public Policy 9(1): 3558.
Lindstäd, R, Vander Wielen, R Green, M (2017) Diffusion in Congress: Measuring the Social Dynamics of Legislative Behavior. Political Science Research and Methods 5(3): 511527.
Lubell, M Fulton, A (2007) Local Diffusion Networks as Pathways to Sustainable Agriculture. California Agriculture 61(3): 131137.
Lubell, M, Scholz, J, Berardo, R Robins, G (2012) Testing Policy Theory with Statistical Models of Networks. Policy Studies Journal 40(3): 351374.
Majone, G (1976) Choice Among Policy Instruments for Pollution Control. Policy Analysis 2(3): 589613.
Malang, T, Brandenberger, L Leifeld, P (2017) Networks and social influence in European legislative politics. British Journal of Political Science, 1–24.
March, J Olsen, J (1989) Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: Free Press.
Marsden, P (1981) Introducing Influence Processes into a System of Collective Decisions. American Journal of Sociology 86(6): 12031235.
Metz, F Ingold, K (2014) Sustainable Wastewater Management: Is It Possible to Regulate Micropollution in the Future by Learning from the Past? A Policy Analysis. Sustainability 6(4): 19922012.
McPherson, M, Smith-Lovin, L Cook, J (2001) Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27, 415444.
Munro, G Ditto, P (1997) Biased Assimilation, Attitude Polarization, and Affect in Reactions to Stereotype-Relevant Scientific Information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23(6): 636653.
Munro, G, Ditto, P, Lockhart, L, Fagerlin, A, Gready, M Peterson, E (2002) Biased Assimilation of Sociopolitical Arguments: Evaluating the 1996 U.S. Presidential Debate. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 24(1): 1526.
Newig, J Fritsch, O (2009) Environmental Governance: Participatory, Multi-Level – and Effective? Environmental Policy and Governance 19(3): 197214.
Newman, M (2002) Assortative Mixing in Networks. Physical Review Letters 89(20): 14.
Olson, M (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ostrom, E, Cox, M Schlager, E (2014) An Assessment of the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework and Introduction of the Social-Ecological Systems Framework. In Sabatier P and Weible C (eds.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 267306.
Pahl-Wostl, C (2007) The Implications of Complexity for Integrated Resources Management. Environmental Modelling & Software 22(5): 561569.
Robins, G, Bates, L Pattison, P (2011) Network Governance and Environmental Management: Conflict and Cooperation. Public Administration 89(4): 12931313.
Robins, G, Pattison, P, Kalish, Y Lusher, D (2007a) An Introduction to Exponential Random Graph (p*) Models for Social Networks. Social Networks 29(2): 173191.
Robins, G, Snijders, T, Wang, P, Handcock, M Pattison, P (2007b) Recent Developments in Exponential Random Graph (p*) Models for Social Networks. Social Networks 29(2): 192215.
Sabatier, P (1999) Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P Jenkins-Smith, H (1993) Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sager, F (2009) Governance and Coercion. Political Studies 57(3): 537558.
Sandström, A Carlsson, L (2008) The Performance of Policy Networks: The Relation Between Network Structure and Network Performance. The Policy Studies Journal 36(4): 497524.
Schneider, V (2014) Akteurskonstellationen und Netzwerke in der Politikentwicklung. In Schubert D and Bandelow N (eds.), Lehrbuch der Politikfeldanalyse. München: Oldenbourg, 259288.
Schwarzenbach, R, Escher, B, Fenner, K, Hofstetter, T, Johnson, A, Von Gunten, U Wehrli, B (2006) The Challenge of Micropollutants in Aquatic Systems. Science 313(5790): 10721077.
Shalizi, C Thomas, A (2011) Homophily and Contagion Are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies. Sociological Methods & Research 40(2): 211239.
Varone, F (1998) Le choix des instruments des politiques publiques. Une analyse comparée des politiques d’efficience énergétique du Canada, du Danemark, des Etats-Unis, de la Suède et de la Suisse. Bern: Paul Haupt Verlag.
Wang, P, Sharpe, K, Robins, G Pattison, P (2009) Exponential Random Graph (p∗) Models for Affiliation Networks. Social Networks. 31(1): 1225.
Wasserman, S Pattison, P (1996) Logit Models and Logistic Regressions for Social Networks: I. An Introduction to Markov Graphs and p*. Psychometrika 61, 401425.
Weible, C, Pattison, A Sabatier, P (2010) Harnessing Expert-Based Information for Learning and the Sustainable Management of Complex Socio-Ecological Systems. Environmental Science & Policy 13(6): 522534.
Weible, C Sabatier, P (2005) Comparing Policy Networks: Marine Protected Areas in California. Policy Studies Journal 33(2): 181201.
Zafonte, M Sabatier, P (1998) Shared Beliefs and Imposed Interdependencies as Determinants of Ally Networks in Overlapping Subsystems. Journal of Theoretical Politics 10(4): 473505.
Zhang, Y, Friend, A, Traud, A, Porter, M, Fowler, J Mucha, P (2008) Community Structure in Congressional Cosponsorship Networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 387(7): 17051712.


Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Metz et al. supplementary material
Online Appendices 1&2

 Word (1.1 MB)
1.1 MB
Supplementary materials

Metz et al. Dataset


Interdependent policy instrument preferences: a two-mode network approach

  • Florence Metz (a1) (a2), Philip Leifeld (a3) and Karin Ingold (a2) (a4) (a5)


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.