IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v196y2009i2p808-818.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Actor analysis methods and their use for public policy analysts

Author

Listed:
  • Hermans, Leon M.
  • Thissen, Wil A.H.

Abstract

Public policy analysts use methods rooted in OR and systems analysis to support policy makers in their judgement. In doing so, most policy analysts recognize the value of a certain understanding of the role of actors in policy making processes. Different methods are available to aid such understanding and, although they all focus on actors, there are important differences between them. Insight into the range of available methods and their characteristics will thus help policy analysts to learn more about the potential and limitations involved in analyzing multi-actor processes. This article provides such an overview, based on the main requirements these methods should meet. This overview is used to discuss some of the implications for policy analysts who are interested in analyzing multi-actor processes, focusing specifically on trade-offs between analytic quality and practical usability.

Suggested Citation

  • Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2009. "Actor analysis methods and their use for public policy analysts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 808-818, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:196:y:2009:i:2:p:808-818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(08)00342-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thissen, Wil A. H. & Twaalfhoven, Patricia G. J., 2001. "Towards a conceptual structure for evaluating policy analytic activities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 627-649, March.
    2. Nancy Shulock, 1999. "The paradox of policy analysis: If it is not used, why do we produce so much of it?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 226-244.
    3. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    4. David L. Weimer, 1999. "Comment: Q-method and the isms," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 426-429.
    5. Robert Thomson & Frans Stokman & René Torenvlied, 2003. "Models of Collective Decision-making," Rationality and Society, , vol. 15(1), pages 5-14, February.
    6. Masahide Horita, 2000. "Folding Arguments: A Method for Representing Conflicting Views of a Conflict," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 63-83, January.
    7. Michel J.G. van Eeten, 2001. "Recasting Intractable Policy Issues: The Wider Implications of The Netherlands Civil Aviation Controversy," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 391-414.
    8. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marques, Marlene & Juerges, Nataly & Borges, José G., 2020. "Appraisal framework for actor interest and power analysis in forest management - Insights from Northern Portugal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    2. Wang, Qiuchen & Liu, Hongyi & Ore, Fredrik & Wang, Lihui & Hauge, Jannicke Baalsrud & Meijer, Sebastiaan, 2023. "Multi-actor perspectives on human robotic collaboration implementation in the heavy automotive manufacturing industry - A Swedish case study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Lamprinopoulou-Kranis, Chrysa & Renwick, Alan W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Hermans, Frans & Islam, Md. Mofakkarul & Roep, Dirk, 2012. "A Systemic Innovation Policy Framework: The Cases of Scottish and Dutch Agrifood Innovation Systems," 131st Seminar, September 18-19, 2012, Prague, Czech Republic 135794, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C. & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahamad & Salla, Manjola & Bach, Ngo Duy, 2015. "Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 92-101.
    5. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    6. Tomaz Dentinho & Joao Filipe Fernandes, 2011. "Understanding the impacts of electric mobility in the transportation patterns of the Azores using a spatial interaction model with alternative transportation modes," ERSA conference papers ersa10p541, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    8. Qiuchen, Wang & Jannicke, Hauge Baalsrud & Sebastiaan, Meijer, 2022. "The complexity of stakeholder influence on MaaS: A study on multi-stakeholder perspectives in Shenzhen self-driving mini-bus case," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Stanzel, Jens & Krott, Max & Schusser, Carsten, 2020. "Power alliances for biodiversity—Results of an international study on community forestry," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    11. Tomaz Dentinho & Paulo Oliveira, 2011. "Participative Planning in Africa. Firts steps in the Director Plano of Huambo," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1696, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Femke Bekius & Sebastiaan Meijer & Hugo Thomassen, 2022. "A Real Case Application of Game Theoretical Concepts in a Complex Decision-Making Process: Case Study ERTMS," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 153-185, February.
    13. Leon Hermans, 2011. "An Approach to Support Learning from International Experience with Water Policy," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(1), pages 373-393, January.
    14. Müller, Matthias Otto & Groesser, Stefan N. & Ulli-Beer, Silvia, 2012. "How do we know who to include in collaborative research? Toward a method for the identification of experts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 495-502.
    15. Hamed Samarghandi & Davood Askarany & Bahareh Banitalebi Dehkordi, 2023. "A Hybrid Method to Predict Human Action Actors in Accounting Information System," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, January.
    16. Zolfagharian, Mohammadreza & Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob & Romme, A. Georges L., 2019. "Studying transitions: Past, present, and future," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    17. Gomes, Sharlene L. & Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2018. "Extending community operational research to address institutional aspects of societal problems: Experiences from peri-urban Bangladesh," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 904-917.
    18. Qiuchen Wang & Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2019. "Adopting an Actor Analysis Framework to a Complex Technology Innovation Project: A Case Study of an Electric Road System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, December.
    19. Wang, Wei & Liu, Wenbin & Mingers, John, 2015. "A systemic method for organisational stakeholder identification and analysis using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 562-574.
    20. Gomes, Sharlene L. & Hermans, Leon M., 2018. "Institutional function and urbanization in Bangladesh: How peri-urban communities respond to changing environments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 932-941.
    21. Huang, Kuang-Chiu & Hsu, Jung-Fang, 2017. "Balance between Privacy Protecting and Selling User Data of Wearable Devices," 14th ITS Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Kyoto 2017: Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society 168490, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    22. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2020. "Stakeholders’ role in distribution loss reduction technology adoption in the Indian electricity sector: An actor-oriented approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    23. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Movuh, Mbolo C. Yufanyi & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahmad & Salla, Manjola, 2016. "Comparing community forestry actors in Cameroon, Indonesia, Namibia, Nepal and Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 81-87.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Flavio Martins & Maria Fatima Almeida & Rodrigo Calili & Agatha Oliveira, 2020. "Design Thinking Applied to Smart Home Projects: A User-Centric and Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    2. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    3. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    5. Xinxin Liu & Xiaosheng Wang & Haiying Guo & Xiaojie An, 2021. "Benefit Allocation in Shared Water-Saving Management Contract Projects Based on Modified Expected Shapley Value," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(1), pages 39-62, January.
    6. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    7. Moumita Palchaudhuri & Sujata Biswas, 2016. "Application of AHP with GIS in drought risk assessment for Puruliya district, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(3), pages 1905-1920, December.
    8. D. K. Choudhury, 2019. "Standard Critical Path and Selection of Most Economic and Quality Contractors for Construction of Thermal Power Plant: A Case Study in NTPC," Metamorphosis: A Journal of Management Research, , vol. 18(2), pages 103-118, December.
    9. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    10. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    11. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    12. Lilian. O. Iheukwumere-Esotu & Akilu Yunusa-Kaltungo, 2021. "Knowledge Criticality Assessment and Codification Framework for Major Maintenance Activities: A Case Study of Cement Rotary Kiln Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.
    13. Alpana Agarwal & Divina Raghav, 2023. "Analysing Determinants of Employee Performance Based on Reverse Mentoring and Employer Branding Using Analytic Hierarchical Process," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 48(3), pages 343-358, August.
    14. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    15. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    16. Mou, W.M. & Wong, W.-K. & McAleer, M.J., 2018. "Financial Credit Risk and Core Enterprise Supply Chains," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2018-27, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    17. Marco Rogna, 2019. "A First-Phase Screening Device for Site Selection of Large-Scale Solar Plants with an Application to Italy," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS57, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    18. Villacreses, Geovanna & Gaona, Gabriel & Martínez-Gómez, Javier & Jijón, Diego Juan, 2017. "Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: The case of continental Ecuador," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 275-286.
    19. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    20. Pi-Fang Hsu & Bi-Yu Chen, 2007. "Developing and Implementing a Selection Model for Bedding Chain Retail Store Franchisee Using Delphi and Fuzzy AHP," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 275-290, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:196:y:2009:i:2:p:808-818. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.