1. Mark Lubell, UC Davis UC Davis Policy Networks Conference May 19, 2009

2.  Most research on public policy ignores institutional complexity  Long’s ecology of games perspective: 1.Rule-structured policy games/venues 2.Policy outcomes emergent property of multiple games 3.Games connected through policy networks and payoff externalities

5. IRWM Bay Area Water Forum Bay Area Joint Venture Sonoma Creek TMDL

6.  Policy Issues: Common pool resources and public goods  Policy Actors: Self-interested, boundedly rational pursuing economic and political payoffs  Policy Games: Collective-choice forums where decisions are made about rules governing issues under jurisdiction  Geographically-defined policy arena: Context for interaction among other elements

7.  Interdependence: Strategy and payoff externalities  Incrementalism and punctuations  Diversity and abundance of policy games  Policy games more central than policy actors  Second-order collective-action problems  Symbolic policy  Core and periphery games and actors linked to political power  Unintended consequences

8.  Game Theory: Games(s), nested games  Complex adaptive systems: Evolutionary agents  Network analysis and games: endogenous linkages, stability and change  Ecological theory: niche differentiation, energy flow in food webs, abundance/diversity

9.  Focuses on actors choosing to be in games  Good way to deal with complexity of the system  Between-game versus within-game networks  Network stats applicable to both “modes” of a 2-mode matrix  ERGM analyses being developed

10.  IRWM is state grant program for integrating water management  Bay Area Study : Snowballing from IRWM list  167/329 responses, 50.8%.  Approximately 117 unique policy games identified, 388 individual policy actors

11. There are many different forums and processes available for participating in water management and planning in the Bay Area. Planning processes are defined as forums where stakeholders make decisions about water management policies, projects, and funding. In the spaces below, please list the three most important planning/management forums and/or processes that you yourself have participated in during the last three years.

12.  “Hybrid” name generator  “For each of the processes/forums named above, please list the other organizations, agencies, or other water management stakeholders with whom you have collaborated.”  Categories: Federal agencies, state government agencies, local or regional agencies including counties/cities, private or non-profit including education

15. Mean= 3.09 SD= 4.57 Min=1 Max=42 Mean= 9.66 SD= 7.23 Min=1 Max=34 *excludes IRWM

16.  International trend towards decentralized water management  In EU and aspiring countries, driven by the EU Water Framework Directive that mandates basin planning  Turkey must please EU, maintain Middle East relations, and is currently a hydraulic society”

17.  Using expert knowledge on national laws, identify implementation networks—policy actor responsibility over specific management functions  Dynamic change over decades: 1950-2000 Planning and organization Monitoring and evaluation Waste Disposal Agricultural Measures (groundwater permissions etc.) Erosion and Flood Control Geothermal Waters Coastal and transitional waters Pricing of Water Publication and educational activities Legal and institutional arrangements in regional scale Construction of water related infrastructure Operation and maintenance of water related infrast. Transboundar y waters

18. 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 1950 2000

20.  The ecology of games is the future of policy analysis (general equilibrium versus partial)  Many new questions demand development of new theory with appropriate balance of parsimony and complexity  Network theory and analysis will be useful  Important role for policy naturalists  Developing policy recommendations will be very difficult