| This research investigates the relationships between a social network perspective and different aspects of policy change. Policy scholars have done little to examine specific mechanisms at the individual level that drive policy learning and influence processes. These processes can affect the adoption (or non-adoption) of policy within policy networks. I argue that a stakeholder's position, their centrality, in a policy network is associated with increased policy learning and influence. Further, these factors have influenced policy decisions in electricity restructuring at the state level.;The dissertation adopts two approaches to the question of network structure and policy change. First, from a social structure (i.e. network) perspective, I conduct case studies of Texas, Georgia, and Arkansas---a most-similar case comparison---using institutional analysis, fieldwork, and surveys of electricity restructuring stakeholders. In Texas and Arkansas, stakeholders engaged in collaborative learning experiences, and advocates leveraged their higher centrality to gain influence among key decision-makers in the state network and connect their states to a national network. Alternatively, actors in Georgia had fewer external ties and were entrenched in a more limited set of connections that resulted in problematic and failed policy adoptions.;Second, classroom policy simulations are used to support and expand upon the field research. The simulations analyze social structure more completely, with formal quantitative network analysis. They show that central actors excel in learning and have more influence than peripheral players---though influence does not necessarily result in consensus. Important control variables are considered in the simulations that could not be identified in the field research. In both the case studies and simulations, social structure and network position at the individual level clearly emerge as important components of policy change. |
