Article published In: Language Problems and Language Planning
Vol. 40:2 (2016) ► pp.187–217
A network model of language policy and planning
The United Nations as a case study
Published online: 4 August 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.40.2.05mce
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.40.2.05mce
This article contributes to recent critical discussion of ‘agency’ in language policy and planning (LPP) research and practice. It argues that whilst scholars have widened their purview to consider the impact of individual actors on LPP in different contexts, the field has not developed or embraced theoretical and methodological frameworks which satisfactorily model or investigate the network of actor impact on LPP. This article analyzes the current status of LPP at the United Nations (UN). Taking the ‘Actor-Stage Model’ (Zhao & Baldauf, 2012) as a theoretical point of departure, the article discusses and analyzes the most recent review of LPP within the UN. It becomes apparent that a network of agents is responsible for LPP development, influence and implementation within the organization. This ‘web of influence’ is schematized using a network model which accounts for the implicit and explicit responsibility of multiple actors / ‘experts’ within and outside of the organization. A sub-analysis of institutional LPP goals reveals the ‘polycentric’ and ‘relational’ nature of influence within and across multiple ‘nodes’. It is argued that the network model and the concept of ‘web of influence’ is crucial in de- and re-constructing particular LPP goals and serves as a useful heuristic for those investigating or working within similar sites of inter/transnational integration as well as LPP in other macro, meso or micro-contexts.
Keywords: United Nations, network theory, network model, language policy, language planning, agency
References (37)
Baldauf, Jr., R.B. (1982). The language situation in American Somoa: Planners, plans and planning. Language Planning Newsletter, 8(1), 17–33.
. (2004). Issues of prestige and image in language-in-education planning in Australia. Current Issues in Language Planning, 5(4), 376–388.
. (2006). Rearticulating the case for micro-language planning in a language ecology context. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 147–170.
. (2008). Rearticulating the case for micro-language planning in a language ecology context. In A.J. Liddicoat and R.B. Baldauf, Jr. (Eds.), Language planning and policy: Language in local contexts (pp. 18–41). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Canagarajah, S. (Ed.) (2002). Celebrating local knowledge on language and education. (Special issue). Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 1(4).
Davis, K.A. (1999). The socio-political dynamics of indigenous language maintenance and loss: A framework for language policy and planning. In T. Huebner and K.A. Davis (Eds.), Socio-political perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA (pp. 67–97). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hornberger, N.H. (2006). Frameworks and models in language policy and planning. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp 24–41). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Hornberger, N.H., & Johnson, D.C. (2007). Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly, 44(3), 509–532.
Fall, P.L., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Multilingualism in the United Nations system organisations: Status of implementation. JIU/REP/2011/4. Geneva: United Nations.
Haarman, H. (1990). Language planning in the light of a general theory of language: A methodological framework. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 951, 109–129.
Kaplan, R.B., & Baldauf, R.B., Jr. (1997). Language planning: From practice to theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Liddicoat, A. (2009). Language planning and international collaboration: A current issue in language planning. Current Issues in Language Planning, 10(2), 163–165.
McEntee-Atalianis L.J. (2006). ‘Geostrategies of interlingualism’: Language policy and practice in the International Maritime Organisation, London. UK. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 341–358.
McEntee-Atalianis, L.J. (2008). Diplomatic negotiation in an international organisation: An exploration of expert status and power. The International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities and Nations, 8(3), 265–271.
. (2010). An investigation of argumentational discourse units in diplomatic negotiation. Sociolinguistic Studies, 4(3), 553–568.
. (2011). The role of metaphor in shaping the identity and agenda of the United Nations: The imagining of an international community and international threat. Discourse and Communication, 5(4), 393–412.
. (2013). Stance and metaphor: Mapping changing representations of (organisational) identity. Discourse and Communication, 7(3), 319–340.
. (2015). Language policy and planning in international organisations. Multilingualism and the United Nations: Diplomatic baggage or passport to success? U. Jessner-Schmid and C.J. Kramsch (Eds.), The multilingual challenge: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 295–322). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
McEntee-Atalianis, L.J., & Zappettini, F. (2014). Networked identities: Changing representations of Europeanness. Critical Discourse Studies, 11(4), 397–415.
Nekvapil, J., & Nekula, M. (2006). On language management in multinational companies in the Czech Republic. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 307–327.
Payne, M. (2006). Foreign language planning in England: The pupil perspective. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3),189–213.
Pennycook, A. (2002). Mother tongues, governmentality, and protectionism. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 1541, 11–28.
. (2006). Postmodernism in language policy. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 60–76). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Piron, C. (1980). Problèmes de communication linguistique au Nations Unies et dans les organiations apparentées. Language Problems and Language Planning, 4(3), 224–236.
Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 41, 196–213.
. (2006). Language policy: Theory and practice – An Introduction. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 3–9). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Ricento, T., & Hornberger, N.H. (1996). Unpeeling the onion: Language planning and policy and the ELT professional. TESOL Quarterly, 301, 401–428.
Sassen, S. (1996). Losing control?: Sovereignty in an age of globalisation. New York: Colombia University Press.
Siew Kheng Chua, C. (2006). Singaporean educational planning: Moving from the macro to the micro. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 214–229.
Sims, C. (2006). Language planning in American Indian Pueblo communities: Contemporary challenges and issues. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 251–268.
Winter, J. and Pauwels, A. (2006). ‘Trajectories of agency’ and discursive identities in education: A critical site in feminist language planning. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2/3), 171–188.
Zhao, S. (2011). Actors in language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook in research in second language teaching and learning, vol. II1 (pp. 905–923). London: Routledge.
Zhao, S., & Baldouf, R.B., Jr. (2012). Individual agency in language planning: Chinese script reform as a case study. Language Problems and Language Planning, 36(1), 1–24.
Cited by (16)
Cited by 16 other publications
Jiang, Hanchen, Chuping Zhang & Jingyu Zhang
McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa J. & Francis M. Hult
Lee, Huan Yik, M. Obaidul Hamid & Ian Hardy
Lee, Huan Yik, M. Obaidul Hamid & Ian Hardy
Hult, Francis M.
Hurdus, Jeremy
А.А., Позднякова & Г.В., Кузнецова
Zhao, Yun, Ronghui Zhao & Yuanyuan Liu
Shepherd, Elizabeth & Lisa McEntee-Atalianis
Tesseur, Wine
McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa & Rachelle Vessey
McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa & Rachelle Vessey
Paciotto, Carla, Enrico Castelli Gattinara & Daniela Mainardi
McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa J.
McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa J.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
