Pdf Interest Groups And Policymaking Springer

In the past three decades the number and activity level of interest groups has increased dramatically. Many argue that the role of interest groups has expanded as that of political parties has receded, making interest groups more important and political parties less important in the interaction of citizens with government... While defenders often paint interest groups as organizations dedicated to protecting citizens who would otherwise be overlooked in the workings of mass democracy, critics tend to portray them as conspirators out to hijack public... This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Gillian Peele (Fellow and Tutor in Politics) (Fellow and Tutor in Politics) You have full access to this open access chapter, Download reference work entry PDF Interest groups play a vital role in modern representative democracies by acting as intermediaries between citizens’ demands and policymakers (Otjes & Rasmussen, 2017; Rasmussen & Gross, 2015). However, their representative function also means that they are not neutral actors (Rasmussen & Gross, 2015) and advocate across various policy areas, including environmental, digital, and financial regulation policies (Pagliari & Young, 2014, 2016).

Additionally, they engage in more contested areas, such as gun policy (Lacombe, 2019; Merry, 2016). Many studies do not explicitly define how they use the term interest groups. Studies that do define them tend to agree on the concept of interest groups as a broad range of non-state organizations engaged in public policy advocacy (e.g., De Bruycker, 2015; Dür & Mateo, 2014;... Specifically, Beyers et al. (2008) define interest groups based on their organized form, political interests, and their informality. They define interest groups as organizations that engage in political advocacy to advance specific interests by interacting with policymakers rather than contesting elections.

Other studies that explicitly define the interest group concept do so in a variety of ways (Baroni et al., 2014; Beyers et al., 2008). Terms such as advocacy groups, pressure groups, social movement organizations, civil society organizations, NGOs, and business associations are employed in its definition. However, social movements, for example, exclude market-based actors such as firms or business associations. Similarly, the concept of civil society encompasses an arena of actors distinct from both the state and the market, including individuals, movements, and the media, while typically excluding corporate actors. “Interest groups” thus serves as an overarching term to capture the shared purpose of these organizations, which is to engage in advocacy and to “represent interests.” However, some categorizations also include less conventional entities... This broad scope makes it challenging to establish a precise and universally accepted definition.

Additionally, scholars employ different classification schemes to distinguish between various types of interest groups, further complicating the debate over definitions (Baroni et al., 2014). The interest group literature distinguishes between organizational and behavioral approaches when defining interest groups. Organizational definitions focus on structural characteristics, often restricting interest groups to membership-based organizations, thereby excluding without memberships such as individual companies. While this approach provides clear identification, it is narrow and overlooks how groups pursue shared political interests. In contrast, behavioral definitions emphasize actions, defining interest groups by their observable, policy-related activities and their efforts to influence public policy (Baroni et al., 2014). An interest group is an organization of a part of society, which aims to defend the material interests of its members and/or to promote the ideal cause of the group in the public space...

It has four constitutive characteristics. Is made up of members, who may be individuals (e.g., an occupational group of family doctors) or collective actors (e.g., a sectoral association of organic farms). This first dimension distinguishes it from a private company that can also lobby politicians. Is a structured organization that can take different legal forms (e.g., association, foundation, or cooperative). It differs thus from a loose social movement that does not have formal and permanent structures. Seeks to influence public opinion formation, the drafting of legislation, and policy implementation.

It uses various advocacy strategies to gain access to policy-makers and institutional venues. This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Agenda-setting can be defined as the process in which the policy agenda of policymakers is set. Policy agendas reflect how policymakers pay serious attention to and prioritize a portfolio of policy issues such as the economy, health, social welfare, and foreign policy. While having the attention of the policymakers is not a sufficient condition for policy change, it is not possible to change a policy without attention. Agenda-setting thus has substantial implications for policy outcomes.

It is therefore also a crucial policy stage for interest groups to lobby in to eventually attain favorable policy outcomes for themselves and for the interests they represent. Agenda-setting research generally builds on the key assumption that policymakers are boundedly rational. According to this perspective, policymakers have short attention spans and policy agendas and therefore have limited carrying capacity. To get their agenda heard by policymakers, interest groups thus have to... This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M.

S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56(4), 947–952. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952796. Baroni, L., Carroll, B.

J., William Chalmers, A., Marquez, L. M. M., & Rasmussen, A. (2014). Defining and classifying interest groups. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 3(2), 141–159.

https://doi.org/10.1057/iga.2014.9. This study examines interest groups’ involvement in the policymaking process by asking the following questions: Which political and non-political actors do interest groups target? What are the attitudinal and behavioral components of their strategy? We focus on new Southern European democracies that have been understudied in terms of interest group politics. Based on an original cross-national survey administered in Greece, Portugal and Spain, with responses from approximately 600 interest groups, this study argues that the attitudinal and behavioral dimensions are partially distinct components that need... The findings show that although groups mainly target governmental actors to defend their interests, parties are still considered important intermediaries to influence public policies.

Moreover, organizational resources are the most significant explanatory factors that shape the relations between organized interests and policymakers, while cross-country differences do not seem to be of great relevance. This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout. It is important to clarify the meaning of the terms political and non-political actors used herein. The first group includes the institutional actors that play a key role in the parliamentary or governmental arena, while the second encompasses civil servants and actors belonging to civil society. This distinction is therefore different from the insider versus outsider categorization.

New Southern European democracies refer to those polities that established a democratic regime during the third wave of democratization, in the mid-1970s. Therefore, they include Greece, Portugal and Spain. This allows us to distinguish these late democratizers vis-à-vis Italy, which experienced a completely different trajectory. Having laid out the theoretical and conceptual framework on solid ground in the previous sections, this chapter turns its focus on the research primacy of the study, which rests on the character and role... More specifically, it sets out to explore the structures and strategies of interest groups as intermediary actors between state and society. Such groups are deemed by the EU as generators of social capital and good governance, although one cannot discount their dark side, which will also be discussed toward the end of this chapter.

A comparative politics approach is being adopted to configure their different typologies, which, ultimately, determine their stratagems to engage in public affairs. The major thrust of this chapter is to introduce in greater detail the nature of domestic interest groups, and the different methods and avenues of influence at their disposal. The inquiry commences with a concise evaluation of how classical and contemporary political thinkers assess the role of interest groups in the attainment of the common good. Eventually, the discussion explores the correlation between interest groups and policy success, and consequently, groups’ input toward good and legitimate governance. The chapter, moreover, features the variables that are eventually to be used when analyzing change, if any, in internal structures, fieldwork interactivity and attitudinal formation of domestic organized groups as a consequence of EU... This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications Government officers are key players in designing and implementing public policies. Not surprisingly, a growing body of research approaches their connections with other stakeholders, such as ministers, elected officials, and political parties. Fewer studies, however, address the relationship between bureaucrats and interest organisations. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of recent publications regarding interest groups and the public bureaucracy.

The paper introduces the findings of an extensive literature review with bibliometric techniques and qualitative content analysis. To map previous studies, I analysed 1978 abstracts with VOSviewer and R. The final collection included 415 papers which were read and coded through NVivo. Based on this review, this paper exposes data on authors, countries, and research methods related to texts published between 2000 and 2022. In addition, it critically examines concepts and empirical evidence regarding the interactions between intere... Australian Journal of Public Administration, 1991

People Also Search

• PDF Interest Groups and Policymaking - Springer
• Interest Groups and Policymaking - Springer
• Interest Groups - Springer
• Interest Groups in Public Policy - Springer
• (PDF) Bureaucrats, interest groups and policymaking: a comprehensive ...
• Interest Groups and Agenda-Setting - Springer
• Interest group strategies and policy involvement: Does the ... - Springer
• Interest Groups, Public Opinion, and Political Representation