Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Lobbying in the European Parliament

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

  • 1071 Accesses

Abstract

In this introductory chapter, I present the research question of the book and situate it in the literature. The objective of the book is to examine under which conditions interest groups shape policy outcomes in the European Parliament (EP). Even though the EP has become an increasingly important lobbying venue in Brussels due to the expansion of its powers, researchers have paid little attention to how lobbying in the EP plays out. For a long time, the EP has had a reputation as a champion of diffuse interests. This contrasts with the interest group literature’s assumption of a business bias in politics. It is, therefore, time to gain a more nuanced understanding of interest group influence in the EP. The chapter also presents the book’s key concepts, case selection, and methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Austen-Smith, D., & Wright, J. R. (1994). Counteractive lobbying. American Journal for Political Science, 38(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1969). Two faces of power. In W. E. Connolly (Ed.), The bias of pluralism. New York: Atherton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B. (1980a). Is it better to be powerful or lucky? Part 1. Political Studies, 28(2), 183–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B. (1980b). Is it better to be powerful than lucky? Part 2. Political Studies, 28(3), 338–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J. (2015). Change and continuity in the composition of the lobby community in the European Union: Lobby explosion and lobby tourism. In S. Shotton & P. G. Nixon (Eds.), Lobbying the European Union. Changing minds, changing time. Burlington: Ashgate. Ch. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, J. (2004). Voice and access. Political practices of European interest associations. European Union Politics, 5(2), 211–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biersteker, T. J. (1995). Constructing historical counterfactuals to assess the consequences of international regimes. In V. Rittberger (Ed.), Regime theory and international. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ch.13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouwen, P. (2004a). Exchanging access goods for access: A comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union institutions. European Journal of Political Research, 43(3), 337–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwen, P. (2004b). The logic of access to the European Parliament: Business lobbying in the committee on economic and monetary affairs. Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(3), 473–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunea, A. (2013). Issues, preferences and ties: Determinants of interest groups’ preference attainment in the EU environmental policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(4), 552–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunea, A. (2014). Explaining interest groups’ articulation of policy preferences in the European Commission’s open consultations. An analysis of the environmental policy area. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(6), 1224–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunea, A. (2015). Evaluating pluralism: Interest groups’ policy demands and lobbying success in the European Commission’s open consultations. A case study in environmental policy. In P. S. Shotton & P. G. Nixon (Eds.), Lobbying the European Union. Changing minds, changing time. Burlington: Ashgate. Ch. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, C. (2005). The European Parliament: The EU’s environmental champion? In A. G. Jordan (Ed.), Environmental policy in the European Union. Actors, institutions & processes (2nd ed.). London: Earthscan. Ch. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, A.W. (2013). Trading information for access: informational lobbying strategies and interest group access to the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(1), 39-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coen, D. and Richardson, J., eds.(2009b). Lobbying the European Union: Institutions, Actors and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1958). A critique of the ruling Elite model. The American Political Science Review, 58(2), 463–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dür, A. (2008). Measuring interest group influence in the EU: A note on methodology. European Union Politics, 9(4), 559–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eising, R. (2007). Institutional context, organizational resources and strategic choices: Explaining interest group access in the European Union. European Union Politics, 8(3), 329–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2014b). Codecision and conciliation. A guide to how the European Parliament co-legislates under the ordinary legislative procedure. Brussels: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. Sussex: Harvester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2004). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1986). The constitution of society. Oxford: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, W. (1989). Pressure groups, politics and democracy in Britain. Hempstead: Phillip Allan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, J. (2011). Interest representation in the European Union (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermansson, H. (2015). Privileged access to the European Commission’s stakeholder consultations. In P. S. Shotton & P. G. Nixon (Eds.), Lobbying the European Union. Changing minds, changing time. Burlington: Ashgate. Ch. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S., & Høyland, B. (2011). The political system of the European Union (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klüver, H. (2013). Lobbying in the European Union. Interest groups, lobbying coalitions, and policy change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, W. (2009). The European Parliament. In D. Coen & J. Richardson (Eds.), Lobbying the European Union. Institutions, actors, and issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1977). Politics and markets. New York: Basic Books. Ch. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, B. A. (1983). A new era: Groups and the grassroots. In A. J. Cigler & B. A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest group politics (pp. 169–190). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (1974). Power: a radical view. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, D. (2010). Who to lobby and when. Institutional determinants of interest group strategies in European Parliament committees European Union Politics, 11(4), 553–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, D. (2015). Explaining interest group interactions with party group members in the European Parliament: Dominant party groups and coalition formation. Journal of Common Market Studies, 53(2), 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElroy, G. (2006). Committee representation in the European Parliament. European Union Politics, 7(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panke, D. (2006). Lobbying Institutional Key Players: How States Seek to Influence the European Commission, the Council Presidency and the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(1), 129–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource-dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M. A. (1997). Representing diffuse interests in EC policy-making. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(4), 572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polsby, N. W. (1960). How to study community power: The pluralist alternative. Journal of Politics, 22(3), 474–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, M. K. (2015). The battle for influence: The politics of business lobbying in the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies, 53(2), 365–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, A., & Gross, V. (2015). Biased access? Exploring selection to advisory committees. European Political Science Review, 7(3), 343–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yordanova, N. (2011). Inter-institutional rules and the division of power in the European Parliament: Allocation of consultation and co-decision reports. West European Politics, 34(1), 97–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dionigi, M.K. (2017). Introduction. In: Lobbying in the European Parliament. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42688-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics