Brussels: The premier league of lobbying

  • Rinus van Schendelen


Lobbying is of all times and places. It also takes place at the level of the European Union (EU), where thousands of lobby groups are active all days. In this chapter the concept of lobbying is used in a technical way, free from emotional connotations. It refers to more unorthodox efforts of both public and private interest groups to influence officials in the desired direction. The EU system appears to be very open and irresistible to lobby groups. Due to the decline of national co-ordination the lobby groups, acting more self-reliantly now and thus showing their idiosyncrasies, get their more European patterns of behaviour by the rise of both collective action and professional lobbying. All groups take part in collective action. But only a few do the lobbying more professional by defining their ambitions carefully, by doing a lot of studious work before and by lobbying prudently. To the many amateurish groups they set the trend. Finally EU lobbying is discussed for four dependent variables: effectiveness, quality of outcomes, democracy and integration.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    L. Milbrath, The Washington Lobbyists, Rand McNally, Chicago, 1963 and United States Government, Federal Lobbying: Differences in Lobbying Definitions and their Impacts, General Accounting Office, Washington, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    M. de Callières, On the Manner of Negotiating with Princes, edition University Press of America, Washington, 1963 (originally 1716).Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    A. Hirschman, Exit, Voice and Loyalty, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass.), 1970.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    M. van Schendelen (ed.), EU Committees as Influential Policymakers, Aldershot, Ashgate, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    A. Fallik, The European Public Affairs Directory 2003, Landmarks, Brussels, 2003.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    J. Greenwood, Representing Interests in the EU, Macmillan, London, 1997, p. 103.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    A. Spinelli, The Eurocrats, Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1965.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    J. Greenwood and M. Aspinwall (eds.), Collective Action in the EU, Routledge, London, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    For more at length and detailed elaboration see note 1 (chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7).Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    The three catchwords of ambition, study and prudence are symbolised by the name of Machiavelli as part of the main title of the book mentioned in note 1, as explained in its third printing (2003).Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    The concept and its counterpart of ‘going window-in’ are derived from PARG, Public Affairs Offices and Their Functions, Public Affairs Research Group, Boston University, Boston, 1981.Google Scholar
  12. 15.
    M. van Schendelen and R. Scully (eds.), The Unseen Hand: Unelected EU Legislators, Cass, London, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  13. 16.
    D. Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Cadell, London, 1748 (and later).Google Scholar
  14. 20.
    A. Metten, The Ghost of Brussels, Socialist Party, European Parliament (internal memo), 1991.Google Scholar
  15. 21.
    E. Rieger, ‘The Common Agricultural Policy’, in H. Wallace and W. Wallace (eds.), Policy-making in the EU, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000 (4th edition), pp 179–210.Google Scholar
  16. 22.
    J. Besette, The Mild Voice of Reason, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 23.
    H. D’Hollander, De democratische legitimiteit van de Europese besluitvorming (in Dutch, meaning ‘Democratic Legitimacy of European decision-making’), Ph.D., published by Belgische Kamer van Afgevaardigden (Belgian Chamber of Representatives), Brussels, 2003. The extensively studied cases regard among others the dossiers on Biotechnology, Consultation in Companies, Animal Welfare, Chocolate, and HD Television.Google Scholar
  18. 26.
    B. Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees: Private Vices, Public Benefits, Garman, London, 1934 (originally 1705).Google Scholar
  19. 27.
    Particularly paper 10 (J. Madison) of The Federalist Papers, 1788.Google Scholar
  20. 28.
    Compare with R. Dahl and E. Tufte, Size and Democracy, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1973.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Westdeutscher Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rinus van Schendelen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations