Skip to main content

Lobbying as a Leveraged Act: On Resource Dependencies and Lobby Presence

  • Chapter
The Organization Ecology of Interest Communities

Part of the book series: Interest Groups, Advocacy and Democracy Series ((IGAD))

Abstract

It is hard to imagine any advanced western democracy functioning without the involvement of interest groups. One of the most fundamental concerns of political scientists regarding this long-standing practice is the imbalance in the number and type of interest groups involved in public decision making. Business associations tend to vastly outnumber any other type of interest groups, in particular those representing public interests. This ‘mobilization bias’ has been a remarkably persistent phenomenon across time, government venues and entire political systems (Lowery et al. 2005; Messer et al. 2010; Olson 1965; Schattschneider 1970[1960]). And in our contemporary multi-level governance systems these long-existing mobilization biases seem only to be reinforced (Beyers and Kerremans 2007; Hanegraaff et al. 2011; Kohler-Koch and Quittkat 2013). Indeed, recent studies mostly demonstrate that business groups are more often present at key political institutions at national and supranational governance levels and employ a broader set of lobby tactics than citizen groups do (Beyers and Kerremans 2007; Dur and Matteo 2013; Eising 2007; Hanegraaff et al. 2011; Kohler-Koch and Quittkat 2013; Rasmussen and Carroll 2013). By now this skewed distribution has almost become a truism and variables representing the distinction between businesses and citizen groups in statistical analyses are often considered control variables rather than main effects.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aldrich, H. E., and J. Pfeffer. 1976. Environments of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology 2: 79–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F., and B. L. Leech. 2001. Interest niches and policy bandwagons. patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. Journal of Politics 63 (4): 1191–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., J. M. Berry, M. Hojnacki, D. C. Kimball, and B. L. Leech. 2009. Lobbying and Policy Change. Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, J. K. 1975. The interorganizational network as a political economy. Administrative Science Quarterly 20 (2): 229–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J., and D. Lowery. 2011. Short-term volatility in the EU interest community. Journal of European Public Policy 18 (1): 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J., J. Beyers, C. Braun, M. Hanegraaff, and D. Lowery. 2014. Making inference across mobilization and influence research: Comparing top-down and bottom-up mapping of interest systems. Paper prepared for the ECPR General Conference, Glasgow, 3–6 September 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J., B. Carroll, C. Braun, A. Chalmers, T. DeStrooper, D. Lowery, S. Otjes, and A. Rasmussen. 2014. ‘Interest organizations across economic sectors: Explaining interest group density in the European Union’, Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, J., and B. Kerremans. 2007. Critical resource dependencies and the Europeanization of domestic interest groups. Journal of European Public Policy 14 (3): 460–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, J., L. C. Bonafont, A. Dür, R. Eising, D. Fink-Hafner, D. Lowery, C. Mahoney, W. Maloney, and D. Naurin. 2014. The INTEREURO Project: Logic and Structure. IG&A special issue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boscarino, J. E. 2009. Surfing for problems: Advocacy group Strategy in U.S. forestry policy. The Policy Studies Journal 37 (3): 415–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwen, P. 2002. Corporate lobbying in the European Union: The logic of access. Journal of European Public Policy 9 (3): 365–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwen, P. 2004. 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 

  • Braun, C. 2012. The captive or the broker? Explaining public agency-interest group interactions. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 25 (2): 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broscheid, A., and D. Coen. 2007. Lobbying activity and fora creation in the EU: Empirically exploring the nature of the policy good. Journal of European Public Policy 14 (3): 346–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, W. P. 1990. Organized interests and their issue niches: A search for pluralism in a policy domain. Journal of Politics 52 (2): 477–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, A. 2009. Population ecology and niche seeking in the development of gay and lesbian rights groups. Social Science Journal 46 (4): 656–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dur, A., and G. Matteo. 2013. Who lobbies the European Union? National interest groups in a multilevel polity. Journal of European Public Policy 19 (7): 969–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dusso, A. 2010. Legislation, political context, and interest group behavior. Political Research Quarterly 63 (1): 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eising, R. 2007. The access of business interests to EU institutions: Towards elite pluralism? Journal of European Public Policy 14 (3): 384–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraussen, B. 2014. The visible hand of the state: On the organizational development of interest groups. Public Administration, 92 (2): 406–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, V., and D. Lowery. 1996. The Population Ecology of Interest Representation: Lobbying Communities in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. L., and A. V. Deardorff. 2006. Lobbying as legislative subsidy. American Political Science Review 100 (1): 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D. 2011. Explaining policy bandwagons: Organized interest mobilization and cascades of attention. Governance — An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions 24 (2): 205–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D. R. 2014. The Organization of Political Interest Groups: Designing Advocacy. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D. R., and C. Djaugberg. 2015. Identity as constraint and resource in interest group evolution: A case of radical organizational change. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 17 (1): 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D., and G. Jordan. 2009. Interpreting environments: Interest group response to population ecology pressures. British Journal of Political Science 39: 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D., and A. Nownes. 2011. Reappraising the survival question: Why we should focus on interest group ‘organizational form’, and ‘career’, in: A. Cigler and B. Loomis (eds.), Interest Group Politics, Washington, DC: Congresional Quarterly Press, pp. 52–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D. R., and H. F. Thomas. 2012a. Interest group survival: Explaining sources of mortality anxiety. Interest Groups & Advocacy 1 (2): 215–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D. R., and H. F. Thomas. 2012b. Evaluating the breadth of policy engagement of by organized interests. Public Administration 90 (3): 582–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanegraaff, M., J. Beyers, and C. Braun. 2011. Open the door to more of the same? The development of interest group representation at the WTO. World Trade Review 10 (4): 447–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., and J. Freeman. 1977. The population ecology of organizations. The American Journal of Sociology 82 (5): 929–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., and J. H. Freeman. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review 49 (2): 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaney, M. T. 2004. Outside the issue niche — The multidimensionality of interest group identity. American Politics Research 32 (6): 611–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imig, D. R. 1992. Resource mobilization and survival tactics of poverty advocacy groups. The Western Political Quarterly 45 (2): 501–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, G., and W. A. Maloney. 1998. Manipulating membership: Supply-side influences on group size. British Journal of Political Science 28: 389–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch, B., and C. Quittkat (eds.). 2013. Demystification of Participatory Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D. 2007. Why do organized interests lobby? A multi-goal, multi-context theory of lobbying. Polity 39 (1): 29–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., and V. Gray. 1993. The density of state interest group systems. Journal of Politics 55 (1): 191–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., and K. Marchetti. 2012. You don’t know Jack: Principals, agents, and lobbying. Interest Groups & Advocacy 1: 139–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., V. Gray, and M. Fellowes. 2005. Sisyphus meets the Borg. Economic scale and inequalities in interest representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics 17 (1): 41–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., V. Gray, and J. Monogan. 2008. The construction of interest communities: Distinguishing bottom-up and top-down models. The Journal of Politics 70 (4): 1160–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., V. Gray, J. Kirkland, and J. J. Harden. 2012. Generalist interest organizations and interest system density: A test of the competitive exclusion hypothesis. Social Science Quarterly 93 (1): 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackay, A. L. 1991. ‘Archimedes ca 287–212 BC’. A Dictionary of Scientific Quotations. London: Taylor and Francis, p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messer, A., J. Berkhout, and D. Lowery. 2010. The density of the EU interest system: A test of the ESA model. Journal of British Political Science 41: 161–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minkoff, D. C. 1999. Bending with the wind: Strategic change and adaptation by women’s and racial minority organizations. American Journal of Sociology 104 (6): 1666–1703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikolic, S. J. S., and T. M. Koontz. 2008. Nonprofit organizations in environmental management: A comparative analysis of government impact. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18: 441–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nownes, A. 2010. Density dependent dynamics in the population of transgender interest groups in the United States, 1974–2005. Social Science Quarterly 91 (3): 689–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nownes, A. J. 2012. Numbers in a niche: A practitioner’s guide to mapping gay and lesbian groups in the US, in: D. Halpin and G. Jordan (eds.), The Scale of Interest Organization in Democratic Politics, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nownes, A. J., and D. Lipinski. 2005. The population ecology of interest group death: Gay and lesbian rights interest groups in the United States, 1945–98. British Journal of Political Science 35: 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., and G. R. Salancik. 2003[1978]. The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective. California: Stanford Business Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppelaars, C. 2009. Corporatism or lobbyism behind Dutch dikes? Interest representation in the Netherlands, in: C. McGrath (ed.), Interest Groups and Lobbying, Volume Two: Europe, Lewiston, NY: The Mellen Press, pp. 207–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, A., and B. Carroll. 2013. Determinants of upper-class dominance in the heavenly chorus: Lessons from European Union online consultations. British Journal of Political Science 44 (2): 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury, R. H. 1969. An exchange theory of interest groups. Midwest Journal of Political Science 13 (1): 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E. E. 1970[1960]. The Semi-Sovereign People. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and Organizations, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., J. R. Grote, V. Schneider, and J. Visser. 2006. Governing Interests: Business Associations Facing Internationalization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilts, A. 2001. Europeanization and the means of interest representation by national business associations. European Journal of Industrial Relations 7 (3): 269–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. Q. 1973. Political Organizations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2015 Caelesta Braun

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Braun, C. (2015). Lobbying as a Leveraged Act: On Resource Dependencies and Lobby Presence. In: Lowery, D., Halpin, D., Gray, V. (eds) The Organization Ecology of Interest Communities. Interest Groups, Advocacy and Democracy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137514318_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics