Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Organization Ecology of Interest Communities pp 117–135Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Case Study Approaches to Studying Organization Survival and Adaptation

  • Chapter

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

Abstract

Our early knowledge of organized interests was drawn almost entirely from case studies of particular interest organizations and pieces of legislation (e.g. Bauer et al. 1964; Schattschneider 1935). Though large-n statistical studies have become the norm in interest group research, case studies comprise some of the more insightful and influential work on organized interests in the last couple of decades (e.g. Bosso 2005; Brown 1995; Hansen 1991; Rothenberg 1992) and represent the first take at understanding emerging organizations, such as the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street (Gitlin 2012; Martin 2013; Skocpol and Williamson 2013). Here, I discuss what the case study research has to say about the questions motivating population ecology research.

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

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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allern, Elin Haugsgjerd, Nicholas Aylott, and Flemming Juul Christiansen. 2007. “Social Democrats and Trade Unions in Scandinavia: The Decline and Persistence of Institutional Relationships.” European Journal of Political Research 46(5): 607–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, Raymond A., Ithiel De Sola Pool, and Anthony Dexter. 1964. American Business and Public Policy. New York: Atherton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, Frank R. and Bryan D. Jones. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, Frank R., Virginia Gray, and David Lowery. 2009. “Federal Policy Activity and the Mobilization of State Lobbying Organizations.” Political Research Quarterly 62(3): 552–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, Jeffrey M. 1999. The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosso, Christopher J. 2005. Environment, Inc: From Grassroots to Beltway. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, William P. 1988. Private Interests, Public Policy, and American Agriculture. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, William P. 1995. Cultivating Congress: Constituents, Issues, and Interests in Agricultural Policymaking. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costain, Anne E. and Andrew S. McFarland, eds. 1998. Social Movements and American Political Institutions: People, Passions and Power. New York: Roman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cress, Daniel M. and David A. Snow. 1998. “Mobilization at the Margins: Organizing by the Homeless,” in Costain, Anne E. and Andrew S. McFarland, eds. Social Movements and American Political Institutions: People, Passions and Power. New York: Roman and Littlefield, pp. 73–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dark, Taylor E. 1999. The Unions and the Democrats: an Enduring Alliance. Ithaca: CoC University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francia, Peter L. 2010. “Assessing the Labor-Democratic Party Alliance: A One-Sided Relationship.” Polity 42(3): 293–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo. 1975. The Politics of Women’s Liberation. New York: McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, John. 2004. “What is a Case Study and What is It Good For?” American Political Science Review 98(2): 341–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gitlin, Todd. 2012. Occupy Nation: The Roots, The Spirit, and the Promise of Occupy Wall Street. New York: Itbooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, Virginia and David Lowery. 1996. “A Niche Theory of Interest Representation.” Journal of Politics 58: 91–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, John C., Mark J. Rozell, and Clyde Wilcox, eds. 2003. The Christian Right in American Politics: Marching to the Millennium. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenstone, J. David. 1969. Labor in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, Jacob S. and Paul Pierson. 2010. Winner-Take-All Politics. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, Herbert H. 1984. “Black Radicalization and the Funding of Civil Rights: 1957–1970.” Social Problems 32(1): 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, Darren and Grant Jordan. 2009. “Interpreting Environments: Interest Group Response to Population Ecology Pressures.” British Journal of Political Science 39(2): 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, Darren, Carsten Daugbjerg, and Yonatan Schvartzman. 2011. “Interest-Group Capacities and Infant Industry Development: State-sponsored Growth in Organic Farming.” International Political Science Review 32(2): 147–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, John Mark. 1991. Gaining Access: Congress and the Farm Lobby, 1991– 1981. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaney, Michael T. 2007. “Identity Crisis: How Interest Groups Struggle to Define Themselves in Washington.” Interest Group Politics 7: 279–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imig, Douglas Rowley. 1992. “Resource Mobilization and Survival Tactics of Poverty Advocacy Groups.” The Western Political Quarterly 45(2): 501–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. Craig and Charles Perrow. 1977. “Insurgency of the Powerless: Farm Worker Movements (1946–1972).” American Sociological Review 42(2): 249–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazin, Michael. 2007. A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, Nathan J. and Christopher Witko. 2012. “Federalism and American Inequality.” Journal of Politics 74(2): 414–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killian, Lewis M. 1972. “The Significance of Extremism in the Black Revolution.” Social Problems 20(1): 41–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, David. 2007. “Why Do Organized Interests Lobby? A Multi-goal, Multi-context Theory of Lobbying.” Polity 39(1): 29–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, David and Virginia Gray. 1995. “The Population Ecology of Gucci Gulch, or the Natural Regulation of Interest Group Numbers in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science 39(1): 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, David and Virginia Gray. 1998. “The Dominance of Institutions in Interest Representation: A Test of Seven Explanations.” American Journal of Political Science 42(1): 231–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Isaac William. 2013. Rich People’s Movements: Grassroots Campaigns to Untax the One Percent. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, Doug. 1986. “Recruitment to High-risk Activism: The Case of Freedom Summer.” American Journal of Sociology 92(1): 64–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John D. and Mayer N. Zald. 1977. “Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory.” American Journal of Sociology 82(6): 1212–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, Andrew S. 1984. Common Cause: Lobbying in the Common Interest. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, David S. and Douglas R. Imig. 1993. “Political Opportunity and the Rise and Decline of Interest Group Sectors.” The Social Science Journal 30(3): 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nownes, Anthony J. and Daniel 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(2): 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Mancur. 1971. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, Christopher S. and Matt A. Barreto. 2013. Change They Can’t Believe in: The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Gerald R. Salancik. 1978. The External Control of Organizations. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, Naomi, Meryl Fingrutd, Michele Ethier, Roberta Karant, and David McDonald. 1985. “Social Movements and Network Analysis: A Case Study of Nineteenth-century Women’s Reform in New York State.” American Journal of Sociology 90(5): 1022–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, Lawrence S. 1992. Linking Citizens to Government: Interest Group Politics at Common Cause. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozell, Mark J. and Clyde Wilcox. 1996. Second Coming: The New Christian Right in Virginia Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury, Robert H. 1984. “Interest Representation: The Dominance of Institutions.” The American Political Science Review 78(1): 64–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, Elmer E. 1935. Politics, Pressures and the Tariff: A Study of Free Private Enterprise in Pressure Politics as Shown in the 1929–1930 Revision of the Tariff. New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, Theda. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, Theda and Vanessa Williamson. 2013. The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, David. 2003. Fluctuating Fortunes: The Political Power of Business in America. New York: Beard Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Jack L. 1983. “The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America.” The American Political Science Review (3): 390–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Edward T., John D. McCarthy, and Baumgartner, Frank. 2012. “Replacing Members with Managers? Mutualism among Membership and Nonmembership Advocacy Organizations in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 116(4): 1284–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, Carolyn M. 2000. Confessions of an Interest Group: The Catholic Church and Political Parties in Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, Clyde. 2009. “Of Movements and Metaphors: The Co-evolution of the Christian Right and the GOP.” Evangelicals and Democracy in America 2: 331–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, Vanessa, Theda Skocpol, and John Coggin. 2011. “The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.” Perspectives on Politics 9(1): 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witko, Christopher. 2009. “The Ecology of Party–Organized Interest Relationships.” Polity 41(2): 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witko, Christopher. 2013. “Party Government and Variation in Corporate Influence on Agency Decision-making: OSHA Regulation, 1981–2006.” Social Science Quarterly 94(4): 894–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woliver, Laura. 1998. “Social Movements and Abortion Law,” in Costain, Anne E. and Andrew S. McFarland, eds. Social Movements and American Political Institutions: People, Passions and Power. New York: Roman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zald, Mayer N. and John D. McCarthy. 1979. “Social Movement Industries: Competition and Cooperation among Movement Organizations.” Working Paper No. 201, Center for Research on Social Organizations (http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/50975/201.pdf?sequence=1).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Christopher Witko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Pennsylvania State University, USA

    David Lowery

  2. Australian National University, Australia

    Darren Halpin

  3. University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, USA

    Virginia Gray

Copyright information

© 2015 Christopher Witko

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Witko, C. (2015). Case Study Approaches to Studying Organization Survival and Adaptation. 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_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation