The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Interest Groups, Lobbying and Public Affairs

Living Edition
| Editors: Phil Harris, Alberto Bitonti, Craig S. Fleisher, Anne Skorkjær Binderkrantz

Influence

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13895-0_43-1

Definition

One of the main reasons why scholars study interest groups is their relationship to influence and power, more precisely how organized interests affect policy agendas, the policymaking process, and public policy. Influence is central, indeed one of the most central concepts, in the interest group research field, but it is also highly elusive, which makes it a demanding research topic. It is best conceived as a latent variable, and most analysts will agree that it cannot be directly observed. While different operational definitions have been proposed for access (e.g., measuring membership of advisory committees or invitations to parliamentary hearings) and strategies (e.g., mapping the use of insider and outsider tactics, in particular advocacy campaigns), we lack a straightforward definition or operationalization of “influence.” Instead, empirically influence needs to be approximated through a triangulation of various directly measured variables, such as group resources,...

Keywords

Influence Power Access Interest groups Strategies Public policy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

In writing this chapter I benefited from a research grant of the European Research Council (ERC-2013-CoG 616702-iBias). I also would like to acknowledge David Lowery, Evelien Willems, Bas Redert, Sharon Belli, and Anne Binderkrantz for their helpful comments.

References

  1. Achen, C. H., & Bartels, L. M. (2016). Democracy for realists. Why elections do not produce responsive government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arts, B., & Verschuren, P. (1999). Assessing political influence in complex decision-making. An instrument based on triangulation. International Political Science Review, 20(4), 411–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barry, B. (1980). Is it better to be powerful or lucky? Political Studies, 28(2), 183–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumgartner, F. R., & Leech, B. L. (1998). Basic interests. The importance of groups in politics and political science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumgartner, F. R., Berry, J., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D. C., & Leech, B. L. (2009). Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkhout, J., Hanegraaff, M., & Statsch, P. (2019). Explaining the patterns of contacts between interest groups and political parties: Revising the standard model for populist times. Party Politics.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819856608.
  7. Binderkrantz, A., Pederson, H., & Beyers, J. (2017). What is access? A discussion of the definition and measurement of interest group access. European Political Science, 16(3), 306–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burstein, P. (2014). American public opinion, advocacy, and policy in congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Burstein, P. (2020). Testing theories about advocacy and public policy. Perspectives on Politics.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592719004663.
  10. Burstein, P., & Linton, A. (2002). The impact of political parties, interest groups and social movement organizations on public policy: Some recent evidence and theoretical concerns. Social Forces, 81(2), 380–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Culpepper, P. D. (2011). Quiet politics and business power. Corporate control in Europe and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dalton, R. J. (2017). The participation gap. Social status and political inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. De Bruycker, I., & Beyers, J. (2018). Lobbying strategies and success. Inside and outside lobbying in European Union legislative politics. European Political Science Review, 11(1), 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Bruycker, I., Berkhout, J., & Hanegraaff, M. (2019). The paradox of collective action: Linking interest aggregation and interest articulation in EU legislative lobbying. Governance, 32(2), 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dür, A. (2008). Interest groups in the European Union: How powerful are they? West European Politics, 31(6), 1212–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dür, A., & De Bièvre, D. (2007). Inclusion without influence? The involvement of NGOs in European Trade Policy. Journal of Public Policy, 27(1), 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dür, A., Bernhagen, P., & Marshall, D. (2015). Interest group success in the European Union. When (and why) does business lose? Comparative Political Studies, 48(8), 951–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Halpin, D. R., & Fraussen, B. (2017). Conceptualising the policy engagement of interest groups: Involvement, access and prominence. European Journal of Political Research, 76(3), 823–732.Google Scholar
  21. Hanegraaff, M., Beyers, J., & De Bruycker, I. (2016). Balancing inside and outside lobbying: The political strategies of lobbyists at global diplomatic conferences. European Journal of Political Research, 55(3), 568–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lowery, D. (2007). Why do organized interests lobby? A multi-goal, multi-context theory of lobbying. Polity, 39(1), 29–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lowery, D. (2013). Lobbying influence: Meaning, measurement and missing. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 2(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lucas, K., Hanegraaff, M., & De Bruycker, I. (2019). Lobbying the lobbyists: When and why do policymakers seek to influence advocacy groups in global governance? Interest Groups & Advocacy, 8(3), 407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mahoney, C. (2007). Lobbying success in the United States and the European Union. Journal of Public Policy, 27(2), 35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moe, T. M. (2005). Power and political institutions. Perspectives on Politics, 3(2), 215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith, M. A. (2000). American business and political power. Public opinion, elections and democracy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Biezen, I., & Saward, M. (2008). Democratic theorists and party scholars: Why they don’t talk to each other, and why they should. Perspectives on Politics, 6(1), 21–35.Google Scholar
  29. Verschuren, P., & Arts, B. (2004). Quantifying influence in complex decision-making by means of paired comparisons. Quality & Quantity, 38(5), 495–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Section editors and affiliations

  • Anne Skorkjær Binderkrantz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceAarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark