Over the last several decades, a number of societal changes can be expected to have led to the increased mobilization of interest groups representing citizen interests. For this mobilization to be effective, citizen groups need to win access to relevant political arenas. This article investigates the development of the Danish interest group system and the representation of interest groups in political arenas. While replicating findings of increasing citizen mobilization from other countries is expected, it is argued here that the development of groups’ political representation as a consequence of this mobilization depends on the dynamics of resource exchange in different political arenas. This argument is tested on a unique dataset of Danish interest groups in 1975 and 2010 which includes data on group populations and group access to the administration and the media. The analysis demonstrates that citizen groups must overcome not only the challenge of organizing, but also persistent logics guiding the inclusion of, interest groups in different political arenas. Citizen groups have been more successful in increasing their representation in the media than in the administrative arena.

No abstract

Executive Summary This article tests the density dependence theory on the population of Danish patient groups from 1901 to 2011. The theory states that the formation of interest groups can be explained by the number of groups in the population. The density dependence theory is a population theory, and these have successfully been applied to interest group populations in pluralist systems such as the American. However, they have only rarely been applied to corporative systems. As there are important differences between pluralist and corporative systems regarding how interest groups are integrated in the policy process, the interest group populations can be expected to develop in different ways. Therefore, the article explores whether and how population theories work in corporative systems by testing the density dependence theory on the population of Danish patient groups. The article conducts a graphical and a statistical analysis on a new and comprehensive data set with founding and disbanding years for all Danish patient groups from 1901 to 2011. The findings support the expectations of the theory as the density of the population has a positive and curvilinear effect on the founding rate. However, they also indicate that corporative structures may suppress the population mechanisms that are often found to drive the development of interest group populations in pluralist systems. This suggests that population theories can also be applied to corporative systems and that they can contribute to answer the much discussed question about interest group formation.

Interest groups can contribute to a well-functioning democracy as they ensure diversity in the chorus of voices in the political system. Is there more diversity in the Danish interest group population today than earlier? Four different societal developments: new political values, demographic changes, changes in the corporative structures, and the expansion of the welfare state affect how the Danish interest group population has developed in terms of the composition of different group types. There is more diversity in the Danish interest group population today than in the 1970s when economic groups such as unions and business groups were dominant. Today, the population is more balanced between economic groups and civil society groups.

Interessegrupper kan bidrage til et velfungerende demokrati, idet de kan sikre diversitet i koret af stemmer i det politiske system. Men er der mere diversitet i den danske interessegruppepopulation i dag end tidligere? Fire forskellige samfundsudviklinger: nye politiske værdier, demografiske ændringer, ændrede korporative strukturer og velfærdsstatens ekspansion påvirker, hvordan den danske interessegruppepopulation har udviklet sig i forhold til sammensætningen af forskellige gruppetyper. Der er mere diversitet i den danske interessegruppepopulation i dag end i 1970’erne, hvor de økonomiske organisationer som arbejdstager- og erhvervsorganisationer dominerede populationen. I dag er der mere ligevægt mellem de økonomiske organisationer og civilsamfundsorganisationerne.