The Visible Hand of the State: On the Organizational Development of Interest Groups

Fraussen, Bert

doi:10.1111/padm.12056

Cited by 56 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(98 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One can imagine that policymakers prefer to interact with professionalized groups that credibly represent a sizable societal segment and are able to supply valuable expertise. Yet, being an insider might also benefit the overall organizational development of an interest group (Fisker, 2015;Fraussen, 2014). Future research that maps the organizational development of organized interests in conjunction with their degree of government access might deliver more clarity on this thought provoking matter.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s in and who’s out?: Explaining access to policymakers in Belgium

Fraussen

Beyers

2015

Acta Polit

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most political systems, the community of policy insiders represents a small subset of the total interest group population. Therefore, one key question is which factors explain why some mobilized interests become insiders and others remain outsiders. By contrasting a bottom-up registration of interest groups with a top-down census of all groups that enjoy access to policymakers, we present a unique approach to distinguish insiders from outsiders. This approach allows us to systematically analyze which factorssuch as resources, constituency, scale of organization and policy portfolio -predict who becomes a policy insider. Our analysis focuses on interest group politics in Belgium, and shows that next to resources, the size of the membership, the scale of organization and a group's policy portfolio are strong predictors of the likelihood to gain access.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s in and who’s out?: Explaining access to policymakers in Belgium

Fraussen

Beyers

2015

Acta Polit

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4 As Gauja (2015b: 90) indicates, "political parties are generally accepted to be adaptive organizations," and we think a similar claim can be made as regards interest organizations (e.g. Fraussen, 2013;. A key contribution to this area was made by Ingrid Van Biezen (2005), who assessed the explanatory value of three different perspectives on the development of parties in new democracies in Europe, namely, life-cycle scenarios, generational and period effects.…”

Section: Emphasis Added)mentioning

confidence: 86%

Political Parties and Interest Organizations at the Crossroads: Perspectives on the Transformation of Political Organizations

Fraussen

Halpin

2016

Political Studies Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the case for considering the study of parties and interest organizations together, under the umbrella of "political organizations." While both literatures are rather disconnected at the moment, we believe that they share many commonalities. A common narrative involves the apparent transformation of parties and interest organizations, as both organizations are continuously adapting to changing environments. In this review, we integrate both literatures and assess arguments for organizational convergence vis-à-vis claims of continuing diversity. Building upon recent work that takes a more joined-up approach, we advance a common research agenda that demonstrates the value and feasibility of studying these organizations in tandem. Scholars of political parties and interest organizations increasingly seem to grapple with very similar questions, such as the evolving position of these organizations between society and state, the difficulties of engaging citizens and the extent to which external factors, such as state regulation and mediatization, shape organizational structures and practices. So far, unfortunately, a lack of engagement across the party and interest organization literatures has resulted in highly informative yet parallel conversations on what might productively be conceptualized as the same basic trends or processes. We believe our understanding of the organizational form and development of interest organizations and political parties would be advanced substantially by addressing them under the broader

show abstract

“…As organized interest works on various topics with varying degrees of intensity, the nature and the size of policy portfolios can be quite diverse (Strolovitch, 2007). Whereas the broad mission of different organized interests might be quite similar or even identical, how organizations translate their general orientation into political action can vary considerably (Fraussen, 2013). All Brussels-based regional representations fulfill a similar function and gain their legitimacy from defending regional interests.…”

Section: A Lobbying Perspective On the Policy Portfolio Of Regional Rmentioning

confidence: 98%

It’s not all about the money: Explaining varying policy portfolios of regional representations in Brussels

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on territorial lobbying in the European Union (EU) has paid much attention to the interaction between regional representations in Brussels and the member-state central governments, and the relations of these representations with the European institutions. Surprisingly, far less systematic research has been conducted on the policies that regional representations prioritize when they lobby in Brussels. In this article, we focus on the policy portfolios of these organizations and analyze variation concerning the domains and issues these regional representations prioritize. Empirically, we demonstrate that the size and the nature of a policy portfolio is not primarily affected by the capabilities of a regional representation, but rather results from structural ties of regional lobbyists with other public and private interests. This claim is corroborated by data collected through a telephone survey with 127 officials from regional offices and trans-regional associations.Regional authorities, that is sub-state jurisdictions such as provinces, counties, regions and länder, mobilize in large numbers in the European Union (EU), often by establishing a permanent representation in Brussels (Donas and Beyers, 2013a). Following Swenden et al (2006, p. 864) we denote these actors as regions, which are meso-level jurisdictions situated between local units of government (such as municipalities) and the central government. The Brussels-based representations of these entities act as communication channels between the region and the European institutions. They monitor policy developments in Brussels, functioning as a kind of

show abstract

The Visible Hand of the State: On the Organizational Development of Interest Groups

Cited by 56 publications

References 62 publications

Who’s in and who’s out?: Explaining access to policymakers in Belgium

Who’s in and who’s out?: Explaining access to policymakers in Belgium

Political Parties and Interest Organizations at the Crossroads: Perspectives on the Transformation of Political Organizations

It’s not all about the money: Explaining varying policy portfolios of regional representations in Brussels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About