Who says what to whom? Alignments and arguments in EU policy-making

Eising, Rainer; Rasch, Daniel; Rozbicka, Patrycja; Fink‐Hafner, Danica; Hafner-Fink, Mitja; Novák, Miroslav

doi:10.1080/01402382.2017.1320175

Cited by 34 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of interest groups has increasingly moved from qualitative case studies to large-N empirical research (Baumgartner and Leech 1998;Beyers et al 2008;Eising et al 2017) and there has been a growing use of surveys for data collection and empirical analysis (for a thorough review, see Marchetti 2015;Beyers et al 2020). For instance, several studies analyzed how interest organizations have mobilized at the European level, examining multi-level strategies adopted by distinct types of group (see Bouwen 2004;Eising 2007;Klüver 2010;Mateo 2012, 2014).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interest group strategies and policy involvement: Does the context matter? Evidence from Southern Europe

Lisi

Loureiro

2021

Int Groups Adv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines interest groups' involvement in the policymaking process by asking the following questions: Which political and non-political actors do interest groups target? What are the attitudinal and behavioral components of their strategy? We focus on new Southern European democracies that have been understudied in terms of interest group politics. Based on an original cross-national survey administered in Greece, Portugal and Spain, with responses from approximately 600 interest groups, this study argues that the attitudinal and behavioral dimensions are partially distinct components that need to be distinguished. The findings show that although groups mainly target governmental actors to defend their interests, parties are still considered important intermediaries to influence public policies. Moreover, organizational resources are the most significant explanatory factors that shape the relations between organized interests and policymakers, while cross-country differences do not seem to be of great relevance.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interest group strategies and policy involvement: Does the context matter? Evidence from Southern Europe

Lisi

Loureiro

2021

Int Groups Adv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current research is looking at the what is the "target of arguments" and "who" are the parties who shape the targets through argumentation? Examining the "to whom the arguments are addressed to" does not mean that the actors implicitly mention the person or the receiver of the target arguments (Eising et al, 2017). However, the very circulation of arguments around the subject of said arguments, often connects it to other stakeholders already involved in the topic (of the arguments).…”

Section: To Whom the Arguments Are Addressed To?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Playground of Big Tobacco? Discourse Network Analysis of the Cigarette Advertising Debate and Policy in Indonesia

Murti

Ratriyana

2022

Journal of Communication Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study contributes to an understanding of the discourses of cigarette advertising which intersect within policy debate, media exposure, and the interests of a debate’s primary actors. The policy refers to the existing legislation that has been evolved for ten years. Meanwhile, the debate refers to the nuance of banning the cigarette advertisement in fully or partially form of regulation. It identifies and maps discourse coalitions that emerged as part of Indonesia’s cigarette advertising debate (2010–2020) through an analysis of the main actors’ use of arguments during media coverage of the policy. The findings highlight the contested ground—as well as nature—of the cigarette advertising debate and policy in Indonesia. The current research was able to map the actors, arguments, target audience, as well as channels and impacts of the debate over the evolution of policy in the nation. As implied, the current research engages in the critical use of Lasswell’s model in communication and the process of constructing policy with the strong ties of interest from organizations behind the discourse.

show abstract

“…Similarly, consultation with stakeholders is an important component of the policy formulation process. It is widely accepted that national ministries consult external stakeholders, mostly because it increases the quality and legitimacy of policies but also because certain information cannot be produced by decision-makers themselves (Scharpf, 1999;Rasmussen, 2015;Eising et al, 2017). But consultation, and cognitive and decisional biases in the consultation process have not been studied substantially from a behavioural governance perspective.…”

Section: Policy Formulation and Adoptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural governance in the policy process: introduction to the special issue

Gofen

Moseley

Thomann

et al. 2021

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research adopting an interdisciplinary, behavioural perspective on Public Policy and Public Administration is booming. Yet there has been little integration into mainstream public policy scholarship. Behavioural public administration (BPA) and behavioural public policy (BPP) have emerged largely as two disconnected subfields. We propose the overarching term 'behavioural governance' to refer to the cognitive and decision processes through which decision-makers, implementing actors and target populations shape and react to public policies and to each other, as well as the impacts of these processes on individual and group behaviour. To allow an integrative perspective, this introductory essay discusses how a behavioural perspective can deepen understanding of different phases of the policy process. We connect insights from a long established public policy and administration scholarship which has not always been self-defined as 'behavioural' with more recent studies adopting a more explicitly behavioural perspective, including those in this Special Issue from varied national contexts.

show abstract

Who says what to whom? Alignments and arguments in EU policy-making

Cited by 34 publications

References 44 publications

Interest group strategies and policy involvement: Does the context matter? Evidence from Southern Europe

Interest group strategies and policy involvement: Does the context matter? Evidence from Southern Europe

The Playground of Big Tobacco? Discourse Network Analysis of the Cigarette Advertising Debate and Policy in Indonesia

Behavioural governance in the policy process: introduction to the special issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About