How corporatist institutions shape the access of citizen groups to policy-makers: evidence from Denmark and Switzerland

Christiansen, Peter Munk; Mach, André; Varone, Frédéric

doi:10.1080/13501763.2016.1268194

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Citizen groups 3 were divided into identity groups (e.g., patients, the elderly), leisure groups and public interest groups (e.g., environmental, humanitarian) (cf. Christiansen et al 2018). As a reliability test, a random sample of 100 groups from each country was coded by another researcher.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet it might be expected that the degree of this dominance would be higher in traditionally corporatist countries such as Finland than in pluralist countries such as the United Kingdom (cf. Christiansen et al , 4). The expected dominance of economic groups might be explained by path dependency and administrative routines, as strong bonds between civil servants and interest groups emerge over time and may be hard to break even if ‘rational’ from a pure resource‐exchange perspective (Braun ).…”

Section: Changing Patterns Of Routine Corporatism and The Understudiementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Stronghold of Routine Corporatism? The Involvement of Interest Groups in Policy Making in Finland

Vesa¹,

Kantola

Binderkrantz

2018

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the Nordic countries have a tradition of integrating privileged interest groups into policy making, a number of studies have argued that this Nordic ‘routine corporatism’ has changed over the last decades. Studies of Denmark, Norway and Sweden demonstrate that interest groups are less frequently involved in committees preparing policy, that lobbying of parliament has become more important and that the position of citizen groups has strengthened. However, systematic studies of present‐day Finland are largely missing. This article therefore adds to the literature by focusing on the Finnish case. Drawing on surveys of interest groups and civil servants, the involvement of interest groups in policy making in Finland is assessed and compared with Denmark and the United Kingdom. It is found that: (1) working groups and similar bodies are still very important sites of advocacy; (2) public administration is a more important site of advocacy than parliament or government; (3) economic groups continue to enjoy a particularly privileged position; and (4) resources predict groups’ access to policy making more strongly in Finland than in Denmark or the United Kingdom. These findings imply that routine corporatism persists in Finland to a greater extent than in Denmark. The study augments the existing evidence that corporatism may have adapted to new circumstances rather than being eliminated.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Changing Patterns Of Routine Corporatism and The Understudiementioning

confidence: 99%

A Stronghold of Routine Corporatism? The Involvement of Interest Groups in Policy Making in Finland

Vesa¹,

Kantola

Binderkrantz

2018

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If MPs are more professional nowadays, then interest groups could be expected to invest more intensively in the parliamentary venue to influence them Christiansen et al 2016).…”

Section: Case Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy evaluation in parliament: interest groups as catalysts

Varone

Bundi

Gava

2018

International Review of Administrative Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Members of Parliament (MPs) request policy evaluations and use the resultant findings to inform law-making and hold the government to account. Since most elected representatives have developed strong ties to interest groups, one might wonder whether these privileged relationships influence MPs' parliamentary behavior. This study investigates how MPs' affiliations to groups affects their demand for policy evaluations. Empirical evidence shows that, regardless of respective party or individual characteristics, MPs are more likely to request evaluations in those policy domains where they have a group affiliation. This effect holds even when controlling for a classical measure of MP policy specialization, such as legislative committee membership. These findings suggest that ties between MPs and specific types of interest group should be considered when explaining parliamentary behavior across different policy domains. Point for practitioners: To influence the policymaking process, interest groups participate in consultation procedures and parliamentary hearings, they lobby elected officials and deliver policy expertise to decision-makers. These advocacy strategies are well studied. This article innovates by showing that, in addition, interest groups foster 3 the development of policy evaluations. MPs affiliated to an interest group active on a specific issue are likely to request policy evaluations in that policy domain. Interest groups strengthen the parliamentary demand for evaluation studies and, thus, may potentially contribute to the accountability of government and public administration.

show abstract

“…The pluralist environment of the USA is supposed to increase groups' competition for decision-makers' attention and lead to a less biased access to venues. By contrast, neo-corporatist arrangements, which are (still) at work in many European countries Fraussen et al 2015;Christiansen et al 2018), guarantee a privileged access to insider groups, namely peak business groups, majors unions and those associations representing public authorities. Within the European context, Lowery et al (2015Lowery et al ( , 1221Lowery et al ( -1224 note that neo-corporatist intermediation systems are, by definition, the "ultimate form of bias" as they clearly provide venue access and policy influence for only a few favored groups.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the comparative research design also contrasts two different political systems. California's Constitution sets up a pluralist system of separation of powers, whereas the Swiss consensus democracy is a neo-corporatist system (Christiansen et al 2018). At the same time, California and Switzerland are both advanced economies where direct democracy is extensively used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interest groups as multi-venue players

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas some recent studies underline interest groups' strategy to specialize in certain venues when lobbying, we investigate under which conditions groups develop a multi-venue strategy. This study examines and compares groups' advocacy activities during three issues that were each debated in California and Switzerland. Empirical evidence shows that the policy issue at stake influences the diversity of groups that mobilize to influence an issue, while institutional factors and group types are key to explain the level of multi-venue advocacy. Multi-venue groups are propotionally more numerous in the Swiss neo-corporatist system than in the Californian pluralist system. And citizen groups are more frequently multi-venue players than business groups, regardless of the policy sector or the political system.These findings demonstrate the added value of a research design encompassing advocacy activities in all venues visited during a policy process and, furthermore, comparing these advocacy activities across political systems and policy domains.

show abstract

How corporatist institutions shape the access of citizen groups to policy-makers: evidence from Denmark and Switzerland

Cited by 24 publications

References 29 publications

A Stronghold of Routine Corporatism? The Involvement of Interest Groups in Policy Making in Finland

A Stronghold of Routine Corporatism? The Involvement of Interest Groups in Policy Making in Finland

Policy evaluation in parliament: interest groups as catalysts

Interest groups as multi-venue players

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About