Interest-group capacities and infant industry development: State-sponsored growth in organic farming

Abstract

Both interest-group and public-policy scholars accept that groups are important to policy formulation and implementation because they hold valuable capacities. However, the literature has not dealt with whether, and how, groups develop capacities. In this article, we examine the question of group capacity development by focusing on the adaption of specific groups to evolving policy contexts. Taking the example of organic farm policy we look at the impact that divergent policy strategies aimed at growing this infant industry sector have had on the way related industry groups have evolved in four countries. This comparative study supports our argument that policy strategy is one key force in shaping the capacities that groups develop over time.

Dynamics of Policy Networks. The Case of Organic Farming Policy in the Czech Republic

“…On the other hand, while still influential, the organic farming organizations do not appear to have the power to assert both consistency between the Action Plan and the new RDP, and to secure sufficient resource allocation for organic farming support to achieve the objectives of the Action Plan. Halpin et al (2011) have discussed different strategies of organic farming interest groups (in Australia, UK, Sweden, and Denmark) to overcome the challenges of political power in changing stages and roles throughout a policy cycle. They showed that the interest groups developed new capacities (e.g.…”

“…While many comparative studies (e.g. Greer 2005;Halpin et al 2011) focused on the comparison of policy networks in different countries, our study is one of the few to undertake a longitudinal analysis of the same network in one country. Our study provided empirical material that allowed us to carefully analyse the (changing) roles and capacities of actors in the network; it thereby illustrates the dialectical nature of policy networks as conceptualized by Marsh & Smith (2000).…”

“…Group capacity is conceptualized as a group's potential to engage in a policy process by providing ideas, knowledge and expertise, which can also help acceptance of a certain policy outcome if the group represents a larger part of the target society (Halpin, Daugbjerg, & Schvartzman, 2011). Daugbjerg and Halpin (2010) suggest that policy capacity develops as a result of high levels of both state and associative capacity and the ability to create conditions favourable for corporatist deliberation.…”

“…Fischer and Sciarini (2013) have shown that state actors and non-state actors are indeed relevant for transposition of European level policies; in particular as the non-state organizations provide legitimacy for the policy and ensure societal acceptance (Fischer & Sciarini, 2013). Halpin et al (2011) concluded that interest-group capacity responds to policy evolution, so that the capacity can potentially grow with increasing establishment of the policy. Similarly, Sissenich (2010) showed in her study of the 27 EU member states that state capacity and organized interests go hand in hand, and concluded that countries that were rated as having good governance also have citizens who are engaged in interest organizations and/or participate in various forms of protest.…”

Environmental Policy Performance Revisited: Designing Effective Policies for Green Markets

“…The state has provided increasing funding for research in organic production and has set up an extension service for organic farmers as part of the state agricultural advisory service. No significant support has been granted to demand‐oriented market development (Halpin et al ., 2011). Organic certification and labelling are delegated to the private association KRAV, which was formed in 1985 and state‐accredited in 1993 (Boström, 2006, pp.…”