Organizations and the Democratic Representation of Interests: What Does It Mean When Those Organizations Have No Members?

Abstract

This article documents the prevalence in organized interest politics in the United States of organizations—for example, corporations, think tanks, universities, or hospitals—that have no members in the ordinary sense and analyzes the consequences of that dominance for the democratic representation of citizen interests. We use data from the Washington Representatives Study, a longitudinal data base containing more than 33,000 organizations active in national politics in 1981, 1991, 2001, 2006, and 2011. The share of membership associations active in Washington has eroded over time until, in 2011, barely a quarter of the more than 14,000 organizations active in Washington in 2011 were membership associations, and less than half of those were membership association with individuals as members. In contrast, a majority of the politically involved organizations were memberless organizations, of which nearly two-thirds were corporations. The dominance of memberless organizations in pressure politics raises important questions about democratic representation. Studies of political representation by interest groups raise several concerns about democratic inequalities: the extent to which representation of interests by groups is unequal, the extent to which groups fail to represent their members equally, and the extent to which group members are unable to control their leaders. All of the dilemmas that arise when membership associations advocate in politics become even more intractable when organizations do not have members.

Member Influence and Involvement in Civil Society Organizations: A Resource Dependency Perspective on Groups and Parties

“…they exercise influence over decisions), which is neither necessarily the case in parties nor in groups (e.g. Cross and Blais, 2012;Evers, 2014;Hazan and Rahat, 2010;Jordan and Maloney, 1997;Maloney, 2012;Scarrow, 1996;Schlozman et al, 2015;Skocpol, 2003;Van Haute and Gauja, 2015).…”

Prioritizing professionals? How the democratic and professionalized nature of interest groups shapes their degree of access to EU officials

“…The conceptualization of transmission belts developed here applies to membership-based interest groups, as they are expected to have a representative role that one would not assumeor that is at least more complicatedfor non-membership organizations (Schlozman et al, 2015). More specifically, membership-based interest groups are expected to promote a legitimate representation through processes of authorization and accountability between members and representatives.…”

Self-maintenance vs. goal attainment: drivers of mortality anxiety in organized civil society

“…Our findings -especially the factors indicating intra-organizational resilience -put earlier insights regarding the importance of membership-related resources on a broader footing (Gray and Lowery 1997;Halpin and Thomas 2012;Heylen et al 2018), while putting debates around the declining importance of members both in the group and party literature into perspective (Scarrow 1996;Skocpol 2003;Maloney 2009;Schlozman et al 2015). More specifically, member involvement contributes to an organization's sense of security, which challenges traditional assumptions about the tensions between institutionalization and participation (Michels 1915).…”

“…Regarding the role of an organization's membership base, despite debates around the declining importance of members for organizations operating in advanced democracies (Scarrow 1996;Skocpol 2003;Maloney 2009;Schlozman et al 2015), cultivating voluntary support remains important: member loyalty and member involvement (H2.3 and H2.4) enhance the security perceived by CSOs. More specifically, for one unit increase in the level of member loyalty, we expect a decrease of 0.26 standard deviations in the log odds of higher levels of mortality anxiety, while for one unit increase in the level of involvement, we expect a 0.08 standard deviations decrease in the log odds of higher levels of mortality anxiety.…”