Lobby Groups and political consultancy

Question 1

Classification possibilities of interest groups

Answer 1

(- legal definition)

• group membership structure (no members, individuals, mixed membership, organisational members)
• scope (general, sectoral, trade union, occupational, individual)
• level of mobilisation (international, EU, national, regional)
• size (staff, budget)

Question 2

EU Transparency register classifications

Answer 2

• professional consultancy/ law-firms/ self-employed consultants
• in-house lobbyists and trade/business/professional associations (most registrants)
• non-governmental organisations
• think-tanks, research and academic institutions
• organisations representing churches and religious communities
• organisations representing local, regional and municipal authorities

-> further split-ups on lower levels possible

Question 3

Group membership - typical levels of European Associations

Answer 3

Firms (level 1) join in national organisations (level 2); national organisations unite in European associations (level 3)

Question 4

Pro + cons of European Associations

Answer 4

Pro:
- large budget/staff, highly specialised staff

Cons:

• finding a consensus can be difficult (27 national associations)
• individual firms started lobbying, too, decreasing the influence of the European association
• > initiatives to engage firms more closely with the association’s work

Question 5

Mixed membership of European associations

Answer 5

e. g.:
- national associations, European associations, firms (e.g. FoodDrinkEurope)
- national associations, firms (European Federation of Bottled Waters)

Question 6

Organisations with no (formal) membership

Answer 6

• political consultancy, law firms
• think tanks
• other formats: networks, houses, …

Question 7

Geographical scope of European associations

Answer 7

Firms have no “geography”:

• most European associations cover all EU MS + often EEA
• activities focus on EU institutions
• national associations often have their own Brussels office (in addition)

Question 8

Sectoral scope of associations

Answer 8

• some groups represent general interests
• others are sector-specific
• some are very specific
• firms
• in terms of information: highly specialised sectoral associations

Question 9

On which levels are interest groups active?

Answer 9

Inside: backstage, expert groups, advisory bodies, etc.

Outside: the ‘arena’ where IGs communicate among themselves, with policy-makers + their own constituents (in addition to outside lobbying)

Question 10

Nature of political issues

Answer 10

First order norms:
very particularistic, concern a few IGs, highly technical and sector-specific; narrow range of groups needed, no large coalitions required (e.g. the specifics of a specific policy plan)

Second order norms: dividing issues, diverging opinions, large number of groups involved; concern a sector, no spill-over to broader political environment (e.g. policy options)

Third order norms: unifying issues, relatively uncommon, legitimacy of a policy discussed (not necessarily a practical solution) (e.g. Should we regulate?)

Question 11

Directional vs. instrumental influence

Answer 11

• directional: general policy shift which entails a profound shift in policy views
• instrumental: adapt existing policy tools

Question 12

Modes of interaction

Answer 12

• bargaining: influencing through delivering expertise, knowledge
• > aim to get e.g. favourable regulation, subsidy
• arguing: aiming at changes in factual beliefs/preferences, framing of interpretations and understandings (no intention to change something specific)
• acquiescence: try to influence voting behaviour

Question 13

Organisational diversity - relevant dimensions within IGs

Answer 13

• encompassiveness: differing in terms of scope
• leadership autonomy: dependence on constituency for the chosen course of action (less autonomous -> limited flexibility; more autonomous -> less inhibited by internal decision-making)

Question 14

Strengths and weaknesses of different organisational formats

Answer 14

Question 15

Activities of highly specialised IGs

Answer 15

• would usually be relevant for first/second order issues where influence is instrumental
• bargaining
• use inside arena

Question 16

Activities of encompasing IGs

Answer 16

• would usually be relevant for second/third order issues where influence is directional
• arguing, agenda setting
• use inside and outside arena

Question 17

Pros and cons of political consultancy services

Answer 17

Pros:

• allow firms or IGs to outsource some tasks
• for smaller IGs and firms: advice on stragety and procedure
• showing members that they receive ‘value’ for membership fees (credible costly signal)
• firms can lobby outside of an association, if common position is unsufficient for them
• EU consultants might be helpful for seeking alliance partners on a specific proposal + assisting alliance in lobbying strategy, communication, etc.

Cons:

• financial costs
• loss of control of an operation
• risk of losing own network among policy-makers

Question 18

Empirics of consultancy hiring

Answer 18

• business IGs are more likely to hire consultants than non-business IGs
• lobbying budget is most likely to be between €10,000 and €99,999

Question 19

Guéguen’s current model of lobbying

Answer 19

Question 20

Impact of unity and conflict between an association and individual firm lobbying

Answer 20

• alignment: both association and firm lobby on the same issue at the same time; members engage in costly lobbying to support association’s position
• > higher predicted lobbying success
• opposition: lobbying on the same issue, diverging preferences
• > least efficient form of lobbying
• delegation: association takes position on an issue, member firm stays silent
• > mediocre predicted lobbying success
• control: firm lobbies on an isssue, but association stays silent
• > mediocre predicted lobbying success

-> with individual firms being more active in lobbying, it became more challenging + possible conflicts between associations and individual firms