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

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-501
Author(s):  
Adrià Albareda
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Organizational Capacity ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Organizational Attributes ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Member Involvement ◽  
Eu Commission ◽  
The Eu

AbstractInterest groups are key intermediary actors between civil society and public officials. The EU has long emphasized the importance of interacting with representative groups that involve their members. Additionally, there is an increasing trend toward the professionalization of groups that invest in organizational capacities to efficiently provide policy expertise. Both member involvement and organizational capacity are crucial features for groups to function as transmission belts that aggregate and transfer the preferences of their members to policymakers, thus reinforcing the legitimacy and efficiency of governance systems. Yet, not all groups have these organizational attributes. This paper quantitatively examines the effects of interest groups’ investment in member involvement and organizational capacity on the level of access to EU Commission officials. The results indicate that member involvement does not pay off in terms of higher levels of access. In contrast, groups with high organizational capacities have more meetings with public officials of the Commission.

17. Organized Interests

2020 ◽  
pp. 316-332
Author(s):  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Owen Parker ◽  
Ian Bache ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Charlotte Burns
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Central Component ◽  
European Level ◽  
Organized Interests ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the so-called organized interests, whose interaction with the formal European Union (EU) institutions is a central component of the EU’s decision-making process. The term ‘interest group’ refers to a range of organizations outside of the formal institutions that seek to influence decision making. They provide a link between state actors and the rest of society, also known as ‘civil society’. The chapter first considers the general growth of interest group activity at the European level before discussing the types of group that try to influence EU policy making and the forms of representation open to interests. It then explores the strategies and tactics that interest groups use to try to influence the different institutions. Finally, it analyses the issue of regulating interest group access to the EU institutions.

Conceptualizing Legitimacy

2020 ◽  
pp. 25-55
Author(s):  
Vivien A. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Interaction Effects ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Philosophical Perspective ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 2 investigates questions of democracy and legitimacy in the EU; defines the three legitimizing mechanisms of output, input, and throughput; and then examines the five main criteria for throughput legitimation—efficacy, accountability, transparency, inclusiveness, and openness. The chapter begins with foundational definitions of legitimacy in liberal democracy based not only on a governing body’s authority but also on its activities. For the latter, it then explores the concepts of input, output, and throughput legitimacy; sets them in historical philosophical perspective; and differentiates them from one another. Lastly, the chapter discusses the different criteria that make up throughput legitimacy, provides examples from EU governance, and discusses their interaction effects. Efficacy is defined in terms of efficiency in policymaking, with illustrations drawn from the challenges EU actors have faced to improve governance processes. Accountability is first defined generally as public officials giving account and being held to account in technical and political forums, and then discussed in terms of EU actors’ accountability and the forums to which they may (or may not) be accountable. Transparency is defined as ensuring citizen access to information about governance policies and processes, with examples of the ways in which EU actors may (or may not) be transparent for good (or bad) reasons. Inclusiveness and openness are defined as EU actors’ willingness to engage with citizens (mainly organized in interest groups) and discussed in terms of their successes or failures to bring in citizens in ways that ensure balance and fairness in representation.

International Limits to National Claims in EU Constitutional Negotiations: The Spanish Government and the Asylum Right for EU citizens

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
State Power ◽  
International Norms ◽  
Close Inspection ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
National Governments ◽  
Instrumental Approaches ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAn examination of EU constitutional negotiations allows for the identification of influences behind specific outcomes. A close inspection of particular issues demonstrates the necessity to revise purely realistic and instrumental approaches that focus primarily on formal negotiators, that is, national governments. Other actors, such as interest groups, can enter the negotiation arena by using empowering resources that are alternatives to state power. In some cases, such as the discussion of asylum rights for EU nationals during the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference, interest groups joined the negotiation and did not pursue self-interest, but rather sought to design broader constitutional principles of the EU. The formal negotiator, the Spanish government, was faced with pressure from these groups that emanated from a set of international norms and moral beliefs that underpinned their claims. Their success is significant, not only because they diluted the Spanish government's proposal, but because their performance demonstrated important characteristics of a maturing European civil society.

scholarly journals Interest Groups, NGOs or Civil Society Organisations? The Framing of Non-State Actors in the EU

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas J. Schoenefeld
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Third Sector ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Civil Society Organisations ◽  
Third Sector Organisations ◽  
Academic Publications ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Scholars have used varying terminology for describing non-state entities seeking to influence public policy or work with the EU’s institutions. This paper argues that the use of this terminology is not and should not be random, as different ‘frames’ come with different normative visions about the role(s) of these entities in EU democracy. A novel bibliometric analysis of 780 academic publications between 1992 and 2020 reveals that three frames stand out: The interest group frame, the NGO frame, as well as the civil society organisation frame; a number of publications also use multiple frames. This article reveals the specific democratic visions contained in these frames, including a pluralist view for interest groups; a governance view for NGOs as ‘third sector’ organisations, and participatory and deliberative democracy contributions for civil society organisations. The use of these frames has dynamically changed over time, with ‘interest groups’ on the rise. The results demonstrate the shifting focus of studies on non-state actors in the EU and consolidation within the sub-field; the original visions of European policy-makers emerging from the 2001 White Paper on governance may only partially come true.

17. Organized Interests

2014 ◽  
pp. 308-326
Author(s):  
Ian Bache ◽  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Owen Parker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Central Component ◽  
European Level ◽  
Organized Interests ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the so-called organized interests, whose interaction with the formal European Union institutions is a central component of the EU’s decision-making process. The term ‘interest group’ refers to a range of organizations outside of the formal institutions that seek to influence decision making. They provide a link between state actors and the rest of society, also known as ‘civil society’. The chapter first considers the general growth of interest-group activity at the European level before discussing the types of group that try to influence EU policy making and the forms of representation open to interests. It then explores the strategies and tactics that interest groups use to try to influence the different institutions. Finally, it analyses the issue of regulating interest-group access to the EU institutions.

Europejski Komitet Ekonomiczno-Społeczny Unii Europejskiej – organ reprezentacji funkcjonalnej czy instytucja fasadowa?

2016 ◽  
pp. 66-81
Author(s):  
Leszek Graniszewski
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Social Conscience ◽  
The Eu

In the article the author draws his attention to the differences between the position of the Committee as a social conscience of the EU (that has been declared in the treaties and declarations) and the practical possibilities to fulfil this role and its results. The analysis featured covers the structure and the manner of operation of the Committee, and, in particular, the functions actually fulfilled by the Committee in its role of the bridge between the EU and the organised civil society.

scholarly journals Reflections on the Relationship between the Government and Civil Society Organizations during the Covid-19 Pandemic: The Israeli Case

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillel Schmid
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
Strategic Behavior ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Power Dependence ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The paper analyzes the relations between the government and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. The paper presents the inconsistent policy of the government, which has been influenced by various interest groups and the very limited financial support allocated to CSOs during the health, economic and social crisis. The paper describes the government’s alienated attitude toward the CSOs as well as the reasons for that behavior. Special attention is devoted to the government’s misunderstanding of the mission and roles of CSOs in modern society, especially at times of crisis and national disasters. The paper also analyzes the organizational and strategic behavior of CSOs toward the government, which has also contributed to the alienated attitude of the government toward them. I argue that relations between CSOs and the government should be based on more trust, mutuality, and understanding on the part of both actors in order to change power-dependence relations, and that there is a need to establish more cross-sectoral partnerships for the benefit of citizens.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document