Skip to main content
Log in

Timing is everything? Organized interests and the timing of legislative activity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Interest Groups & Advocacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Executive Summary

Different perspectives on the role of organized interests in democratic politics imply different temporal sequences in the relationship between legislative activity and the influence activities of organized interests. Unfortunately, lack of data has greatly limited any kind of detailed examination of this temporal relationship. We address this problem by taking advantage of the chronologically very precise data on lobbying activity provided by the door pass system of the European Parliament and data on EU legislative activity collected from EURLEX. After reviewing the several different theoretical perspectives on the timing of lobbying and legislative activity, we present a time series analysis of the co-evolution of legislative output and interest groups for the period 2005–2011. Our findings show that, contrary to what pluralist and neo-corporatist theories propose, interest groups neither lead nor lag bursts in legislative activity in the European Union.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J., Newmark, A., Gray, V. and Lowery, D. (2004) Mayflies and old bulls: Demographic volatility and experience in state interest communities. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4 (2): 140–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansolobehere, S., Snyder Jr, J.M. and Tripathi, M. (2000) Are PAC contributions motivated by access? New evidence from the lobby disclosure act. Business and Politics 4 (2): 9–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balme, R. and Chabanet, D. (2008) European Governance and Democracy: Power and Protest in the EU. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F., Berry, J.M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D. and Leech, B. (2009) Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses and Why. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F.R. and Jones, B.D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, R., Hoskin, C. and Connelly, J.M. (1992) Rent extraction through political extortion: An empirical examination. Journal of Legal Studies 21 (1): 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J. and Lowery, D. (2008) Counting organized interests in the European union: A comparison of data sources. Journal of European Public Policy 15 (4): 489–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, J. and Lowery, D. (2011) Short-term volatility in the EU interest community. Journal of European Public Policy 18 (1): 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, P.T. and Williams, J.T. (2007) Multiple Time Series Models. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brasher, H., Lowery, D. and Gray, V. (1999) State lobby registration data: The anomalous case of Florida (and Minnesota too!). Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (2): 303–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chabanet, D. (2006) The Regulation of Interest Groups in the European Union. pp. Work Package A1: Report (9 October): CONNEX Research Group 4.

  • Coen, D. (2007) Empirical and theoretical studies in EU lobbying. Journal of European Public Policy 14 (3): 333–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coughlin, P.J., Mueller, D.C. and Murrell, P. (1990) Electoral politics, interest groups, and the size of government. Economic Inquiry 28 (4): 682–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzau, A.T. and Munger, M.C. (1986) Legislators and interest groups: How unorganized interests get represented. American Political Science Review 80 (1): 89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drew, E. (1999) The Corruption of American Politics. Woodstock, New York: The Overlook Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • EP. (2003–ongoing) European Parliament Accreditation Register, http://Europa.Eu/Lobbyists/Interest_Representative_Registers/Index_En.Html.

  • Granger, C.W.J. (1969) Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37 (3): 424–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, V. and Lowery, D. (1995) The demography of interest organization communities: Institutions, associations, and membership groups. American Politics Quarterly 23 (1): 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, V., Lowery, D., Fellowes, M. and Anderson, J. (2005) Understanding the demand-side of lobbying: Interest system energy in the American states. American Politics Research 33 (1): 404–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, V., Lowery, D., Wolak, J., Godwin, E. and Kilburn, W. (2005) Reconsidering the countermobilization hypothesis: Health policy lobbying in the American states. Political Behavior 27 (2): 99–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, J. (2007) Organized civil society and democratic legitimacy in the European union. British Journal of Political Science 37 (2): 333–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, B.L., Baumgartner, F.R., La Pira, T. and Semanko, N.A. (2005) Drawing lobbyists to Washington: Government Activity and the Demand for Advocacy. Political Research Quarterly 58 (1): 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowery, D., Gray, V. and Fellowes, M. (2005) Organized interests and political extortion: A test of the fetcher bill hypothesis. Social Science Quarterly 86 (2): 368–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, S.E. and Rabinowitz, G. (2001) Issue voting. In: N.J. Smelser and P.B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, D. (2010) Who to lobby and when: Institutional determinants of interest group strategies in European parliament committees. European Union Politics 11 (4): 553–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McChesney, F.S. (1997) Money for Nothing: Politicians, Rent Extraction, and Political Extortion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messer, A., Berkhout, J. and Lowery, D. (2011) The density of the EU interest system: A test of the ESA model. British Journal of Political Science 41 (1): 161–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W.C. and Munger, M.C. (1991) Economic models of interest groups: An introductory survey. American Journal of Political Science 35 (2): 512–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.G. and Murrell, P. (1986) Interest groups and the size of government. Public Choice 48 (2): 125–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nownes, A. (2003) The population ecology of interest group formation. British Journal of Political Science 34 (1): 49–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1982) The Rise and Decline of Nations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, S. (1976) Towards a more general theory of regulation. Journal of Law and Economics 19 (2): 211–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Salgado, R. (2007) Comment L'europe Construit La Société Civile. Paris, France: Dalloz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E.E. (1960) The Semisovereign People. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlozman, K.L. (1984) What accent the heavenly chorus? Political equality and the American pressure system. Journal of Politics 46: 1006–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shugart, W.F. and Tollison, R.D. (1986) On the growth of government and the political economy of legislation. Research in Law and Economics 9: 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.A. (2000) American Business and Political Power: Public Opinion, Elections, and Democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. (1971) The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2 (1): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W. and Kenworthy, L. (2005) Theories and practices of Neocorporatism. In: T. Janoski, R.R. Alford, A.M. Hicks and M.A. Schwartz (eds.), The Handbook of Political Sociology: States, Civil Societies and Globalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 441–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truman, D. (1951) The Governmental Process. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wawro, G. (2000) Legislative Entrepreneurship in the U.S. House of Representatives. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wessels, B. (2004) Contestation potential of interest groups in the EU: Emergence, structure, and political alliances. In: G. Marks and M.R. Steenbergen (eds.), European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195–215.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • West, D.M. (2000) Checkbook Democracy. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J.R. (1996) Interest Groups and Congress. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dimiter Toshkov.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on Interest Groups & Advocacy website (http://www.palgrave.com/iga) and the website of the corresponding author http://www.dimiter.eu/Data.html.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Toshkov, D., Lowery, D., Carroll, B. et al. Timing is everything? Organized interests and the timing of legislative activity. Int Groups Adv 2, 48–70 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/iga.2012.14

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/iga.2012.14

Keywords

Navigation