IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v53y2015i2p365-382.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Battle for Influence: The Politics of Business Lobbying in the European Parliament

Author

Listed:
  • Maja Kluger Rasmussen

Abstract

The European Parliament (EP) has become an increasingly important lobbying venue for business due to the recent enhancement of its regulatory powers. Existing research, however, disagrees on the extent to which the intensified business lobbying has resulted in increased business influence on EP policy outcomes. Some studies find a ‘business bias’ in the EP, while others still perceive it to be a forceful promoter of diffuse interests (such as consumer and environmental groups). This article examines the conditions under which business groups shape policy outcomes in the EP. The article uses a comparative qualitative case study design of four recent legislative dossiers, and draws on process-tracing of EU documents and lobbying letters, and 145 interviews. It finds that the ability of business to leave its fingerprints on EP reports depends on a number of factors – most notably business unity, low issue salience and dossiers being dealt with by mainstream committees.

Suggested Citation

  • Maja Kluger Rasmussen, 2015. "The Battle for Influence: The Politics of Business Lobbying in the European Parliament," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 365-382, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:53:y:2015:i:2:p:365-382
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jcms.12156
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilligan, Thomas W & Krehbiel, Keith, 1997. "Specialization Decisions within Committee," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 366-386, October.
    2. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521118590, September.
    3. Cornelia Woll, 2012. "The brash and the soft-spoken: Lobbying styles in a transatlantic comparison," Post-Print hal-02186556, HAL.
    4. David Marshall, 2010. "Who to lobby and when: Institutional determinants of interest group strategies in European Parliament committees," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(4), pages 553-575, December.
    5. Dahl, Robert A., 1958. "A Critique of the Ruling Elite Model," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 463-469, June.
    6. Neuhold, Christine, 2001. "The "Legislative Backbone" keeping the Institution upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 5, August.
    7. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521134132, September.
    8. Charlotte Burns & Neil Carter, 2010. "Is Co-decision Good for the Environment? An Analysis of the European Parliament's Green Credentials," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 123-142, February.
    9. Anne Rasmussen & Petya Alexandrova, 2012. "Foreign Interests Lobbying Brussels: Participation of non-EU Members in Commission Consultations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 614-631, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam W. Chalmers, 2020. "Unity and conflict: Explaining financial industry lobbying success in European Union public consultations," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 391-408, July.
    2. Lisa Kastner, 2017. "Tracing policy influence of diffuse interests: The post-crisis consumer finance protection politics in the US," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-02186320, HAL.
    3. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    4. Scott James, 2016. "The domestic politics of financial regulation: Informal ratification games and the EU capital requirement negotiations," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 187-203, March.
    5. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    6. Fairfield Tasha, 2015. "Structural power in comparative political economy: perspectives from policy formulation in Latin America," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 411-441, October.
    7. Nils Redeker & Stefanie Walter, 2020. "We’d rather pay than change the politics of German non-adjustment in the Eurozone crisis," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 573-599, July.
    8. Lisa Kastner, 2016. "The Power of Weak Interests in Financial Reforms," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-02187883, HAL.
    9. Lisa Kastner, 2017. "Tracing policy influence of diffuse interests: The post-crisis consumer finance protection politics in the US," Post-Print hal-02186320, HAL.
    10. Neimanns, Erik & Blossey, Nils, 2022. "From media-party linkages to ownership concentration causes of cross-national variation in media outlets' economic positioning," MPIfG Discussion Paper 22/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Cornelia Woll, 2013. "Lobbying under Pressure: The Effect of Salience on European Union Hedge Fund Regulation," Post-Print hal-02186537, HAL.
    12. Kinderman, Daniel, 2014. "Challenging varieties of capitalism's account of business interests: The new social market initiative and German employers' quest for liberalization, 2000-2014," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/16, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    13. Pritish Behuria, 2019. "The comparative political economy of plastic bag bans in East Africa: why implementation has varied in Rwanda, Kenya and Uganda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 372019, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    14. Hassel, Anke, 2011. "The paradox of liberalization – understanding dualism and the recovery of the German political economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 53212, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Lisa Kastner, 2014. "‘Much ado about nothing?’ Transnational civil society, consumer protection and financial regulatory reform," Post-Print hal-02186500, HAL.
    16. Massoc, Elsa Clara, 2022. "Fifty shades of hatred and discontent: Varieties of anti-finance discourses on the European Twitter (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK)," SAFE Working Paper Series 338, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    17. Stephen Bell & Andrew Hindmoor, 2014. "The Politics of Australia's Mining Tax: A Response to Marsh and Lewis," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 634-637, August.
    18. Svallfors, Stefan, 2015. "Politics as organized combat: New players and new rules of the game in Sweden," MPIfG Discussion Paper 15/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    19. Massimiliano Vatiero, 2018. "Transaction and transactors’ choices: what we have learned and what we need to explore," Chapters, in: Claude Ménard & Mary M. Shirley (ed.), A Research Agenda for New Institutional Economics, chapter 11, pages 97-108, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Stefano Pagliari & Kevin L. Young, 2014. "Leveraged interests: Financial industry power and the role of private sector coalitions," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 575-610, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:53:y:2015:i:2:p:365-382. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.