IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v11y2022i10p436-d924668.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond Usual Suspects? Inclusion and Influence of Non-State Actors in Online Public Consultations in Croatia

Author

Listed:
  • Igor Vidačak

    (Faculty of Political Science, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

Abstract

Despite the increasing use of various e-democracy tools in shaping new policies, there is still a general lack of empirical studies on the influence of non-state actors in online public consultations. This article addresses this gap in the academic literature by focusing on the case of Croatia, which may have relevant broader practical and theoretical implications due to the legally binding rules of institutional responsiveness to individual policy inputs received during e-consultations and the growing interest of citizens and various interest groups to get engaged in this form of policy dialogue. Drawing on the novel data set that includes the responses of 39 government bodies to 51,250 policy inputs of interest groups and individual citizens to online consultations during the first three years since the launch of the government consultation platform, the paper seeks to analyse the influence of different types of non-state actors on the outcomes of government-led online public consultations. Contrary to general expectations about the predominance of more resourceful interest groups, it is argued that individual citizens exert a noticeable influence on the results of online policy consultations of Croatian government bodies. It is also claimed that the specific design and patterns of online public consultations, especially improved responsiveness of government bodies, contribute to the pluralisation of interests, equalizing political representation, and empowering individual citizens and other new actors, beyond traditional interest groups and “usual suspects” in national decision-making processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Igor Vidačak, 2022. "Beyond Usual Suspects? Inclusion and Influence of Non-State Actors in Online Public Consultations in Croatia," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:436-:d:924668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/11/10/436/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/11/10/436/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dür, Andreas & De Bièvre, Dirk, 2007. "The Question of Interest Group Influence," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 1-12, May.
    2. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521118590, September.
    3. Rasmussen, Anne & Carroll, Brendan J., 2014. "Determinants of Upper-Class Dominance in the Heavenly Chorus: Lessons from European Union Online Consultations," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 445-459, April.
    4. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521134132, September.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    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.

    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:gam:jscscx:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:436-:d:924668. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.