IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eui/euiwps/mwp2015-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forging a new Mittelstand compromise : lobbying strategies and business influence after the financial crisis

Author

Listed:
  • Keller, Eileen

Abstract

How did business interests succeed in influencing the post-crisis financial sector reform agenda? The present article draws on a remarkable instance of lobbying success in the process of reforming the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD4-CRR), which regulates banking within the European Union. Business lobbyists from Germany, supported by representatives from other countries, obtained a more favourable regulatory treatment of bank lending to small- and medium-sized corporations (SMEs) compared to the stipulations of the internationally agreed upon Basel III framework. An in-depth study of the formation of this new so-called SME compromise shows that existing approaches, which either highlight the special role of business in shaping public policies or the constraining effects of increased political salience and the politicisation of an issue cannot account for the dynamics of business influence in the case in question. Whereas an inside evidence-based strategy of influence failed, lobbying was successful because business representatives actively increased the salience of the issue through an outside lobbying strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Keller, Eileen, 2015. "Forging a new Mittelstand compromise : lobbying strategies and business influence after the financial crisis," Economics Working Papers MWP2015/19, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:eui:euiwps:mwp2015/19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/38004/MWP_2015_19.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernesto Dal Bo´, 2006. "Regulatory Capture: A Review," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 203-225, Summer.
    2. Stephen Ansolabehere & John M. de Figueiredo & James M. Snyder Jr, 2003. "Why is There so Little Money in U.S. Politics?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 105-130, Winter.
    3. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521118590, October.
    4. Patrick Bernhagen & Thomas Bräuninger, 2005. "Structural Power and Public Policy: A Signaling Model of Business Lobbying in Democratic Capitalism," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 43-64, March.
    5. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 694-715, December.
    6. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(4), pages 694-715, December.
    7. Culpepper,Pepper D., 2011. "Quiet Politics and Business Power," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521134132, October.
    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. 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.
    2. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6sio9gcc4m9nr96pqt3c5at95b is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/6sio9gcc4m9nr96pqt3c5at95b is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Woll, Cornelia, 2015. "Politics in the interest of capital: A not-so-organized combat," MaxPo Discussion Paper Series 15/2, Max Planck Sciences Po Center on Coping with Instability in Market Societies (MaxPo).
    5. Marsh David & Akram Sadiya & Birkett Holly, 2015. "The structural power of business: taking structure, agency and ideas seriously," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 577-601, October.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Cornelia Woll, 2013. "Lobbying under Pressure: The Effect of Salience on European Union Hedge Fund Regulation," Post-Print hal-02186537, HAL.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2016. "Merchants of Doubt: Corporate Political Influence when Expert Credibility is Uncertain," CESifo Working Paper Series 6165, CESifo.
    17. Caleb Goods & Bradon Ellem, 2023. "Employer associations: Climate change, power and politics," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 44(2), pages 481-503, May.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/53r60a8s3kup1vc9k4oa8d14m is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Catherine Casey, 2016. "Labour's interest in corporate governance in the UK: are workers on the board back on the agenda?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 46-61, January.
    20. Pablo T. Spiller & Sanny Liao, 2006. "Buy, Lobby or Sue: Interest Groups' Participation in Policy Making - A Selective Survey," NBER Working Papers 12209, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Patrick Emmenegger & Lina Seitzl, 2019. "Collective Action, Business Cleavages and the Politics of Control: Segmentalism in the Swiss Skill Formation System," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(3), pages 576-598, September.
    22. Stephen Bell & Andrew Hindmoor, 2014. "The Structural Power of Business and the Power of Ideas: The Strange Case of the Australian Mining Tax," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 470-486, May.
    23. Lisa Kastner, 2016. "The Power of Weak Interests in Financial Reforms," Working Papers hal-02187883, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    SME compromise; business influence; lobbying strategies; CRD4-CRR; Basel III; capital requirements; regulatory reform; financial crisis; banking regulation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eui:euiwps:mwp2015/19. 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: Cécile Brière (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiueit.html .

    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.