Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-t82dr Total loading time: 0.355 Render date: 2021-11-29T19:22:58.314Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Change or stability in the structure of interest group networks? Evidence from Scottish Public Policy Consultations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2018

Robert Ackland
Affiliation:
Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia E-mail: robert.ackland@anu.edu.au
Darren R. Halpin
Affiliation:
Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia E-mail: darren.halpin@anu.edu.au

Abstract

Scholars have hotly debated the structure of group engagement in policymaking. Two aspects of this conversation are examined here. First, some claim that the “explosion” of organised interests brings with it increasing fragmentation but also policy “balkanisation”. Others suggest increasing fragmentation, but with overlap between subsectors. A second area of this debate concerns the existence and number of “central” or “core” groups. Although existing studies show that, in aggregate, there is no more policy specialisation among United Kingdom organised interests, we do not know whether this means that there are fewer or more central groups. In this article, we utilise public policy consultations in Scotland over a continuous 25-year period, and the tools of network analysis, to examine the above propositions. We find that the expanding system of policy consultation is not associated with more balkanisation or with a decline of central policy actors that span policy communities.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The data used in this article were collected as part of an ESRC Project 2006-9 “The mobilisation of organised interests in policymaking” (award to Halpin). We thank the participants and discussant for Panel 50-7 Interest Group Networks at the 2013 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting in Chicago, and participants at a presentation of this article at the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan (2013), for their detailed feedback and comments on an earlier version of this article. We also thank the two anonymous JPP reviewers, and the Editor, for their very detailed and insightful comments on our work.

References

Badham, J. (2013) Measuring the Shape of Degree Distributions. Network Science 1(2): 213225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R. and Leech, B. I. (1998) Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and Political Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beales, D., Carter A., Chrispin J., et al. (2012) Groups and the Limited Pluralism of the Set-Piece Consultation. British Journal of Politics and IR, 14 (1): 175–186.Google Scholar
Borgatti, S. (2012) Two-Mode Concepts in Social Network Analysis. In Meyers R. A. (ed.), Computational Complexity: Theory, Techniques and Applications . New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Box-Steffensmeier, J. M. and Christenson, D. P. (2014) The Evolution and Formation of Amicus Curiae Networks. Social Networks 36: 8396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, W. P. (1990) Organized Interests and Their Issue Niche: A Search for Pluralism in a Policy Domain. Journal of Politics 52(2): 477509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cairney, P. (2008) Has Devolution Changed the “British Policy Style”? British Politics 1: 350–372.Google Scholar
Cairney, P. (2011) The New British Policy Style: From a British to a Scottish Political Tradition? Political Studies Review 9(2): 208220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cairney, P. (2014) The Territorialisation of Interest Representation in Scotland: Did Devolution Produce a New Form of Group-Government Relations? Territory, Politics, Governance 2(3): 303321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavanagh, M., Marsh, M. and Smith, M. (1995) The Relationship Between Policy Networks and Sectoral and Subsectoral Levels: A Response to Jordan, Maloney and McLaughlin. Public Administration 73(1): 6279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, V. and Lowery, D. (2000 [1996]) The Population Ecology of Interest Representation: Lobbying Communities in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Greer, A. (2005) Agricultural Policy in Europe. Manchester: Manchester University press.Google Scholar
Grossman, M. (2012) Interest Group Influence on US Policy Change: An Assessment Based On Policy History. Interest Groups & Advocacy 1: 171192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halpin, D. and Thomas, H. (2012) Evaluating the Breadth of Policy Engagement by Organized Interests. Public Administration 90(3): 582599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halpin, D., Baxter, G. and MacLeod, I. (2012) Multiple Arenas, Multiple Populations: Counting Organized Interests in Scottish Public Policy. In Halpin, D. and Jordan, G. (eds.), The Scale of Interest Organization in Democratic Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 118140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heaney, M. T. (2014) Multiplex Networks and Interest Group Influence Reputation: An Exponential Random Graph Model. Social Networks 36(1): 6681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heaney, M. T. and Lorenz, G. M. (2013) Coalition Portfolios and Interest Group Influence Over the Policy Process. Interest Groups & Advocacy 2(3): 251277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinz, J. P., Laumann, E. O., Nelson, R. L. and Salisbury, R. H. (1993) The Hollow Core. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
John, P. (2006) The Policy Agendas Project: A Review. Journal of European Public Policy 13(7): 975986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, G., Halpin, D. and Maloney, W. (2004) Defining Interests: Disambiguation and the Need for New Distinctions? British Journal of Politics and International Relations 6(2): 195212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, G. and Maloney, W. (2001) Britain: Change and Continuity Within the New Realities of British Politics. In Thomas C. (ed.), Political Parties and Interest Groups: Shaping Democratic Governance. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2744.Google Scholar
Jordan, G., Maloney, W. A. and McLaughlin, M. (1994) Characterizing Agricultural Policy-Making. Public Administration 72: 505526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, G. and Halpin, D. (2006) The Political Costs of Policy Coherence? Constructing a Rural Policy for Scotland. Journal of Public Policy 26: 2141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, G. and Richardson, J. (1987) Government Under Pressure in Britain. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
LaPira, T. M., Thomas, H. F. III and Baumgartner, F. R. (2009) The Structure and Stability of Lobbying Networks in Washington. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Laumann, E. O. and Knoke, D. (1987) The Organizational State: Social Choice in National Policy Domains. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Marsh, D., Toke, D., Belfrage, C., Tepe, D. and McGough, S. (2009) Policy Networks and the Distinction Between Insider and Outsider Groups: The Case of the Countryside Alliance’. Public Administration 87(3): 621638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, M. E. J. (2006) Modularity and Community Structure in Networks. Proceedings – National Academy of Sciences 103(23): 85778696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pons, P. and Lataby, M. (2005) Computing Communities in Large Networks Using Random Walks, arXiv, http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0512106.Google Scholar
Salisbury, R. (1984) Interest Representation: The Dominance of Institutions. American Political Science Review 81(1): 6476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salisbury, R. H., Heinz, J. P, Laumann, E. O and Nelson, R. L. (1987) Who Works With Whom? Interest Group Alliances and Opposition. American Political Science Review 81(4): 12171234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Self, P. and Storing, H. (1962) The State and the Farmer. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Smith, M. (1991) From Policy Community to Issue Network: Salmonella in Eggs and the New Politics of Food. Public Administration 69: 235255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. (1993) Pressure, Power and Policy: State Autonomy and Policy Networks in Britain and the United States. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Walker, J. L. (1991) Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Ackland and Halpin supplementary material

Ackland and Halpin supplementary material 1

Download Ackland and Halpin supplementary material(File)
File 67 KB
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Change or stability in the structure of interest group networks? Evidence from Scottish Public Policy Consultations
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Change or stability in the structure of interest group networks? Evidence from Scottish Public Policy Consultations
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Change or stability in the structure of interest group networks? Evidence from Scottish Public Policy Consultations
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *