Information, politicization, and reputation: assessing interest groups’ agenda-setting influence in the EU

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Political Science Review Pub Date : 2024-02-14 DOI:10.1017/s1755773924000043
F. Stevens, Evelien Willems
{"title":"Information, politicization, and reputation: assessing interest groups’ agenda-setting influence in the EU","authors":"F. Stevens, Evelien Willems","doi":"10.1017/s1755773924000043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study examines interest groups’ influence on the European Commission’s policy agenda. We argue that organizations can gain agenda-setting influence by strategically emphasizing different types of information. Analyzing a novel dataset on the engagement of 158 interest groups across 65 policy issues, we find that prioritizing information about audience support is more advantageous than emphasizing expert information. However, the effectiveness of highlighting the scope of audience support depends on the level of issue salience and degree of interest mobilization. Specifically, our findings indicate that when dealing with issues characterized by quiet politics, there are no systematic differences among groups employing distinct modes of informational lobbying.","PeriodicalId":47291,"journal":{"name":"European Political Science Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773924000043","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines interest groups’ influence on the European Commission’s policy agenda. We argue that organizations can gain agenda-setting influence by strategically emphasizing different types of information. Analyzing a novel dataset on the engagement of 158 interest groups across 65 policy issues, we find that prioritizing information about audience support is more advantageous than emphasizing expert information. However, the effectiveness of highlighting the scope of audience support depends on the level of issue salience and degree of interest mobilization. Specifically, our findings indicate that when dealing with issues characterized by quiet politics, there are no systematic differences among groups employing distinct modes of informational lobbying.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信息、政治化和声誉:评估利益集团对欧盟议程设置的影响
本研究探讨了利益集团对欧盟委员会政策议程的影响。我们认为,组织可以通过战略性地强调不同类型的信息来获得议程设置的影响力。通过分析 158 个利益集团参与 65 个政策议题的新数据集,我们发现,优先考虑受众支持信息比强调专家信息更有优势。然而,强调受众支持范围的有效性取决于问题的突出程度和利益动员程度。具体而言,我们的研究结果表明,在处理以静默政治为特征的问题时,采用不同信息游说模式的群体之间并不存在系统性差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
50
期刊最新文献
Widening the gap of political inequality? The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on political engagement Lip service to liberal democracy in Western Europe? What drives trust in regulatory agencies? Probing the relevance of governmental level and performance through a cross-national elite experiment on EU regulation Gamson going global? Cabinet proportionality in comparative perspective Election integrity across Europe: who thinks elections are held fairly and why?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1