Andrea Migone, David Chen, Bryan Evans, Alex Howlett, Michael Howlett
{"title":"“Is Lobbying for Losers?”: Corporate Behavior and Canadian Military Procurement Contracting","authors":"Andrea Migone, David Chen, Bryan Evans, Alex Howlett, Michael Howlett","doi":"10.1111/rego.12658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lobbying is a multi‐faceted phenomenon that involves interest groups and corporations contacting politicians and officials in order to try to achieve their policy preferences. While interest group policy‐related lobbying has received a great deal of attention, studies of corporate contract lobbying are rarer even though this is a much older phenomenon. The article critically examines the commonly‐held position that in the latter case “lobbying is for winners”; that is, that large scale corporate lobbying helps secure contracts that might otherwise have gone to a different firm. It argues instead that firms enjoying technological and other market‐related strengths enjoy an “insider advantage” and lobby less than firms in more competitive situations. In other words that in many situations “lobbying is for losers,” a tool used by weaker firms trying to match or offset the technological and other advantages enjoyed by dominant firms. The article draws on government lobbying registers to examine recent defense‐related procurement efforts in Canada to purchase fighter jets, naval surface ships, patrol vessels, and search and rescue aircraft and the contract lobbying they engendered. Evidence from the four cases provides support for the “loser” thesis with respect to large‐scale technologically advanced goods but also the need to carefully define what constitutes an “inside advantage” allowing firms to forego or delay their lobbying activity, often until only <jats:italic>after</jats:italic> a contract has been awarded.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"180 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12658","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Lobbying is a multi‐faceted phenomenon that involves interest groups and corporations contacting politicians and officials in order to try to achieve their policy preferences. While interest group policy‐related lobbying has received a great deal of attention, studies of corporate contract lobbying are rarer even though this is a much older phenomenon. The article critically examines the commonly‐held position that in the latter case “lobbying is for winners”; that is, that large scale corporate lobbying helps secure contracts that might otherwise have gone to a different firm. It argues instead that firms enjoying technological and other market‐related strengths enjoy an “insider advantage” and lobby less than firms in more competitive situations. In other words that in many situations “lobbying is for losers,” a tool used by weaker firms trying to match or offset the technological and other advantages enjoyed by dominant firms. The article draws on government lobbying registers to examine recent defense‐related procurement efforts in Canada to purchase fighter jets, naval surface ships, patrol vessels, and search and rescue aircraft and the contract lobbying they engendered. Evidence from the four cases provides support for the “loser” thesis with respect to large‐scale technologically advanced goods but also the need to carefully define what constitutes an “inside advantage” allowing firms to forego or delay their lobbying activity, often until only after a contract has been awarded.
期刊介绍:
Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.