Pressure groups

1. Pressure groups Lecture 1

2. What do we mean by a p/group? • ‘The field of organized groups possessing both formal structure and real common interests in so far as they influence the decisions of public bodies’ (W J M Mackenzie) • Some group activity directed at private bodies, but still relatively limited • Social movements may not have a formal structure and are usually united by ideas not interests

3. Differ from parties • Party wants to win control of government or at least a share of office to implement policies • Parties are broad coalitions that have to aggregate interests, groups often single issue • Parties run candidates in elections, but note ‘interest parties’

4. Social movements approach (1) • Literature in sociology • Represent people with an outsider orientation • Seek to change elements in the existing power structure • Often use direct action methods • Opposed to conventional power politics

5. Social movements approach (2) • Do not want to influence state, want to act in civil society • Loosely defined organisational structure • Either lack clearly defined leadership or have charismatic leader • Often left of centre, lifestyle politics, but note petrol protests

6. Changing terminology • A search for ‘hurrah words’ to describe pressure or interest groups • Stakeholders – used by government and EU • Non-governmental organisations (originated with UN) • Campaigning groups • Advocacy groups

7. What’s in a name? • We don’t want to restrict your choice of group • You can study international organisations or from country other than UK – but need understanding • You can study direct action groups • Key consideration is feasibility – is there enough material • Step 1: check out web site

8. Web site design (1) • Does it download reasonably quickly? • Is the site design coherent? • Is it uncluttered? • Is the meaning of categories clear? • Can you find what you want quickly and easily? • How would the site appear to someone wanting to get involved?

9. Web site design (2) • Can you join on line or download a membership form? • Can you find out how to get involved in campaigns? • Are illustrations relevant and appealing? • Podcasts or videos? • Has it been updated recently?

10. Balance of question • Approximate division between two parts of question is one third/two thirds • Assessment of group effectiveness is core of second part of question • You will be given credit for examining methodological problems of assessing effectiveness

11. PGs and democracy – in favour • Additional route for political participation, allowing citizens to develop political skills • Increasing sense of involvement in politics and responsiveness of process, reducing alienation • May counter political exclusion at a time when more conventional forms of participation are declining

12. PGs and Democracy – in favour (2) • Allow diversity of opinions to be expressed which is important as society becomes more diverse – more ‘fine grained’ views than those of political parties • Allow the intensity of opinions to be expressed so that democracy is more than a ‘head counting’ exercise

13. PGs and democracy – in favour (3) • Provide information to government about public concerns – conduit of information • Provide expertise not easily available to government or only at disproportionate cost, leading to better decision-making • Consistent with basic democratic norm of freedom of association

14. PGs and democracy – against (1) • Extent of participation is often very limited in both quantity and quality • Involvement may just be financial • May be motivated by selective incentives • Membership often very passive • No greater engagement with civil society

15. PGs and democracy – against (2) • Groups often lack internal democracy, very hierarchical, run almost as businesses • Hence opportunities for participation may be limited • Over represent educated and affluent, hence increase rather than decrease political exclusion

16. PGs and democracy – against (3) • May be fronts for business activities, a lack of transparency • Patient groups are coy about how much money they receive from pharmaceutical companies, but at least half do • Lobbying for (expensive) drugs sold by companies to treat particular conditions

17. PGs and democracy – against (4) • Fragment the political process, especially ‘single issue’ groups • Arouse expectations that cannot be met, fuelling cynicism • Do not aggregate demands – do not have choose between priorities or consider opportunity costs of policies

18. Summary of concerns • Using language of Gerry Stoker • Participatory failure – not engaging many citizens effectively • Reinforcement of (social) bias • Undermining effective governance by increasing polarisation • See book chapter on website for elaboration of these arguments

19. How can we categorise pressure groups? • Insider/outsider groups cuts across traditional sectional/cause distinction arguing that was helpful but insufficient • Insider groups recognised as legitimate by government • But had to abide by rules of the political game which imposed constraints

20. Outsider groups • A more disparate category • Include ‘would be’ insider groups, outsider groups by necessity • Ideological or protest groups who do not want to be drawn into embrace of government • Implication of typology that insider groups more likely to succeed – but not always

21. Aberdeen Group modify typology • Core insiders dealing with a broad range of issues • Specialist insiders in policy niches • Peripheral insiders, little influence

22. Criticisms of typology • One can pursue both strategies simultaneously – Greenpeace • But does set up tensions within a group, Greenpeace very hierarchical and hence can control them • In some areas now insider and outsider groups – National Farmers Union and Farmers for Action

23. Easy to become an insider • Insider groups number outsiders by 9:1 • Not that hard to be placed on a consultation list. Blair Govt. has consultation code • Internet lowers costs of formation, mobilisation and involvement • Being involved in consultation is not same as real access to policy makers

24. Most important criticism • Nature of politics has changed, leading to changes in nature of pressure group activity • Outsider groups becoming more successful, hence undermining one of key points of distinction • Growth of direct action