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) • 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 oftens 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 • 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 fond 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. PGs and democracy – in favour • Additional route for political participation • Allow diversity of views to be expressed in way that is more fine grained than parties – more important as society becomes more diverse • Allow intensity of opinions to be expressed

11. PGs and democracy – in favour (2) • Provide information to government about public concerns • Provide expertise not easily available to government or only at disproportionate cost • Consistent with basic democratic norm of freedom of association

12. PGs and democracy - against • Who do they represent? Often lack internal democracy • Membership often passive, join for selective benefits • Fragment political process, only interested in own demands • Over represent education and affluent, increase political exclusion

13. 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

14. 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

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

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

17. 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

18. 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

19. Growth of direct action • Growing dissatisfaction with results of conventional politics • More fragmented society makes identity politics more important • Technology aids mobilisation: internet and mobile phone • Imitation effects

20. Recent literature (1) • Baggott, Speaking for Patients and Carers 2005 • Depts. becoming more accessible • Using restrained language still important – no emotion • Dept. of Health disliked confrontational groups • One group excluded for causing trouble

21. Recent literature (2) • Ministers worked more closely with groups that shared aims • Groups that had insider status more likely to report example of influence • Not hard to gain insider status, but core status crucial • Govt. able to manipulate and control groups, offer small concessions in return for compliance

22. Recent literature (3) • Anne Binderkrantz, ‘Interest Group Strategies’, Political Studies, Decemb 2005, 53 (4), 694-715 • Uses Danish evidence and multiple regression to distinguish four types of strategy • Groups utilise a wide repertoire of tactics and strategies