Search

There is broad consensus that lobbyists with government experience are valuable to those who employ them, principally because they possess contacts in government and unique insights into the policy process. Yet the near exclusive focus on government experience as the defining feature of lobbyist careers, means the literature has neglected analysis of the mix of different (and important) experiences that actual lobbyists likely accumulate during their careers. We address these gaps through analysis of the career sequences of over 600 lobbyists operating across contract and in‐house roles in Australia. Using the tools of sequence and cluster analysis, we identify four broad types of careers among lobbyists. While half of all lobbyists have had roles with some direct political experience, we find that distinctions between types of lobbying careers are differentiated by experience in other fields such as journalism, public relations, associations and corporate life. Moreover, our multivariate analysis shows that different career types are more strongly associated with in‐house versus contract lobbying roles. We conclude that scholars should move beyond a focus on 'revolving doors' to more directly analyse the range of experiences that lobbyists leverage in their professional lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideas about what makes a 'good citizen' continue to evolve alongside the digitalisation of political participation. We examine these interrelated trends through an in-depth analysis of the normative basis for contemporary online petitioning. This article uses original survey data in Australia and Germany to confirm the emergence of distinctive 'contribution' citizenship norms which emphasise the importance of sharing content through networked communications infrastructures. We then examine the relationship between these novel citizenship norms and online petitioning, differentiating online petitioning along two dimensions of mode (signing versus sharing) and frequency. First, we find 'contribution' norms are more associated with sharing online petitions than signing them. Second, 'contribution' norms are more associated with high-frequency sharing and signing, as opposed to more casual instances of participation. In combination, these findings show that contribution norms are distinctively associated with more intensive forms of online petitioning (e.g. frequent sharing), while more casual forms (such as casual signing) are supported by a more diverse range of normative orientations. We conclude that the way citizens engage with online petitions reflects, in part, their normative orientation to contributing information towards networked communication infrastructures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organised interests are a key component of Australian democratic life — they promise to connect society and economy to political institutions in ways that parties may not. The literature on Australian organised interests has focused primarily on connections to legislative and, to a lesser extent, administrative arenas. However, comparatively little attention has been given to the judicial arena. In this paper, we take a first look at attempts — successful and otherwise — by organised interests to attain access to the High Court of Australia. We focus on one key type of litigation strategy, being non‐party intervention, which is the subject of significant research in international contexts. Although in the United States, access to the court for non‐parties is more or less automatic, in other contexts like Australia, this is not the case. Over time in Australia, the High Court has become more open to applications from non‐parties. We proceed to examine in detail the attempts to access — and levels of success — by non‐parties in the High Court of Australia for the period 2012–17. We conclude with a research agenda that will explore the judicial arena as a strategy for organised interest to exert their influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The exploration of the Australian states engages with their organic industry to manage the impacts of global economic change on industry development is discussed. Also reworked which is the concept of governance and transformative capacity with deliberative networking as the key factor used to combine associative capacity and state capacity.

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2007.00532.x Byline: Bianca McKinney (1), Darren Halpin (2) Keywords: insider/outsider model; pressure group theory; homelessness Abstract: The insider/outsider model, first developed in the 1970s by Wyn Grant in the United Kingdom, is perhaps the most common analytical device deployed by Australian scholars in making sense of pressure or interest group behaviour. The British literature has since witnessed a high level of debate, critique and refinement of the original model, and we argue this also adds value to the discussion of group life in Australia. This article operationalises and compares two insider/outsider models commonly used to make sense of the public policy advocacy of pressure groups: (i) the conventional or orthodox models of insider/outsider and (ii) the so-called 'Aberdeen' insider/outsider model. It is argued that the latter model is more analytically powerful than the current understanding of insider and outsider pressure groups; that ideology is less of a determining factor in the ascription of status than the existing understanding implies; and that the Aberdeen model is applicable in the Australian context. These arguments are sustained via the examination of a case study of the policy advocacy of two social service groups in Western Australia during the State Homelessness Taskforce in 2001: the Western Australian Council of Social Service and the Tenants Advice Service of Western Australia. Author Affiliation: (1)Edith Cowan University (2)Edith Cowan University and The Robert Gordon University

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00618.x Byline: DARREN R. HALPIN (1) Abstract: Embracing 'groups' as means to address democratic deficiencies invites scrutiny of their democratic practices. However, many groups lack internal democratic practices and offer few opportunities for affiliates to participate. Guided by an implicit 'representation' narrative of groups, the absence of internal democratic practices is interpreted as a sign of 'failure' or 'deficiency'. Some scholars have entertained the idea of setting minimum standards of internal democracy as a prerequisite for policy access. This article scrutinizes this emerging consensus and its 'representation' narrative. Drawing upon the work of O'Neill (2001) and Pitkin (1967), it is argued that groups can also be viewed through a lens of solidarity. This paper argues that the type of constituency a group advocates for can be used to calibrate expectations of internal democratic structures of accountability and authorization. The concepts of 'representation' and 'solidarity' are used to make sense of the (changeable) practices of a variety of groups. Author Affiliation: (1)Darren R. Halpin is Reader in Politics in the Department of Economics and Public Policy at The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen. Article History: Date received 19 March 2005. Date accepted 17 August 2005. Date edited 26 August 2006.

As a more long-term and integrative approach to policy-making, sustainability is a concept that exercises the minds of policy-makers, business representatives and citizens alike. Policy that pursues a sustainability agenda therefore attracts a vast array of stakeholders, each keen to pursue often disparate interests or causes. Through a case study of the WA Collaboration's experience with sustainability policy-making in Western Australia, this paper considers the way in which innovative engagement between government and civil society organisations can contribute to enhancing more integrative and strategic policy-making capacity. In particular, this paper examines the role of the WA Collaboration in facilitating policy integration through the deliberative opportunities it provides for developing more encompassing positions amongst its diverse membership. The paper suggests that this style of engagement, while not without its difficulties and tensions, is valuable for making progress in highly contested policy contexts.

The political representation of Australian farmers merits more attention from an historical perspective. Drawing upon the existing wealth of organisational histories it is argued that one can identify a number of shifts in the dominant organisational form or strategy pursued by primary producers in seeking political representation over time. Each phase has its own logic and rationale rooted in a range of historical conditions. The article identifies the importance of the pattern of social interaction, economic conditions and the prevailing political process in catalysing transitions between 'phases' of representation. It concludes that the current debate over representation amongst primary producers and rural communities should be interpreted as the precursor to yet another phase of representation.

This article looks at the emergence and maintenance of interest groups. We systematically identify a range of membership incentives that underpin mobilisation and apply them to a case study, the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), focusing on the recruitment literature rather than the special niche literature on trade associations. The FSB was created in 1974 and membership was 'flat' at about 40,000 until recruiting method changes were introduced in the early 1990s. The total now approaches 200,000. This account of FSB recruitment argues unsurprisingly that the group resulted from a combination of diverse influences rather than the Truman type of 'automatic' mobilisation. More surprisingly, it notes that while early membership is accounted for by the perspectives of Truman, Salisbury, Wilson, Moe, Opp and Sabatier, the major increases of the past decade requires attention to the contribution of face-to-face marketing and Olsonian incentives. The FSB is an unusually good example of group entrepreneur activity that illustrates how entrepreneur incentives are different from those salient to members. Groups can experience different phases and forms as they grow. We exploit a 'natural experiment' by illustrating how the FSB addressed membership stagnation by changing the recruitment package in a broadly Olsonian direction. The 'before and after' patterns of recruitment allow a 'test' of these techniques. It also raises the issue of how different recruitment efforts produce a membership with different political characteristics.

The source, size and recipients of political contributions, and their influence on policy-making, has long been of interest to political scientists, journalists and citizens. There is ever present discussion of 'dark money' and 'pay for play' politics. However, these discussions are often limited by the inconsistent and sometimes incorrect coding of the Australian Electoral Commission financial disclosure data. These data make it difficult to understand who is financing Australian politics, how patterns of giving differ across donors, parties and time, and how this relates to policy outcomes. This creates a risk that the commentary shaping public understanding of the integrity of political institutions will be flawed. This paper, and the underlying data we present, addresses this gap, providing a firmer foundation for understanding its democratic institutions, helping drive a more informed discussion on the role of money in politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Students of public policy have spent considerable effort setting out the types of policy instruments or tools available to policymakers in different stages of the policy process. A nascent strand of this important work concerns the agend-asetting phase, where scholars aim to understand the instruments – procedural and substantive – that government uses to shape the issues that it has to address. There is however limited engagement between scholarship on interest groups and this ongoing discussion around agenda-setting tools. This paper aims to fill this gap by identifying different types of agenda-setting tools deployed by government which are used to shape engagement from organised interests. These tools are classified as those which governments use to routinise demands, regularise demands, generate demands, and impose issues onto the agenda. The paper refocuses attention of policy scholars onto the means and strategies that policymakers deploy to manage government agendas, a process which has clear implications for what becomes a policy problem and thereafter potentially subject to governmental action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interest groups cannot advocate on every issue they might consider relevant. They must decide what issues to prioritise and which ones to leave to one side. In this article, we examine how groups seek to balance different internal and external considerations when prioritizing issues, and which factors might explain variation in the relative strength of these drivers. We integrate data of a survey of national interest groups in Australia with findings from interviews with a cross section of high-profile groups. While the literature often suggests a clash between external political considerations and internal membership demands, we find that groups view these drivers as largely compatible. Our explanatory analysis points to the policy orientation and insider status of the group, its democratic character, and the extent to which it faces competition for membership contributions, as important factors shaping the relative strength of distinct drivers of internal agenda setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gaining an audience on social media is an important goal of contemporary policy advocacy. While previous studies demonstrate that advocacy-dedicated nonprofit organizations—what we refer to as advocacy groups—use different social media tools, we still know little about what specific audiences advocacy groups set out to target on social media, and whether those audiences actually engage with these groups. This study fills this gap, deploying survey and digital trace data from Twitter over a 12-month period for the Australian case. We show that while groups target a variety of audiences online, there are differences between group types in their strategic objectives and the extent to which particular audiences engage with them. Business groups appear to target elite audiences more often compared with citizen and professional groups, whereas citizen groups receive more online engagement from mass and peer audiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Media attention is a scarce, yet attractive, resource for interest groups. Existing studies show that media attention is concentrated on a relatively small number of well-resourced groups, often representing economic interests. However, the literature still struggles to disentangle the reasons behind this bias in media attention. Is it explained by media selection practices or uneven interest group activity? We cannot separate these two possible mechanisms by simply studying aggregate levels of media attention. In this study, we therefore compare the set of groups that lobby in specific policy areas with the groups that appear in the news on issues related to those same policy areas. The investigation is based on data from Denmark and the United Kingdom. First, we use survey data to identify the policy areas in which groups actively lobby. Second, we identify groups' media appearances in news stories related to those same policy areas. Third, we compare diversity among the groups actively lobbying with the groups actually appearing in the news and investigate possible biases. We find that even when the analysis of media appearances is narrowed down to only those groups active in a policy area, the news media allow more access to well-resourced groups. However, in contrast to previous findings, differences in media appearances across interest group types are not reproduced. These results imply that media selection biases are mainly produced by varying lobbying resources rather than discrimination based on the type of interests that groups represent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question of whether more coherence in one area comes at the cost of incoherence elsewhere is explored. A case study is presented of the Scottish Executive's projection of a unified rural policy, with the reality of a persistent Scottish agricultural sector, with contending publics with separate and often conflicting agendas.

Although scholarship has highlighted the role of stakeholders in policy making, less is known about the preparations they make that lay the groundwork for their lobbying activities. This article links ideas on collaborative governance with the study of agenda setting within interest groups. We outline an orthodox mode of agenda setting that anticipates groups possess a proactive policy mode, an institutionalized policy platform, and a pyramid-like agenda structure. Subsequently, we use this orthodox mode as a heuristic device for examining agenda structures and processes, combining survey data on the practices of groups in Australia with illustrative qualitative evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the role of variations in organizational form in explaining levels of group access. Specifically, we test whether group forms incorporating more extensive engagement with members receive policy advantages. We develop and test a account of beneficial inefficiencies. Our account reasons that the costs of inefficient intraorganizational processes and practices associated with enhanced engagement with members are beneficial as they generate crucial "access goods"—specifically encompassing positions—that in turn receive enhanced policy benefits. The costs of intraorganizational practices allowing members to engage more thoroughly in decision making are thus beneficial inefficiencies. We test this proposition using data on the Australian interest group system. Using the tools of cluster analysis, we identify three forms, each varying in respect of the inefficiencies they embody. Our multivariate analysis finds strong support for the account of beneficial inefficiencies: groups with the most inefficient organizational model receiving the greatest policy access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online petitions are an important feature of contemporary political engagement in advanced democracies. In this paper we report on a unique data set - covering a five year period and over 17,000 petitions - documenting the development of the Change.org platform in Australia. Australia presents an interesting case as, until very recently, there was no national government hosted online petition site. Our analysis results in three findings that advance scholarship on online petitions. First, we find the majority of petitions are in fact targeted at government, and that their issue area is of a political nature. Second, we find that most signers of petitions sign a single petition - they are not serial participants. Finally, we show that ‘super users’ of the online petition system engage broadly as well as often. Together these findings demonstrate that online petition creation and signing - even on commercial platforms - is a distinct and important part of citizen engagement in politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ascertaining which interest groups are considered relevant by policymakers presents an important challenge for political scientists. Existing approaches often focus on the submission of written evidence or the inclusion in expert committees. While these approaches capture the effort of groups, they do not directly indicate whether policy makers consider these groups as highly relevant political actors. In this paper we introduce a novel theoretical approach to address this important question, namely prominence. We argue that, in the legislative arena, prominence can be operationalised as groups being mentioned strategically - used as a resource - by elected officials as they debate policy matters. Furthermore, we apply a machine learning solution to reliably assess which groups are prominent among legislators. We illustrate this novel method relying on a dataset of mentions of over 1300 national interest groups in parliamentary debates in Australia over a six-year period (2010-2016). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]