IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v10y2023i1d10.1057_s41599-023-02044-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bureaucrats, interest groups and policymaking: a comprehensive overview from the turn of the century

Author

Listed:
  • Nayara F. Macedo de Medeiros Albrecht

    (Newcastle University)

Abstract

Government officers are key players in designing and implementing public policies. Not surprisingly, a growing body of research approaches their connections with other stakeholders, such as ministers, elected officials, and political parties. Fewer studies, however, address the relationship between bureaucrats and interest organisations. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of recent publications regarding interest groups and the public bureaucracy. The paper introduces the findings of an extensive literature review with bibliometric techniques and qualitative content analysis. To map previous studies, I analysed 1978 abstracts with VOSviewer and R. The final collection included 415 papers which were read and coded through NVivo. Based on this review, this paper exposes data on authors, countries, and research methods related to texts published between 2000 and 2022. In addition, it critically examines concepts and empirical evidence regarding the interactions between interest groups and government officers. This study advances the research agenda on interest groups by identifying gaps in previous studies and proposing new perspectives to analyse the political connections of the public bureaucracy. The findings indicate that most publications focus on interest group strategies, revolving doors, and venue choice. Fewer texts assess influence over political appointments and personal networks. Therefore, further research is required to address the causal mechanisms between access to the bureaucracy and interest group influence over public policies. Moreover, the bibliometric analysis revealed that research networks have been located in the United States and Europe and publications tend to focus on the ‘global North’. In this sense, more regional diversity might be beneficial for the development of theoretical and methodological structures able to ‘travel’ to other cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Nayara F. Macedo de Medeiros Albrecht, 2023. "Bureaucrats, interest groups and policymaking: a comprehensive overview from the turn of the century," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02044-8
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-02044-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-02044-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-02044-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Sorge, 2015. "Lobbying (strategically appointed) bureaucrats," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 171-189, June.
    2. Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun, 2019. "Organizing Transmission Belts: The Effect of Organizational Design on Interest Group Access to EU Policy‐making," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 468-485, May.
    3. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    4. Beyers, Jan & Braun, Caelesta, 2014. "Ties that count: explaining interest group access to policymakers," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 93-121, April.
    5. Sartori, Giovanni, 1970. "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1033-1053, December.
    6. Ban, Pamela & You, Hye Young, 2019. "Presence and influence in lobbying: Evidence from Dodd-Frank," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 267-295, June.
    7. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 694-715, December.
    8. Randolph Sloof, 2000. "Interest Group Lobbying and the Delegation of Policy Authority," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 247-274, November.
    9. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    10. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(4), pages 694-715, December.
    11. Marco Maria Sorge, 2010. "Lobbying-consistent Delegation and Sequential Policy Making," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(4), pages 3088-3102.
    12. Bradley, Katharine W. V. & Haselswerdt, Jake, 2018. "Who lobbies the lobbyists? State Medicaid bureaucrats’ engagement in the legislative process," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 83-111, March.
    13. Morten Bennedsen & Sven E. Feldmann, 2006. "Lobbying Bureaucrats," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 108(4), pages 643-668, December.
    14. Amy McKay, 2011. "The decision to lobby bureaucrats," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 123-138, April.
    15. Boehmke, Frederick J. & Gailmard, Sean & Patty, John W., 2013. "Business as usual: interest group access and representation across policy-making venues," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 3-33, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    2. Maria Elena Latino & Marta Menegoli & Martina De Giovanni, 2021. "Evaluating the Sustainability Dimensions in the Food Supply Chain: Literature Review and Research Routes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-25, October.
    3. Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2016. "Merchants of Doubt: Corporate Political Influence when Expert Credibility is Uncertain," CESifo Working Paper Series 6165, CESifo.
    4. Shutao Wang & Xinlei Lv, 2021. "Hot Topics and Evolution of Frontier Research in Early Education: A Bibliometric Mapping of the Research Literature (2001–2020)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Khlystova, Olena & Kalyuzhnova, Yelena & Belitski, Maksim, 2022. "The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the creative industries: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1192-1210.
    6. David Coen & Alexander Katsaitis, 2021. "Lobbying Brexit Negotiations: Who Lobbies Michel Barnier?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 37-47.
    7. Nicole Bolleyer, 2021. "Civil society – Politically engaged or member-serving? A governance perspective," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 495-520, September.
    8. Seuk Yen Phoong & Shi Ling Khek & Seuk Wai Phoong, 2022. "The Bibliometric Analysis on Finite Mixture Model," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    9. Peter Aagaard, 2022. "A Price to Pay? The Backsides of the Privileged Access to the Political System," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1157-1171, December.
    10. Coban, Mehmet Kerem, 2020. "Diffuse interest groups and regulatory policy change: Financial consumer protection in Turkey," OSF Preprints f6t5y, Center for Open Science.
    11. Danica Fink-Hafner & Sara Bauman, 2023. "Interest Group Strategic Responses to Democratic Backsliding," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 39-49.
    12. Costa, Paula L. & Ferreira, João J. & Torres de Oliveira, Rui, 2023. "From entrepreneurial failure to re-entry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    13. Glatz, Annika, 2013. "Interest Groups in International Intellectual Property Negotiations," Papers 928, World Trade Institute.
    14. Oliver Huwyler, 2020. "Interest groups in the European Union and their hiring of political consultancies," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 333-354, June.
    15. Mariani, Marcello M. & Machado, Isa & Magrelli, Vittoria & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2023. "Artificial intelligence in innovation research: A systematic review, conceptual framework, and future research directions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Nan-Chieh Huang & Yu-Lung Wu & Ren-Fang Chao, 2022. "Visualization and Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends on Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Brown, Richard S., 2016. "Lobbying, political connectedness and financial performance in the air transportation industry," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 61-69.
    18. Peter Grajzl, 2011. "A property rights approach to legislative delegation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 177-200, June.
    19. Md Abu Helal & Nathaniel Anderson & Yu Wei & Matthew Thompson, 2023. "A Review of Biomass-to-Bioenergy Supply Chain Research Using Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-32, January.
    20. Marcelo Werneck Barbosa, 2022. "A Critical Appraisal of Review Studies in Circular Economy: a Tertiary Study," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02044-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.