IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v59y2021i5p1267-1283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relational Power, Brokers and Influence: A Study on the Controversial Issue of Fracking in the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandra‐Maria Bocse

Abstract

The article studies non‐state actors working in coalitions trying to influence the position of the European Parliament on fracking and shows that businesses can prevail in this arena. It explores the relationship between the inclusion of brokers in coalitions and the coalitions' ability to impact energy and environmental policy. Existing literatures focus on issue salience or attributional power to explain the success of non‐state actors in impacting policy developments. This paper shows that we need to take account of relational power (particularly the power that entities possess as policy subsystem brokers) to explain business influence. The study draws on a wide range of interviews with policy elites conducted during a six‐month fieldwork in Brussels. It uses an innovative combination of thematic analysis of interviews and social networks analysis to explain the success of business interests in influencing the EU policy on fracking.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandra‐Maria Bocse, 2021. "Relational Power, Brokers and Influence: A Study on the Controversial Issue of Fracking in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1267-1283, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:59:y:2021:i:5:p:1267-1283
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.13196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13196
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.13196?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dãœr, Andreas & De Biãˆvre, Dirk, 2007. "Inclusion without Influence? NGOs in European Trade Policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 79-101, May.
    2. Carpenter, R. Charli, 2011. "Vetting the Advocacy Agenda: Network Centrality and the Paradox of Weapons Norms," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(1), pages 69-102, January.
    3. Menon, Anand, 2012. "The Oxford Handbook of the European Union," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199546282 edited by Jones, Erik & Weatherill, Stephen.
    4. Rasmussen, Anne & Carroll, Brendan J., 2014. "Determinants of Upper-Class Dominance in the Heavenly Chorus: Lessons from European Union Online Consultations," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 445-459, April.
    5. Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Sabatier, Paul A., 1994. "Evaluating the Advocacy Coalition Framework," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 175-203, April.
    6. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. & Kahler, Miles & Montgomery, Alexander H., 2009. "Network Analysis for International Relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 559-592, July.
    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. Winecoff William Kindred, 2015. "Structural power and the global financial crisis: a network analytical approach," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 495-525, October.
    2. Alexandra-Maria Bocse, 0. "Hybrid transnational advocacy networks in environmental protection: banning the use of cyanide in European gold mining," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    3. Carl Vikberg, 2020. "Explaining interest group access to the European Commission’s expert groups," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 312-332, June.
    4. Alexandra-Maria Bocse, 2021. "Hybrid transnational advocacy networks in environmental protection: banning the use of cyanide in European gold mining," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 285-303, June.
    5. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    6. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.
    7. Michael Kenney & Stephen Coulthart & Dominick Wright, 2017. "Structure and Performance in a Violent Extremist Network," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(10), pages 2208-2234, November.
    8. Robert Basedow, 2021. "The EU's International Investment Policy ten years on: the Policy‐Making Implications of Unintended Competence Transfers," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 643-660, May.
    9. Carattini, Stefano & Fankhauser, Sam & Gao, Jianjian & Gennaioli, Caterina & Panzarasa, Pietro, 2023. "What does network analysis teach us about international environmental cooperation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    10. Stefan Niederhafner, 2014. "The Korean Energy and GHG Target Management System: An Alternative to Kyoto-Protocol Emissions Trading Systems?," TEMEP Discussion Papers 2014118, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Sep 2014.
    11. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2021. "Agricultural Policy Processes: Influential Actors, Policy Networks and Competing Narratives," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315323, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Adam William Chalmers, 2014. "In over their heads: Public consultation, administrative capacity and legislative duration in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 595-613, December.
    13. Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "Transnational public-private governance initiatives in world politics: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-174, January.
    14. Parizek, Michal & Stephen, Matthew D., 2021. "The long march through the institutions: Emerging powers and the staffing of international organizations," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(2), pages 204-223.
    15. Srigiri, Srinivasa Reddy & Breuer, Anita & Scheumann, Waltina, 2021. "Mechanisms for governing the water-land-food nexus in the lower Awash River Basin, Ethiopia: Ensuring policy coherence in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda," IDOS Discussion Papers 26/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    16. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    17. Stanzel, Volker (Ed.), 2018. "Die neue Wirklichkeit der Außenpolitik: Diplomatie im 21.Jahrhundert," SWP-Studien 23/2018, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), German Institute for International and Security Affairs.
    18. Daniele Schiliro, 2014. "Changes in Eurozone Governance after the Crisis and the Issue of Growth," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 110-119, April.
    19. Brent F. Nelsen & James L. Guth, 2020. "Losing Faith: Religion and Attitudes toward the European Union in Uncertain Times," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 909-924, July.
    20. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2012. "War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Don’t Always Keep the Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 257-278, July.

    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:bla:jcmkts:v:59:y:2021:i:5:p:1267-1283. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    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.