IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i4p1284-1296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lobbying Conflict, Competition, and Working in Coalitions

Author

Listed:
  • Adam J. Newmark
  • Anthony J. Nownes

Abstract

Objective We examine the factors that affect interest group decisions to join coalitions rather than “go it alone.” Among the factors we consider are organization type, level of conflict, level of competition, and relative influence. Method We conduct a mail survey of lobbyists in five American states to determine the likelihood of interests working in coalitions. Results Our findings indicate that group type has little impact on group decisions to join coalitions. Advantaged (e.g., resource‐rich business organizations) and disadvantaged (e.g., underfunded charity and citizen groups) groups behave similarly when it comes to working with others, a finding that is important in debates over whether some interests are over‐ or underrepresented in the pressure system. We also find that conflict and competition affect groups’ propensity to work with other groups, and that contextual factors, including partisan congruence and lobbying laws, influence the extent to which groups work with other groups. Conclusion Our findings contribute to the ongoing scholarly debate about the conditions under which interest groups bear the costs of lobbying with others.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam J. Newmark & Anthony J. Nownes, 2019. "Lobbying Conflict, Competition, and Working in Coalitions," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1284-1296, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:4:p:1284-1296
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12644
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12644?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
    ---><---

    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:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:4:p:1284-1296. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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=0038-4941 .

    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.