IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v35y2005i02p303-319_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Population Ecology of Interest Group Death: Gay and Lesbian Rights Interest Groups in the United States, 1945–98

Author

Listed:
  • NOWNES, ANTHONY J.
  • LIPINSKI, DANIEL

Abstract

An event-history analysis of the disbandings of nationally active gay and lesbian rights advocacy groups in the United States for the period 1945–98 is presented. Specifically, the hypothesis (which comes from population-ecology theory) is tested that the survival prospects of gay and lesbian rights interest groups are related non-monotonically to the number of groups in the population (i.e., density). The statistical analyses presented support the hypothesis: as density rises from near zero to high, the death rate first decreases but eventually increases. Several other hypotheses are also tested, and among the findings is the following: the survival prospects of gay and lesbian rights interest groups are related non-monotonically to group age – as group age increases, a group's probability of death first rises but then decreases.

Suggested Citation

  • Nownes, Anthony J. & Lipinski, Daniel, 2005. "The Population Ecology of Interest Group Death: Gay and Lesbian Rights Interest Groups in the United States, 1945–98," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 303-319, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:35:y:2005:i:02:p:303-319_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123405000165/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marcel Hanegraaff, 2015. "Transnational Advocacy over Time: Business and NGO Mobilization at UN Climate Summits," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 83-104, February.

    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:cup:bjposi:v:35:y:2005:i:02:p:303-319_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    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.