IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v56y2026ip-_20.html

The Evolution of Firm Lobbying in American Politics: Testing Theories of Lobby Activity and Centrality (1999–2018)

Author

Listed:
  • Hanegraaff, Marcel
  • Aizenberg, Ellis
  • Valeeva, Diliara

Abstract

This research note investigates how the involvement of firms in American politics has developed over the past two decades. The central question is whether individual firms have become more active lobbyists compared to business associations in the US Congress over this period. Different subdisciplines in political science have various expectations regarding the evolution of firm lobbying. We test which perspective is most accurate. To evaluate the hypotheses, we use a novel dataset comprising approximately 180,000 instances of lobbying activity by different types of interest organizations across a wide range of sectors and issues. In our analyses, we trace both the relative activity of firms versus business associations and their centrality in lobbying networks. While most theoretical models in the literature suggest a rise of firm lobbying activity, our results highlight a strikingly stable pattern of firm lobbying activity and centrality within the US political system over the past two decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanegraaff, Marcel & Aizenberg, Ellis & Valeeva, Diliara, 2026. "The Evolution of Firm Lobbying in American Politics: Testing Theories of Lobby Activity and Centrality (1999–2018)," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:56:y:2026:i::p:-_20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123426101409/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:56:y:2026:i::p:-_20. 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.