1. Lobbying or Interest Representation
Public expectations?
Sabine Saurugger
Sciences Po Grenoble

2. Image of lobbying and interest representation at the domestic or at the EU level
What are interest groups?
Does more regulation and more transparency lead to more legitimacy?

3. 1. Image of lobbying and interest representation
No poll on this issue
However: media analysis
How the media talks about interest groups
European Value Survey 2008
Citizen participation in groups
Experts

4. Trade Unions
Parties
Churches
Humanitarian organizations
others
Particip. per country
Austria
21,5
11,4
31,7
8,3
36,3
21,8
Belgium
27,6
6,4
6,7
6,5
41,5
17,7
Germany
14,0
3,3
18,8
5,8
38,1
16,0
Danmark
64,4
6,2
26,8
30,2
27,8
Spain
5,5
2,8
6,0
4,0
69,6
17,6
Finland
45,8
24,8
3,8
52,4
26,6
France
9,1
2,0
4,7
57,2
15,7 UK
2,7
13,5
3,5
37,8
14,7
Greece
5,3
1,4
1,0
81,2
18,6
Hungary
5,9
1,5
0,7
81,1
19,0
Irland
18,9
3,9
4,9
44,0
19,3
Israël
14,1
8,5
5,4
51,5
16,5
Italy
8,8
3,2
5,0
4,4
72,9
Luxembourg
22,2
5,7
5,6
8,6
28,6
Netherlands
21,6
26,2
7,9
26,1
17,3
Norway
47,3
9,2
15,2
17,0
27,7
23,3
Poland
6,1
1,7
3,0
0,5
87,6
19,8
Portugal
5,2
1,9
80,3
19,4
Sweden
55,6
8,4
24,5
23,4
Slovenia
4,2
7,8
64,7
20,3
Mean
13,8
3,4
10,9
56,9
17,9

5. Percentage of people that think having experts, not government, make decisions according to what they think is best for the country would be a very or fairly good idea (EVS 2008)

6. 2. What are interest groups?
One of the reasons of missing polls on this issue: absence of a clear definition and understanding what groups do.
Interest groups are a phenomenon in all societies
When attempting to regulate, one has to keep in mind
What they are
How they act
What resources they have

7. Definition
Beyers et al. (2008, p ) define interest groups as
“all membership organizations which have a political interest, which are organized and which do not strive for public office”.

8. Influencing political actors
Main difference between political parties and interest groups
However: interest groups have become political parties …
Better? The role of interest groups

9. Resources Action repertoires/strategies Financial Social Societal
Negotiation and consultation (lobbying)
Expertise
Protest (public opinion, political actors, media)
Judicialisation (litigation strategies)
Politisation (transformation in a political party) Or
Inside and
Outside strategies

10. 3. Knowing all this: is a register needed?
Transparency makes influence more difficult.
Electoral pledges
Quiet Politics (Pepper Culpepper)

11. However, different evaluation of transparency.
Basis of representative and participatory democracy.
Chari and Crepaz (2014, 2017) argue that regulation of lobbying in the EU has improved. From the first rules introduced by the European Parliament in 1996, to the regulation of the Commission in 2008 and finally the Joint Transparency Register in 2011, EU lobbying legislation has progressed.
Robustness: Centre for Public Integrity index (applies a point score on 48 questions under the eight dimensions discussing for example, the definition of lobbyists, registration details, spending disclosures, electronic filing, and cooling off period. Index results are included in a point scale ranging from 1 (minimal robustness) to 100 (maximum robustness).
Efficiency of the regulation: Registration rates increased and registration became more detailed. .

12. Naurin et al.
Transparency in rationale refers to information on the substance of the decision and of the facts and reasons on which it was based.
Transparency in process refers to information on actions such as deliberations, negotiations, and votes that took place among and between the decision makers during the decision-making process and were thus directly fed into the decision.
Transparency can indeed generate legitimacy. However, no “fishbowl transparency”, with full openness of the decision-making process.
Decision makers may improve their legitimacy simply by justifying carefully afterward the decisions taken behind closed doors.
Only when behaviour close to a deliberative democratic ideal was displayed can openness of the process generate more legitimacy than closed-door decision making with postdecisional justifications.
Finally: Legitimacy effects of transparency can only be realized if the public recognizes the difference between a transparent and a nontransparent process, but not all transparency reforms may be that visible to a modestly attentive public.

13. Conclusion Aim: to reinforce legitimacy through transparency.
Who is representing interests and through which action repertoires?
Transparency in rationale
Transparency in process
Communication with citizens. Alter-EU, Corporate Europe Observatory