Pressure groups

Lecture 1

Dr Justin Greaves

What is a pressure group?

• ‘A pressure group is an organization which seeks as one of its functions to influence the formulation and implementation of public policy’ (Grant 2000)

OR:

• ‘The field of organized groups possessing both formal structure and real common interests in so far as they influence the decisions of public bodies’ (W J M Mackenzie)

Changing times

• But are such definitions out of date?• Some group activity now directed at

private companies (see Grant and Greaves, 2005)

• State has shed some of its functions, with public tasks being carried out by private providers

EG: ‘retailer governance’

Targeting Tesco

• Tescopoly is a coalition of eight environmental, women's, workers' and third world organisations

• Groups include Friends of the Earth, the GMB union and War on Want

• The campaign uses the slogan 'Every little hurts' in a play on the Tesco slogan 'Every little helps'

Differ from parties

• Party wants to win control of government or at least a share of office to implement policies

• Parties are broad coalitions that have to aggregate interests, groups often single issue

• Parties run candidates in elections, but note ‘interest parties’

Social movements

• Difficult to define – used in a vague way

• In contrast to Mackenzie’s definition may not have a formal structure and are usually united by ideas not interests

Klandermans (1997)

• ‘Social movements ...are populated by individuals sharing collective goals and a collective identity who engage in disruptive action’

Jordan (1998)

• ‘There is a tendency to relabel any group using non-conventional strategies and tactics as social movements’

But distinction important• Literature important as reminds us

pressure groups are only one way of bringing about change

• Feminism one of the important social movements (impact on changing consciousness, family level, still few women legislators)

• Many of its goals require political action• Pressure groups spring from it

Social movements: a summary

• Literature in sociology

• Represent people with an outsider orientation

• Seek to change elements in the existing power structure

• Often use direct action methods

• Opposed to conventional power politics

Social movements: summary (2)• Do not want to influence state, want to

act in civil society

• Loosely defined organisational structure

• Either lack clearly defined leadership or have charismatic leader

• Often left of centre, lifestyle politics, but note petrol protests

Recent literature• ‘The new social movement literature has

little space for reform-oriented single issue pressure groups which merely seek to change their bit of the world, and are reasonably comfortable with the state of society and politics as they find them – surely the operating rationale of so many voluntary organisations?’ (McKay and Hilton, 2009)

Think tanks

• Grant’s definition encompasses think tanks even though they do not engage in lobbying

• May have a close relationship with a political party, e.g. Fabian Society

• Can be influential (e.g. IEA and Thatcherism, Adam Smith Institute and the poll tax)

Think tanks (2)

• Demos has been proving influential

• Here is a short video clip showing their engagement with politicians and others

Think tanks (3)

• Think tanks seek to change the intellectual climate of opinion

• Stone (1996) argued that the distinction between think tanks and interest groups has become blurred

• She argues their impact is modest. ‘Policy making is mainly driven by interests, not by ideas’

Changing terminology

• A search for ‘hurrah words’ to describe pressure or interest groups

• Stakeholders – used by government and EU

• Non-governmental organisations (originated with UN)

• Campaigning groups• Advocacy groups

Your projects

• Here is some advice which should come in helpful for your pressure group projects

What’s in a name?• We don’t want to restrict your choice of

group• You can study UK, American, EU or

home country organisation – but need understanding

• You can study direct action groups• Key consideration is feasibility – is there

enough material?• Step 1: check out web site

Four criteria for a good website

1. Useful

2. Usable

3. Accessible for all

4. Sticky (*makes people want to come back) 

Web site design

• Does it download reasonably quickly?

• Is the site design coherent?

• Is it uncluttered?

• Is the meaning of categories clear?

• Can you find what you want quickly and easily? (easy to navigate)

• How would the site appear to someone wanting to get involved?

Web site content (1)

• Can you join on line or download a membership form?

• Can you find out how to get involved in campaigns?

• Are illustrations relevant and appealing?

• Podcasts or videos?

• Has it been updated recently?

Web site content (2)

• Does it provide information:

1.About group

2.The history of group

3.Methods it uses

4.Its successes

5.Contact details for more info

Balance of question

• Approximate division between two parts of question is one third/two thirds

• Assessment of group effectiveness is core of second part of question

• You will be given credit for examining methodological problems of assessing effectiveness

Further advice

• Make sure you answer all parts of the question (especially all three parts on the website).

• For the first part a comparison with another website can be a good idea.

• Please ensure you look at ‘Pressure Groups and British Politics’, Chapter 10. (available online)

• Before we continue, a quite moving and inspirational video-clip on Amnesty International

Types of pressure groups

• There are many ways of categorising pressure groups

Causal/sectional groups

• Sectional groups represent a section of the community (e.g. trade unions, CBI etc)

• Cause groups represent a belief or principle (e.g. Friends of the Earth, Amnesty International)

Insider/outsider typology • Developed by Grant (1978)• Insider/outsider groups cuts across

traditional sectional/cause distinction • Insider groups recognised as legitimate

by government• But had to abide by rules of the political

game which imposed constraints

Outsider groups• A more disparate category• Include ‘would be’ insider groups,

outsider groups by necessity• Ideological or protest groups who do not

want to be drawn into embrace of government

• Implication of typology that insider groups more likely to succeed – but not always

Aberdeen group

• Work of Jordan, McLaughlin and Maloney (94)

• Political price for entry not as high as typology suggests

• Large number of groups consulted

Aberdeen Group modify typology• Core insiders dealing with a broad

range of issues

• Specialist insiders in policy niches

• Peripheral insiders, little influence

Easy to become an insider• Reinforced by work of Page (98) – insiders

outnumber pure outsiders by nine to one• Not that hard to be placed on a

consultation list. Blair Govt. has consultation code

• Internet lowers costs of formation, mobilisation and involvement

• Being involved in consultation is not same as real access to policy makers

Pursuing both strategies

• One can pursue both strategies simultaneously – Greenpeace

• But does set up tensions within a group, Greenpeace very hierarchical and hence can control them

• In some areas now insider and outsider groups – National Farmers Union and Farmers for Action

Most important criticism

• Nature of society and political process has changed

• Far more groups representing a more fragmented society

• Outsider groups becoming more successful, hence undermining one of key points of distinction

• Growth of direct action

Next week

• More on insiders/outsiders

• Pressure groups and the internet

• Direct action strategies