Interest Groups, NGOs or Civil Society Organisations? The Framing of Non-State Actors in the EU

Author:

Schoenefeld Jonas J.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractScholars have used varying terminology for describing non-state entities seeking to influence public policy or work with the EU’s institutions. This paper argues that the use of this terminology is not and should not be random, as different ‘frames’ come with different normative visions about the role(s) of these entities in EU democracy. A novel bibliometric analysis of 780 academic publications between 1992 and 2020 reveals that three frames stand out: The interest group frame, the NGO frame, as well as the civil society organisation frame; a number of publications also use multiple frames. This article reveals the specific democratic visions contained in these frames, including a pluralist view for interest groups; a governance view for NGOs as ‘third sector’ organisations, and participatory and deliberative democracy contributions for civil society organisations. The use of these frames has dynamically changed over time, with ‘interest groups’ on the rise. The results demonstrate the shifting focus of studies on non-state actors in the EU and consolidation within the sub-field; the original visions of European policy-makers emerging from the 2001 White Paper on governance may only partially come true.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Strategy and Management,Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Business and International Management

Reference82 articles.

1. Albareda, A., & Braun, C. (2019). Organizing transmission belts: The effect of organizational design on interest group access to EU Policy-making. Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(3), 468–485.

2. Andrés, A. (2009). Measuring academic research: How to undertake a bibliometric study. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

3. Anheier, H. K., Toepler, S., & List, R. (Eds.). (2010). International encyclopedia of civil society. New York: Springer.

4. Apthorpe, R. (1997). Writing development policy and policy analysis plain or clear: On language, genre and power. In C. Shore & S. Wright (Eds.), Anthropology of policy: Critical perspectives on governance and power (pp. 43–58). London; New York: Routledge.

5. Arras, S., & Beyers, J. (2020). Access to European Union agencies: Usual suspects or balanced interest representation in open and closed consultations? Journal of Common Market Studies, 58(4), 836–855.

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3