Making Inference across Mobilization and Influence Research Comparing Top-Down and Bottom-Up Mapping of Interest Systems

Open Access
Authors
  • D. Lowery
Publication date 02-2018
Journal Political Studies
Volume | Issue number 66 | 1
Pages (from-to) 43-62
Organisations
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) - Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR)
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG)
Abstract
Scholars of mobilisation and policy influence employ two quite different approaches to mapping interest group systems. Those interested in research questions on mobilisation typically rely on a bottom-up mapping strategy in order to characterise the total size and composition of interest group communities. Researchers with an interest in policy influence usually rely on a top-down strategy in which the mapping of politically active organisations depends on samples of specific policies. But some scholars also use top-down data gathered for other research questions on mobilisation (and vice versa). However, it is currently unclear how valid such large-N data for different types of research questions are. We illustrate our argument by addressing these questions using unique data sets drawn from the INTEREURO project on lobbying in the European Union and the European Union’s Transparency Register. Our findings suggest that top-down and bottom-up mapping strategies lead to profoundly different maps of interest group communities.
Document type Article
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321717702400
Downloads
0032321717702400 (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back