1932

Abstract

This review identifies empirical facts about lobbying that are generally agreed upon in the literature. It then discusses challenges to empirical research in lobbying and provides examples of empirical methods that can be employed to overcome these challenges—with an emphasis on statistical measurement, identification, and casual inference. The article then discusses the advantages, disadvantages, and effective use of the main types of data available for research in lobbying. It closes with a number of open questions for researchers in the field and avenues for future work to advance empirical research on lobbying.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135308
2014-05-11
2024-05-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/17/1/annurev-polisci-100711-135308.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135308&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J. 2010. Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: estimating the effect of California's tobacco control program. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 105:490493–505 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abadie A, Grazebal J. 2003. The economic costs of conflict: a case study of the Basque country. Am. Econ. Rev. 93:1113–32 [Google Scholar]
  3. Alt JE, Carlsen F, Heum P, Johansen K. 1999. Asset specificity and political behavior of firms: lobbying for subsidies in Norway. Int. Org. 53:199–116 [Google Scholar]
  4. Angrist JD, Imbens G, Rubin D. 1996. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 91:444–72 [Google Scholar]
  5. Angrist JD, Lavy V. 1999. Using Maimonides' rule to estimate the effect of class size on scholastic achievement. Q. J. Econ. 114:2533–75 [Google Scholar]
  6. Angrist JD, Pischke J. 2010. The credibility revolution in empirical economics: how better research design is taking the con out of econometrics. J. Econ. Perspect. 24:23–30 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ansolabehere SD, de Figueiredo JM, Snyder JM. 2003. Why is there so little money in U.S. politics?. J. Econ. Perspect. 17:1105–30 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ansolabehere S, Snyder JM, Tripathi M. 2002. Are PAC contributions and lobbying linked?. Bus. Polit. 4:21–26 [Google Scholar]
  9. Austen-Smith D. 1995. Campaign contributions and access. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 89:3566–82 [Google Scholar]
  10. Austen-Smith D, Wright J. 1994. Counteractive lobbying. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 38:125–44 [Google Scholar]
  11. Austen-Smith D, Wright J. 1996. Theory and evidence for counteractive lobbying. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 40:2543–64 [Google Scholar]
  12. Baumgartner FR, Berry JM, Hojancaki M, Kimball DC, Leech BL. 2009a. Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why Chicago, IL: Univ. Chicago Press
  13. Baumgartner FR, Gray V, Lowery D. 2009b. Federal policy activity and the mobilization of state lobbying organizations. Polit. Res. Q. 62:3552–67 [Google Scholar]
  14. Baumgartner FR, Larsen-Price HA, Leech BL, Rutledge P. 2011. Congressional and presidential effects on the demand for lobbying. Polit. Res. Q. 64:13–16 [Google Scholar]
  15. Baumgartner FR, Leech BL. 1996. The multiple ambiguities of “counteractive lobbying.”. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 40:2521–42 [Google Scholar]
  16. Baumgartner FR, Leech BL. 2002. Interest niches and policy bandwagons: patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. J. Polit. 63:41191–213 [Google Scholar]
  17. Baylis K, Furtan H. 2003. Free-riding on federalism: trade protection and the Canadian dairy industry. Can. Public Policy 29:2145–61 [Google Scholar]
  18. Benz J, Kirkland JH, Gray V, Lowery D, Sykes J, Deason M. 2011. Mediated density: the indirect relationship between U.S. state public policy and PACs. State Polit. Policy Q. 11:4440–59 [Google Scholar]
  19. Berkman MB. 2002. Legislative professionalism and the demand for groups: the institutional context of interest population density. Legis. Stud. Q. 26:661–79 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S. 2004. How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates?. Q. J. Econ. 119:1249–75 [Google Scholar]
  21. Bertrand M, Bombardini M, Trebbi F. 2012. Is it whom you know or what you know? An empirical assessment of the lobbying process NBER Work. Pap. 16765
  22. Blanes i Vidal J, Draca M, Fons-Rosen C. 2012. Revolving door lobbyists. Am. Econ. Rev. 102:73731–48 [Google Scholar]
  23. Blau B, Brough T, Thomas D. 2013. Corporate lobbying and the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program. J. Bank. Finance 37:83007–17 [Google Scholar]
  24. Bombardini M, Trebbi F. 2012. Competition and political organization: together or alone in lobbying for trade policy?. J. Int. Econ. 87:118–26 [Google Scholar]
  25. Bonardi J-P. 2005. Corporate political strategies for widely salient issues. Acad. Manag. Rev. 30:3555–76 [Google Scholar]
  26. Caldeira GA, Hojnacki M, Wright JR. 2000. The lobbying activities of organized interests in federal judicial nominations. J. Polit. 62:151–69 [Google Scholar]
  27. Caldeira GA, Wright JR. 1998. Lobbying for justice: organized interests, Supreme Court nominations, and the United States Senate. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 42:2499–523 [Google Scholar]
  28. Cameron CM, de Figueiredo JM. 2013. Informational lobbying: theory and empirical evidence from the American states Work. Pap., Dep. Polit., Princeton Univ.
  29. Campos NF, Giovannoni F. 2007. Lobbying, corruption and political influence. Public Choice 131:1/21–21 [Google Scholar]
  30. Carroll GR, Hannan MT. 1992. Dynamics of Organizational Populations: Density, Legitimation, and Competition New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  31. Clarke KA, Primo DM. 2012. A Model Discipline: Political Science and the Logic of Representations New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  32. Comin D, Hobijn B. 2009. Lobbies and technology diffusion. Rev. Econ. Stat. 91:2229–44 [Google Scholar]
  33. de Figueiredo JM. 2002. Lobbying and information in politics. Bus. Polit. 4:2125–29 [Google Scholar]
  34. de Figueiredo JM. 2004. The timing, intensity, and composition of interest group lobbying: an analysis of structural policy windows in the states NBER Work. Pap. 10588
  35. de Figueiredo JM. 2014. The timing of lobbying. Corruption, Business Law, and Business Ethics P Nichols Chicago, IL: Univ. Chicago Press In press [Google Scholar]
  36. de Figueiredo JM, Cameron CM. 2014. Endogenous cost lobbying NBER Work. Pap. In press
  37. de Figueiredo JM, Kim JJ. 2004. When do firms hire lobbyists? The organization of lobbying at the Federal Communications Commission. Ind. Corp. Change 13:6883–900 [Google Scholar]
  38. de Figueiredo JM, Silverman BS. 2006. Academic earmarks and the returns to lobbying. J. Law Econ. 49:2597–625 [Google Scholar]
  39. de Figueiredo JM, Silverman BS. 2007. How do we (want to) fund science? Politics, lobbying, and academic earmarks. Science and the University R Ehrenberg Madison, WI: Univ. Wisconsin Press [Google Scholar]
  40. de Figueiredo JM, Tiller EH. 2001. The structure and conduct of corporate lobbying: how firms lobby the federal communications commission. J. Econ. Manag. Strat. 10:191–122 [Google Scholar]
  41. Drope JM, Hansen WL. 2004. Purchasing protection? The effect of political spending on U.S. trade policy. Polit. Res. Q. 57:127–37 [Google Scholar]
  42. Duso T. 2005. Lobbying and regulation in a political economy: evidence from the U.S. cellular industry. Public Choice 122:3/4251–76 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ehrlich SD. 2008. The tariff and the lobbyist: political institutions, interest group politics, and U.S. trade policy. Int. Stud. Q. 52:2427–45 [Google Scholar]
  44. Evans D. 1996. Before the roll call: interest group lobbying and public policy outcomes in House committees. Polit. Res. Q. 49:2287–304 [Google Scholar]
  45. Facchini G, Mayda AM, Mishra P. 2011. Do interest groups affect US immigration policy?. J. Int. Econ. 85:1114–28 [Google Scholar]
  46. Faccio M. 2006. Politically connected firms. Am. Econ. Rev. 96:1369–86 [Google Scholar]
  47. Fed. Elect. Comm 2013. FEC summarizes campaign activity of the 2011–2012 election cycle. News Release, Fed. Elect. Comm., Washington DC. http://www.fec.gov/press/press2013/20130419_2012-24m-Summary.shtml [Google Scholar]
  48. Furlong SJ. 1998. Political influence on the bureaucracy: The bureaucracy speaks. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 8:139–65 [Google Scholar]
  49. Gawande K, Krishna P, Olarreaga M. 2012. Lobbying competition over trade policy. Int. Econ. Rev. 53:1115–32 [Google Scholar]
  50. Gawande K, Krishna P, Robbins MJ. 2006. Foreign lobbies and U.S. trade policy. Rev. Econ. Stat. 88:3563–71 [Google Scholar]
  51. Gehlbach S. 2006. The consequences of collective action: an incomplete-contracts approach. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 50:3802–23 [Google Scholar]
  52. Goldman E, Rocholl J, So J. 2009. Do politically connected boards affect firm value?. Rev. Financ. Stud. 22:62331–60 [Google Scholar]
  53. Grasse N, Heidbreder B. 2011. The influence of lobbying activity in state legislatures: evidence from Wisconsin. Legis. Stud. Q. 36:4567–89 [Google Scholar]
  54. Gray V, Lowery D. 1996. The Population Ecology of Interest Representation: Lobbying Communities in the American States Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. Michigan Press
  55. Gray V, Lowery D. 1998. The density of state interest-communities: Do regional variables matter?. Publius 28:261–79 [Google Scholar]
  56. Gray V, Lowery D, Wolak J. 2004. Demographic opportunities, collective action, competitive exclusion, and the crowded room: lobbying forms among institutions. State Polit. Policy Q. 4:118–54 [Google Scholar]
  57. Groves RM, Fowler FJ, Couper MP, Lepkowski JM, Singer E, Tourangeau R. 2009. Survey Methodology New York: Wiley
  58. Guo B. 2009. Lobby or contribute? The impact of corporate governance on firms' political strategies Work. Pap., Univ. Auton. Barcelona
  59. Hall RL, Deardorff AV. 2006. Lobbying as legislative subsidy. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 100:169–84 [Google Scholar]
  60. Hall RL, Miler KC. 2008. What happens after the alarm? Interest group subsidies to legislative overseers. J. Polit. 70:4990–1005 [Google Scholar]
  61. Hall RL, Reynolds ME. 2012. Targeted issue advertising and legislative strategy: the inside ends of outside lobbying. J. Polit. 74:3888–902 [Google Scholar]
  62. Hannan MT, Freeman J. 1977. The population ecology of organizations. Am. J. Sociol. 82:5929–64 [Google Scholar]
  63. Hannan MT, Freeman J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. Am. Sociol. Rev. 49:2149–64 [Google Scholar]
  64. Hansen WL, Mitchell NJ. 2000. Disaggregating and explaining corporate political activity: domestic and foreign corporations in national politics. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 94:4891–903 [Google Scholar]
  65. Hansen WL, Mitchell NJ, Drope JM. 2004. Collective action, pluralism, and the legitimacy tariff: corporate activity or inactivity in politics. Polit. Res. Q. 57:3421–29 [Google Scholar]
  66. Harstad B, Svensson J. 2011. Bribes, lobbying, and development. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 105:146–63 [Google Scholar]
  67. Heberlig ES. 2005. Getting to know you and getting your vote: lobbyists' uncertainty and the contacting of legislators. Polit. Res. Q. 58:3511–20 [Google Scholar]
  68. Heckman JJ. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47:1153–61 [Google Scholar]
  69. Heinz J, Laumann E, Nelson R, Salisbury R. 1993. The Hollow Core: Private Interests in National Policy Making Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  70. Helland L. 2008. Lobbying with conflicting interests: Norwegian local-central relations. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 47:2184–205 [Google Scholar]
  71. Hill MD, Kelly GW, Lockhart GB, Van Ness RA. 2013. Determinants and effects of corporate lobbying. Financ. Manag. 42:4931–57 [Google Scholar]
  72. Hillman AJ, Zardhooki A, Biearman L. 1999. Corporate political strategies and firm performance: indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the U.S. government. Strat. Manag. J. 20:167–81 [Google Scholar]
  73. Hochberg YV, Sapienza P, Vissing-Jørgensen A. 2009. A lobbying approach to evaluating the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. J. Account. Res. 47:2519–83 [Google Scholar]
  74. Hojnacki M, Kimball DC. 1998. Organized interests and the decision of whom to lobby in Congress. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 92:4775–90 [Google Scholar]
  75. Hojnacki M, Kimball DC. 1999. The who and how of organizations' lobbying strategies in committee. J. Polit. 61:4999–1024 [Google Scholar]
  76. Hojnacki M, Kimball DC. 2001. PAC contributions and lobbying contacts in congressional committees. Polit. Res. Q. 54:161–80 [Google Scholar]
  77. Holburn GLF, Vanden Bergh RG. 2004. Influencing agencies through pivotal political institutions. J. Law Econ. Org. 20:2458–83 [Google Scholar]
  78. Holyoke TT. 2003. Choosing battlegrounds: interest group lobbying across multiple venues. Polit. Res. Q. 56:3325–36 [Google Scholar]
  79. Horgos D, Zimmermann KW. 2009. Interest groups and economic performance: some new evidence. Public Choice 138:3/4301–15 [Google Scholar]
  80. Igan D, Mishra P, Tressel T. 2012. A fistful of dollars: lobbying and the financial crisis. NBER Macroecon. Ann. 26:1195–230 [Google Scholar]
  81. Imbens GW, Lemieux T. 2008. Regression discontinuity designs: a guide to practice. J. Econometrics 142:2615–35 [Google Scholar]
  82. Jayachandran S. 2006. The Jeffords effect. J. Law Econ. 49:2397–425 [Google Scholar]
  83. Kang K. 2012. Policy influence and private returns from lobbying in the energy sector Work. Pap., Carnegie Mellon Univ.; http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/∼kangk/kang_lobbyingforpower.pdf
  84. Kelleher CA, Yackee SW. 2009. A political consequence of contracting: organized interests and state agency decision making. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 19:3579–602 [Google Scholar]
  85. Kerr WR, Lincoln E, Mishra P. 2014. The dynamics of firm lobbying. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy. In press
  86. Kollman K. 1997. Inviting friends to lobby: interest groups, ideological bias, and congressional committees. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 41:2519–44 [Google Scholar]
  87. Kollman K. 1998. Outside Lobbying: Public Opinion and Interest Group Strategies Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  88. La Pira TM, Thomas HF. 2013. Just how many Newt Gingrich's are there on K Street? Estimating the true size and shape of Washington's revolving door Presented at Annu. Meet. Midwest. Polit. Sci. Assoc., 71st, Chicago
  89. La Pira TM, Thomas HF, Baumgartner FR. 2012. The two worlds of lobbying: the core-periphery structure of the interest group system Work. Pap., Dep. Polit. Sci., James Madison Univ.
  90. Lee S-H, Baik Y-S. 2010. Corporate lobbying in antidumping cases: looking into the continued dumping and Subsidy Offset Act. J. Bus. Ethics 96:3467–78 [Google Scholar]
  91. Leech BA, Baumgartner FR, La Pira T, Semanko N. 2005. Drawing lobbyists to Washington: government activity and the demand for advocacy. Polit. Res. Q. 58:19–30 [Google Scholar]
  92. Lewis DC. 2013. Advocacy and influence: lobbying and legislative outcomes in Wisconsin. Interest Groups Advocacy 2:206–26 [Google Scholar]
  93. Lowery D, Gray V. 1998. The dominance of institutions in interest representation: a test of seven explanations. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 42:1231–55 [Google Scholar]
  94. Lowery D, Gray V, Wolak J, Godwin E, Kilburn W. 2005. Reconsidering the counter-mobilization hypothesis: health policy lobbying in the American states. Polit. Behav. 27:299–132 [Google Scholar]
  95. Mahoney C. 2007. Lobbying success in the United States and the European Union. J. Public Policy 27:135–56 [Google Scholar]
  96. McKay A. 2011. The decision to lobby bureaucrats. Public Choice 147:123–38 [Google Scholar]
  97. McKay A, Yackee SW. 2007. Interest group competition on federal agency rules. Am. Polit. Res. 35:3336–57 [Google Scholar]
  98. Mian A, Sufi A, Trebbi F. 2010. The political economy of the US mortgage default crisis. Am. Econ. Rev. 100:51967–98 [Google Scholar]
  99. Milbrath LW. 1963. The Washington Lobbyists Chicago, IL: Rand McNally
  100. Milyo J, Primo D, Groseclose T. 2000. Corporate PAC campaign contributions in perspective. Bus. Polit. 2:175–88 [Google Scholar]
  101. Morris IL, Neeley GW. 2001. Regulation and “rent-seeking”: understanding attorney certification. State Local Gov. Rev. 33:142–51 [Google Scholar]
  102. Naoi M, Krauss E. 2009. Who lobbies whom? Special interest politics under alternative electoral systems. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 53:4874–92 [Google Scholar]
  103. Nelson D, Yackee SW. 2012. Lobbying coalitions and government policy change: an analysis of federal agency rulemaking. J. Polit. 74:2339–53 [Google Scholar]
  104. Richter BK. 2011. ‘Good’ and ‘evil’: the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate political activity Work. Pap., Red McCombs Sch. Bus., Univ. Texas Austin
  105. Richter BK, Samphantharak K, Timmons JF. 2009. Lobbying and taxes. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 53:4893–909 [Google Scholar]
  106. Roberts BE. 1990. A dead senator tells no lies: seniority and the distribution of federal benefits. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 34:131–58 [Google Scholar]
  107. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. 1983. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70:41–55 [Google Scholar]
  108. Rotemberg JJ. 2003. Commercial policy with altruistic voters. J. Polit. Econ. 111:1174–201 [Google Scholar]
  109. Sartori AE. 2003. An estimator for some binary-outcome selection models without exclusion restrictions. Polit. Anal. 11:111–38 [Google Scholar]
  110. Schlozman KL, Tierney JT. 1986. Organized Interests and American Democracy New York: Harper & Row
  111. Schone K, Koch E, Baumont C. 2013. Modeling local growth control decisions in a multi-city case: Do spatial interactions and lobbying efforts matter?. Public Choice 154:1–295–117 [Google Scholar]
  112. Schuler DA. 1996. Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: the case of the steel industry. Acad. Manag. J. 39:3720–37 [Google Scholar]
  113. Schuler DA, Rehbein K, Cramer RD. 2002. Pursuing strategic advantage through political means: a multivariate approach. Acad. Manag. J. 45:4659–72 [Google Scholar]
  114. Siegel JI. 2005. Can foreign firms bond themselves effectively by renting U.S. securities laws?. J. Financ. Econ. 75:2319–59 [Google Scholar]
  115. Staiger D, Stock JH. 1997. Instrumental variables with weak instruments. Econometrica 65:3557–86 [Google Scholar]
  116. Stoyanov A. 2009. Trade policy of a free trade agreement in the presence of foreign lobbying. J. Int. Econ. 77:137–49 [Google Scholar]
  117. Sukiassyan G, Nugent JB. 2011. Lobbying or information provision: Which functions of associations matter most for member performance?. East. Eur. Econ. 49:230–63 [Google Scholar]
  118. Tavares SC. 2006. The political economy of the European customs classification. Public Choice 129:1/2107–30 [Google Scholar]
  119. Tung HH. 2011. Dynamic career incentive versus policy rent-seeking in institutionalized authoritarian regimes: testing a long-run model of trade policy determination in China Work. Pap., Dep. Polit. Sci., Natl. Taiwan Univ.
  120. Waterman RW, Rouse A, Wright R. 1998. Venues of influence: a new theory of political control of the bureaucracy. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 8:113–38 [Google Scholar]
  121. Werner TD. 2011. The sound, the fury, and the nonevent: business power and market reactions to the Citizen United decision. Am. Polit. Res. 39:1118–41 [Google Scholar]
  122. Wright JR. 1990. Contributions, lobbying, and committee voting in the U.S. House of Representatives. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 84:2417–38 [Google Scholar]
  123. Wolak J, Newmark AJ, McNoldy T, Lowery R, Gray V. 2003. Much of politics is still local: multi-state lobbying in state interest communities. Legis. Stud. Q. 27:4527–55 [Google Scholar]
  124. Yackee SW. 2012. The politics of ex parte lobbying: pre-proposal agenda building and blocking during agency rulemaking. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 22:373–93 [Google Scholar]
  125. Yackee JW, Yackee SW. 2006. A bias toward business? Assessing interest group influence on the bureaucracy. J. Polit. 68:128–39 [Google Scholar]
  126. Yadav V. 2008. Business lobbies and policymaking in developing countries: the contrasting cases of India and China. J. Public Aff. 8:1–267–82 [Google Scholar]
  127. Yu F, Yu X. 2011. Corporate lobbying and fraud detection. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 46:61865–91 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135308
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error