Steering a course between friends and foes. Why bureaucrats interact with interest groups.
Poppelaars, C.H.J.M.
Citation
Poppelaars, C. H. J. M. (2009, March 4). Steering a course between friends and foes. Why bureaucrats interact with interest groups. Eburon, Delft. Retrieved from
https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13576
Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)
License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13576
Steering a Course between
Friends and Foes
Steering a Course between Friends and Foes
Why bureaucrats interact with interest groups
Proefschrift ter verkrijging van
de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden, op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof.mr. P.F. van der Heijden,
volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties te verdedigen op woensdag 4 maart 2009
klokke 16.15 uur door
Caelesta Poppelaars geboren te Etten-Leur
in 1979
Promotiecommissie
Promotor: Prof. dr. D.L. Lowery Overige leden: Prof. dr. F.R Baumgartner
(Pennsylvania State University and CEVIPOF Science Po) Prof. dr. P. ’t Hart
(Australian National University and Universiteit Utrecht) Prof. dr. B. Steunenberg
Dr. A. Timmermans
ISBN 978-90-5972-303-0 Uitgeverij Eburon Postbus 2867 2601 CW Delft
tel.: 015-2131484 / fax: 015-2146888 info@eburon.nl / www.eburon.nl
cover: part of the 1922 election poster of the Liberal Democrats, Hold a steady course! Vote for the liberal democrats, depicting the ‘ship of state’ steering a course between ‘revolution’ and ‘reaction’ (verkiezingsposter van de Vrijzinnige Democraten uit 1922; Houdt Koers! Stemt op de Vrijzinnige Democraten). This poster is part of the collection of Het ReclameArsenaal; www.reclamearsenaal.nl.
Cover design: Onno Groesz
© 2009 Caelesta Poppelaars. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing from the proprietor.
© 2009 Caelesta Poppelaars. Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd, opgeslagen in een geautomatiseerd gegevensbestand, of openbaar gemaakt, in enige vorm of op enige wijze, hetzij elektronisch, mechanisch, door fotokopieën, opnamen, of op enig andere manier, zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van de rechthebbende.
Table of Contents
Preface vii
1 Building Bridges, Seeking Support, or in Need of Expertise? 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Explaining bureaucracy-interest group interactions 4 1.3 Bureaucracy-interest group interactions unravelled 4
2 The Captive, the Entrepeneur, and the Routine-Driven Man 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 The captive bureaucrat 9
2.3 The entrepreneurial bureaucrat 13
2.4 The routine-driven bureaucrat 21
2.5 The missing link 22
3 Why Bureaucrats Interact with Interest Groups 25
3.1 Introduction 25
3.2 Reconceptualising bureaucracy-interest group interactions 26
3.3 Resource dependence across cases 31
3.4 Resource dependence over time 42
3.5 Modelling bureaucracy-interest group interactions 47
4 Bureaucracy-Interest Group-Interactions in Comparative Perspective 53
4.1 Introduction 53
4.2 The challenges of the comparative method 54
4.3 A dataset of bureaucracy-interest group interactions 60 4.4 Assessing the quality of the survey dataset 70
4.5 Approximating a longitudinal perspective 81
4.6 A summary of the research design 84
5 Measuring Degree of Dependence: A Tale of the Bureaucracy 87
Table of Contents
6 The Interest Group Environment: A View from Within 127
6.1 Introduction 127
6.2 Measuring degree of dependence 128
6.3 Examining the interest group environment 131
6.4 Access to the bureaucracy 143
6.5 How far away is Europe? 150
6.6 The resource dependence model revisited 156
7 Degree of Dependence: Multiple Rationalities at Work? 161
7.1 Introduction 161
7.2 Interactions with interest groups: multiple rationalities? 162 7.3 Unravelling habitual and anticipatory rationality 171
7.4 Multiple rationalities in reality 182
7.5 Multiple rationalities at work 191
8 Bureaucracy-Interest Group Interactions Unravelled 195 8.1 Building bridges, dependent on support, or just a habit? 195 8.2 The explanatory value of the resource dependence model 196 8.3 Variations in bureaucracy-interest group interactions 198
8.4 Going forward by looking back 202
8.5 A joint venture of motives and context 210
8.6 Steering a course between friends and foes 215
Appendix I Questionnaires 217
Appendix II Coding Schemes, Diagnostics, and Respondents 232
Appendix III References 238
Dutch summary 246
Curriculum Vitae 254
Preface
This dissertation partially resulted from my experiences while working for the parliamentary committee on Dutch immigrant integration policy. National and local civil servants appeared to have similar motives for cooperating with even the smallest immigrant organisations, although their practices were at odds with the political ideology of that time. In trying to square the circle between these bureaucratic motives and the reigning political ideology, I became more generally interested in bureaucratic motives for working with interest groups. This ongoing challenge to systematically explain variations in bureaucracy-interest group relations made me persist until this dissertation was finished.
Several years lie in between that initial moment of sheer fascination and the final proofs of this book. With the advantage of hindsight, I would compare these intermediate years to what evolutionary biology calls ‘punctuated equilibrium’. In the agenda-setting literature, this concept explains variation in political attention as a result of sudden turmoil. Every now and then in a dissertation project, there is indeed change and a leap forward. Contrary to what punctuated equilibrium theory predicts, however, real change does not occur in the short periods of turmoil. Real change in doing a PhD occurs in the periods of stability, because they confront you with your intellectual and personal abilities far more than the euphoria a leap forward produces.
The question is thus how to survive these, sometimes uncomfortable, stable periods? The answer is simple. I couldn’t have lived through them without the support of many people. First of all, I would like to thank the civil servants and the representatives of the interest groups who participated in this study. This research would not have been possible without them, and I hope I generated some valuable insights in return.
My promotor, David Lowery, has been an invaluable supervisor in many ways. I have benefited from his suggestions and ideas during this research project and his constructive feedback on earlier versions of the manuscript. More generally, his advice showed me how an academic could combine both analytical rigour and tolerance for the various traditions in doing scientific research.
Many other people were willing to help during the various stages of this dissertation project. Frits van der Meer and Trui Steen offered useful feedback on early drafts of the manuscript. Nanette Kistemaker’s assistance in collecting the data for the Dutch interest group survey was particularly helpful, and without Martin Gagner, the Swedish case would have been impossible. Marcel Hanegraaff’s good sense of humour and enthusiasm stimulated me to pursue a more elaborate data-collection strategy and made it much more enjoyable at the
Preface
Several colleagues ensured that I enjoyed a pleasant working environment and activities other than only those related to the dissertation. I appreciated the teamwork offered by the colleagues of the Agenda Setting Project. Co-teaching with Anne-Greet Keizer was a good experience, as well as the many talks we had about doing research. The coffee breaks and a fine Budapesti co-chairing experience with Joost Berkhout were both pleasant and welcome academic breaks. The meetings with my fellow PNN-board members offered a stimulating and enjoyable experience outside yet related to academics.
Roommates are truly important in creating a stimulating working environment, and I’ve been very lucky with my roommates at the fifth floor in Leiden, Marleen Romeijn and Caspar van den Berg. I enjoyed all those times we laughed together about what life sometimes has to offer, and I have benefited from this positive atmosphere in several ways. In addition, the joint venture with Caspar, both in teaching and conducting surveys, was a stimulating co-workers’ experience amid the solo expedition of doing a PhD.
The final revisions of the manuscript were made after I joined the political science department of the University of Antwerp. I appreciate the warm welcome I received from my colleagues of the International and European Politics research group, in particular Jan Beyers, and I very much look forward to conducting some fascinating research together.
Above all, this dissertation would not have been possible without my family and friends. Although my friends often wondered whether it was really worth it, they nevertheless fully supported me in this endeavour. Ilse and Lennart were exactly the down-to-earth and enjoyable persons with whom you want to prepare an important day in your life. My family provided me with an encouraging and warm environment, even though the last few years were tied to life’s unforeseen challenges. Ab showed me the benefits of constructive criticism during the short period of time I knew him, while Petra’s and Stoffer’s renewed happiness very much helped to put the dissertation in perspective. And so did the compassion of my parents for their family, while their own life was not always so easy. Most importantly, their unconditional support stimulated me to follow the direction of my dreams. Jort, my final thanks are for you. Your wonderful joie de vivre, even in times of sorrow, helped me to persist and finally finish the dissertation. And, what is more, how could I ever enjoy our lucky number 13 in the middle of the street so much without you?
Caelesta Poppelaars Den Haag, Januari 2009
