Interest groups in multiple streams:specifying their involvement in the framework

Although interests inhabit a central place in the multiple streams framework (MSF), interest groups have played only a minor role in theoretical and empirical studies until now. In Kingdon’s original conception, organized interests are a key variable in the politics stream. Revisiting Kingdon’s concept with a particular focus on interest groups and their activities—in different streams and at various levels—in the policy process, we take this argument further. In particular, we argue that specifying groups’ roles in other streams adds value to the explanatory power of the framework. To do this, we look at how interest groups affect problems, policies, and politics. The influence of interest groups within the streams is explained by linking the MSF with literature on interest intermediation. We show that depending on the number of conditions and their activity level, interest groups can be involved in all three streams. We illustrate this in case studies reviewing labor market policies in Germany and chemicals regulation at the European level

Big Data

“Big data” are datasets so large that they cannot be analyzed without resorting to data processing software. The definition refers to the volume, variety, and velocity of data generation, as well as to the value their analysis can generate. The datafied society—characterized by the centrality of data generation and processing—has radically changed the informational and technological ecosystem in which interest groups operate. It has expanded their action repertoire to include open data, social media data, citizen sensing, and data journalism. Open government data are made freely available by public administrations for everyone to use. For interest groups, they represent an unprecedented opportunity to gain access to first-hand information about the public sector to craft lobbying and campaigning. Social media platforms offer access to large quantities of data that allow interest groups to better understand and more efficiently target their publics. Citizen sensing involves laypeople in the generation of crowdsourced data, often by means of digital sensors. In the hands of interest groups, it helps to generate evidence while involving affected subjects into the process, expanding the remit of advocacy efforts, and contributes to problemsolving by offering novel interpretations of a problem. Data journalism allows interest groups to make sense of large swaths of data in view of transforming complex information into a story that is digestible by and appeals to large audiences, thus supporting advocacy or lobbying efforts. But leveraging the possibilities offered by the datafied society for lobbying and campaigning is not without risks. Three main challenges can be identified: surveillance which has potential chilling effects on political discourse; the uneven reliability of citizen-generated data; and institutional resistance of the state to the citizen demand for greater transparency

Un “laboratorio” per il corporativismo fascista: diplomati e laureati alla Scuola di Scienze corporative e al corso di Scienze politico-corporative dell’Università di Pisa (1928-1943)

L’articolo prende in esame l’evoluzione degli ordinamenti e la composizione di iscritti, diplomati e laureati della Scuola di Scienze corporative di Pisa – la prima istituita in Italia, nel 1928 – e del corso di Scienze politico-corporative attivato nel 1932 presso la Facoltà di Giurisprudenza dell’Università di Pisa. L’esperimento pisano può essere collegato al lungo dibattito sull’opportunità di stabilire istituzioni finalizzate alla formazione del personale chiamato ad operare all’interno delle amministrazioni pubbliche e della diplomazia, giunto a maturazione nell’età fascista con l’attivazione di alcune Scuole e Facoltà di Scienze politiche a cui il regime attribuì l’obiettivo di formare il personale amministrativo e la nuova classe dirigente dello Stato fascista. Tuttavia, l’istituzione creata da Armando Carlini e Giuseppe Bottai, così come il corso di laurea in Scienze politico-corporative e il Collegio «Mussolini», si caratterizzarono per una peculiare identità, essendo esplicitamente finalizzate alla elaborazione teorica del corporativismo fascista, orientata alla progettazione di uno Stato totalitario. Dopo un faticoso avvio, riconducibile alla particolare fisionomia giuridica della Scuola e alla problematica definizione dei suoi rapporti con la Facoltà giuridica pisana, il dispositivo scientifico e didattico creato da Bottai giunse all’apice del suo potenziale sviluppo alla metà degli anni Trenta, periodo durante il quale si raggiunse il numero più elevato di iscritti e di diplomati. Peraltro, l’analisi delle Facoltà di provenienza dei perfezionandi rileva il chiaro carattere «nazionale» assunto dalla Scuola in questo periodo. La riforma universitaria di De Vecchi del 1935 pose fine all’esperienza del corso di laurea in Scienze politico-corporative, sostituito con un corso di laurea in Scienze politiche – privo però di collegamenti organici con le discipline corporative; la contestuale partenza da Pisa di Bottai, Carlini, Gentile e Spirito portò a una riorganizzazione della Scuola e alla ridefinizione degli indirizzi scientifici che, di fatto, segnarono l’avvio di una fase di declino della Scuola – puntualmente registrato dalla netta riduzione degli iscritti –, riflettendo anche la progressiva perdita di centralità nel dibattito politico e culturale nazionale delle tematiche legate alla costruzione dell’assetto statuale corporativo. This paper examines the evolution of university education system and the profile of students, undergraduates and graduates, at the School of Corporatist Sciences of Pisa – the first to be established in Italy, in 1928 – and the Political-Corporatist Sciences course created in 1932 at the Faculty of Law of the University of Pisa. This experiment, tested at Pisa, can be linked with the long debate on the idea of founding institutes tasked with forming personnel called to work in public administration and the diplomatic corps. Such a plan came to fruition in the fascist years with the creation of certain schools and faculties of political science that were given the job of forming administrative personnel and the new ruling class of the fascist State. However, the institute created by Armando Carlini and Giuseppe Bottai, like the degree course in Political-Corporatist Sciences and Collegio «Mussolini», were of a rather different nature in that they were explicitly aimed at the theoretical development of corporatist fascism, oriented to the planning of a totalitarian State. The School had a problematic start due to its particular legal physiognomy and to issues concerning its relations with the Faculty of Law of the University of Pisa. In the mid-1930s, it was at the peak of its potential development and the number of enrolled and graduating students was at its highest ever levels. Moreover, analysis of students’ origins shows that, during those years, the School had acquired a clear «national» character. The 1935 De Vecchi university reform had varying consequences. It brought to an end the Political-Corporatist Sciences degree course, which was replaced by Political Sciences that was stripped of all corporatismrelated subjects. Then there was the departure from Pisa of Bottai, Carlini, Gentile and Spirito, which led to a restructuring of the School and a reorganization of scientific studies, marking the start of the School’s decline with a clear drop in the number of students enrolling. Then, in national political and cultural debate, there was a progressive loss of importance of themes connected with the construction of the corporatist state system

Nicht-staatliche Akteure

Verbände, NGOs und soziale Bewegungen sind nicht-staatliche Akteure, die für moderne Demokratien eine relevante Vermittlungsfunktion zwischen Staat und Gesellschaft ausüben. Sie treten für soziale, ökologische, kulturelle oder politische Interessen ein. Ihre Kommunikationsinstrumente und -strategien zielen in der Regel zum einen auf politische Entscheider, die sie von ihren Positionen überzeugen, und zum anderen auf die Bürger, die sie zu Teilnahme und Engagement bewegen wollen. Dafür greifen sie auf aufmerksamkeitsversprechende Kommunikationsaktivitäten im online und offline Bereich zurück