Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

Profil

• Die Rolle von Politikinhalten: Verteilungsgewinne in Koaliationsverhandlungen in West- und Osteuropa

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Zeitraum: 11/2016 - 03/2018 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Electoral trade-offs in post-industrial societies

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: ESB: Berlin University Alliance Zeitraum: 07/2023 - 06/2026 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver, Tarik Abou-Chadi

• EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Horizon 2020: Research and Innovation Action (RIA) Zeitraum: 10/2020 - 09/2023 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• EXC 2055/1: Responding to the (Populist) Right: How Moderate Parties Can Win Back Voters

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Exzellenzstrategie Cluster Zeitraum: 01/2021 - 12/2021 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• EXC 2055/1: Social Inequalities, Migration and the Rise of Populist Parties

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Exzellenzstrategie Cluster Zeitraum: 08/2019 - 07/2022 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Johannes Giesecke, Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Exzellenzstrategie Cluster Zeitraum: 01/2019 - 12/2025 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Anette Eva Fasang, Frauke Stuhl, Prof. Dr. phil. Andreas Eckert, Prof. Dr. Johannes Giesecke, Prof. Dr. Philipp Dann, LL.M. (Harvard), Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• FOR 5622/1: Maßnahmen gegen Rechtspopulismus (COUNTERRIGHT) (TP 08)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Forschungsgruppe Zeitraum: 04/2025 - 03/2029 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver, Prof. Dr. Anselm Hager

• GRK 2458/1: Die Dynamiken von Demographie, demokratischen Prozessen und Public Policies (DYNAMICS)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Graduiertenkolleg Zeitraum: 09/2019 - 02/2024 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• GRK 2458/1: Die Dynamiken von Demographie, demokratischen Prozessen und Public Policies (Hertie Kooperation)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Andere außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtung Zeitraum: 09/2019 - 08/2028 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• GRK 2458/2: Die Dynamiken von Demographie, demokratischen Prozessen und Public Policies (DYNAMICS)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Graduiertenkolleg Zeitraum: 03/2024 - 08/2028 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• GRK 2458: Die Dynamiken von Demographie, demokratischen Prozessen und Public Policies (DYNAMICS)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Graduiertenkolleg Zeitraum: 09/2019 - 08/2028 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Interest Groups and the Ministerial Bureaucracy in Germany: Studying Lobbying Success at the Administrative Stage (MINISTERIALLOBBY)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Zeitraum: 09/2021 - 12/2025 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Party-Interest Group Relationships in Contemporary Democracies: Character, Causes and Consequences

  Quelle ↗

  Zeitraum: 10/2014 - 09/2018 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver, Prof. Dr. Elin Haugsjerd Allern

• Paying Attention to Attention: Media Exposure and Opinion Formation in an Age of Information Overload

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Volkswagen Stiftung Zeitraum: 01/2017 - 12/2019 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver, Pablo Barbera, Andrew Guess, Jung Hwan Yang

• Policy-Making in Koalitionsregierungen: Die Umsetzung von Koalitionsverträgen (COALITIONPOLICY)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Zeitraum: 10/2018 - 09/2021 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Socioeconomic Inequality and Populism - a Challenge to Social Cohesion

  Quelle ↗

  Zeitraum: 01/2020 - 12/2020 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Socioeconomic Inequality and Populism – a Challenge to Social Cohesion

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Berlin University Alliance (BUA) Zeitraum: 11/2019 - 12/2020 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Support for the European Union (COVIDEU)

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Volkswagen Stiftung Zeitraum: 01/2022 - 06/2026 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

• Wer wurde ein Nazi? Eine strukturierte Datenbank der Denazifizierungsfragebögen aus den amerikani-schen und französischen Besatzungszonen in Deutschland, 1945-1949

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Internationale Kooperation Zeitraum: 06/2022 - 06/2025 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver, Dr. Jan Stuckatz

• Audencia Business School

  KPT

  118 Treffer85.0%
  • EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)
    K

    85.0%

• Science & Startups Berlin

  PT

  32 Treffer59.2%
  • Zuwendung im Rahmen des Programms „exist – Existenzgründungen aus der Wissenschaft“ aus dem Bundeshaushalt, Einzelplan 09, Kapitel 02, Titel 68607, Haushaltsjahr 2026, sowie aus Mitteln des Europäischen Strukturfonds (hier Euro-päischer Sozialfonds Plus – ESF Plus) Förderperiode 2021-2027 – Kofinanzierung für das Vorhaben: „exist Women“
    T

    59.2%

• International Centre for Higher Education Research Kassel

  PT

  73 Treffer57.0%
  • REGIO - Eine Kartierung der Entstehung und des Erfolgs von Kooperationsbeziehungen in regionalen Forschungsverbünden und Innovationsclustern. Determinanten der Entstehung und des Erfolgs von Kooperationsbeziehungen in regionalen Forschungsverbünden
    P

    57.0%

• Centro de Investigacion Ecologica Y Aplicaciones Forestales Consorcio

  PT

  102 Treffer56.9%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    56.9%

• Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature et de ses Ressources

  PT

  97 Treffer56.9%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    56.9%

• Shenzen Fairy Lake Botanical Garden

  PT

  99 Treffer56.9%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    56.9%

• Drustvo Za Domace Raziskave

  PT

  22 Treffer56.7%
  • EU: Transmitting Contentious Cultural Heritages With the Arts: From Intervention to Co-Production (TRACES)
    P

    56.7%

• Hosman Durabil

  PT

  21 Treffer56.7%
  • EU: Transmitting Contentious Cultural Heritages With the Arts: From Intervention to Co-Production (TRACES)
    P

    56.7%

• Naturhistorisches Museum Wien

  PT

  22 Treffer56.7%
  • EU: Transmitting Contentious Cultural Heritages With the Arts: From Intervention to Co-Production (TRACES)
    P

    56.7%

• Cluj IT Cluster

  PT

  37 Treffer55.5%
  • SKILLAB: Monitoring The Demand And Supply Of Skills In The European Labour Market
    P

    55.5%

• Lobbying in the European Union

  2013

  Oxford University Press eBooks · 394 Zitationen · DOI

  Why can some interest groups influence policy-making while others cannot? Even though this question is central to the study of politics, we know little about the factors explaining interest group influence. Understanding lobbying success should be of particular concern to scholars of European politics since the European Union constitutes a promising political opportunity structure for organized interests. This book sheds light on the impact of interest groups on European policy-making and makes a major contribution to the study of both European Union politics and interest groups more generally. Klüver develops a comprehensive theoretical model for understanding lobbying success and presents an extensive empirical analysis of interest group influence on policy-making in the EU. The book relies on a large, new, and innovative dataset that combines a wide variety of data sources including a quantitative text analysis of European Commission consultations, an online survey of interest groups, information gathered on interest group websites, and legislative data retrieved from EU databases. This book analyzes interest group influence across 56 policy issues and 2,696 interest groups and shows that lobbying is an exchange relationship in which the European institutions trade influence for information, citizen support, and economic power. Importantly, this book demonstrates that it is not sufficient to solely focus on individual interest groups, but that it is crucial how interest groups come together in issue-specific lobbying coalitions. Lobbying is a collective enterprise in which information supply, citizen support, and economic power of entire lobbying coalitions are decisive for lobbying success.

• Who Responds? Voters, Parties and Issue Attention

  2014

  British Journal of Political Science · 253 Zitationen · DOI

  Do parties listen to their voters? This article addresses this important question by moving beyond position congruence to explore whether parties respond to voters’ issue priorities. It argues that political parties respond to voters in their election manifestos, but that their responsiveness varies across different party types: namely, that large parties are more responsive to voters’ policy priorities, while government parties listen less to voters’ issue demands. The study also posits that niche parties are not generally more responsive to voter demands, but that they are more responsive to the concerns of their supporters in their owned issue areas. To test these theoretical expectations, the study combines data from the Comparative Manifestos Project with data on voters’ policy priorities from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and various national election studies across eighteen European democracies in sixty-three elections from 1972–2011. Our findings have important implications for understanding political representation and democratic linkage.

• Measuring Interest Group Influence Using Quantitative Text Analysis

  2009

  European Union Politics · 224 Zitationen · DOI

  The analysis of interest group influence is crucial in order to explain policy outcomes and to assess the democratic legitimacy of the European Union. However, owing to methodological difficulties in operationalizing influence, only few have studied it. This article therefore proposes a new approach to the measurement of influence, drawing on quantitative text analysis. By comparing interest groups’ policy positions with the final policy output, one can draw conclusions about the winners and losers of the decision-making process. In order to examine the applicability of text analysis, a case study is presented comparing hand-coding, WORDSCORES and Wordfish. The results correlate highly and text analysis proves to be a powerful tool to measure interest groups’ policy positions, paving the way for the large-scale analysis of interest group influence.

• Helping or Hurting? How Governing as a Junior Coalition Partner Influences Electoral Outcomes

  2020

  The Journal of Politics · 199 Zitationen · DOI

  Does joining a governing coalition as a junior partner influence a party’s subsequent electoral success? We argue that joining a multiparty cabinet as a junior partner considerably hurts a party’s future electoral prospects as junior partners cannot enact much of what they promised before the election and since they cannot sufficiently differentiate themselves from their larger coalition partner. To test our theoretical expectations comparatively and over time, we have compiled a comprehensive data set on the electoral performance of 307 political parties running in 219 elections in twenty-eight European countries from 1972 to 2017. To shed light on the underlying causal mechanisms, we additionally provide empirical evidence from an illustrative case study showing that the inability to deliver on election promises and a large degree of misperception among voters are important drivers of junior coalition parties’ electoral losses. Our findings provide important insights into the relationship between coalition governments and electoral competition.

• Legislative lobbying in context: towards a conceptual framework of interest group lobbying in the European Union

  2015

  Journal of European Public Policy · 192 Zitationen · DOI

  We outline a conceptual framework that identifies and characterizes the contextual nature of interest group politics in the European Union (EU) to better understand variation in interest group mobilization, lobbying strategies and interest group influence. We focus on two sets of contextual factors that affect EU interest group lobbying. First, we argue that interest group activities are shaped by several policy-related factors, namely the complexity, the policy type, the status quo, the salience and the degree of conflict characterizing legislative proposals and the associated issues. Second, we posit that lobbying in the EU is affected by institutional factors that vary within the EU political system, such as the institutional fragmentation within the European Commission and the European Parliament and across different national political systems depending on the patterns of interest intermediation or the vertical and horizontal distribution of powers. Finally, we theorize about the interrelationship between contextual features and interest group properties and summarize the findings of the collection.

• Do parties respond? How electoral context influences party responsiveness

  2014

  Electoral Studies · 183 Zitationen · DOI

• Setting the Agenda or Responding to Voters? Political Parties, Voters and Issue Attention

  2015

  West European Politics · 182 Zitationen · DOI

  Why do political parties prioritise some policy issues over others? While the issue ownership theory suggests that parties emphasise policy issues on which they have an advantage in order to increase the salience of these issues among voters, the riding the wave theory argues instead that parties respond to voters by highlighting policy issues that are salient in the minds of citizens. This study sheds new light on the selective issue emphasis of political parties by analysing issue attention throughout the entire electoral cycle. On the basis of a quantitative text analysis of more than 40,000 press releases published by German parties from 2000 until 2010, this article provides empirical support for the riding the wave theory. It shows that political parties take their cues from voters by responding to the issue priorities of their electorate. The results have important implications for political representation and the role that parties play in democracies.

• The contextual nature of lobbying: Explaining lobbying success in the European Union

  2011

  European Union Politics · 175 Zitationen · DOI

  Why are some interest groups able to lobby political decisions successfully whereas others are not? This article suggests that the issue context is an important source of variation because it can facilitate or hamper the ability of interest groups to lobby decision-makers successfully. In order to test the effect of issue characteristics, this article draws on a new, unprecedented data set of interest group lobbying in the European Union. Using quantitative text analysis to analyse Commission consultations, this article studies lobbying success across 2696 interest groups and 56 policy issues. The findings indicate that lobbying success indeed varies with the issue context, depending on the relative size of lobbying coalitions and the salience of policy issues, whereas individual group characteristics do not exhibit any systematic effect.

• Party convergence and vote switching: Explaining mainstream party decline across Europe

  2019

  European Journal of Political Research · 172 Zitationen · DOI

  Abstract How can one explain the significant vote losses of mainstream parties across Europe in recent years? In this article, it is argued that mainstream party convergence is an important determinant of the recent political and electoral volatility in European party systems. More specifically, it is hypothesised that as mainstream parties converge on the left‐right scale, voters will switch from supporting a mainstream party to a non‐mainstream party in the next election as they look for an alternative that better represents their ideological views. To test these theoretical expectations, data is combined from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and the Manifestos Project for nearly 15,000 vote choices of individual voters in 30 elections in 16 West and East European countries from 2001 until 2013. The findings have important implications for understanding the recent rise of non‐mainstream parties, the changing nature of party systems and the increasing complexity of cabinet formation across Europe.

• Voting Against Your Constituents? How Lobbying Affects Representation

  2015

  American Journal of Political Science · 150 Zitationen · DOI

  Citizens delegate the representation of their political preferences to members of Parliament (MPs), who are supposed to represent their interests in the legislature. However, MPs are exposed to a variety of interest groups seeking to influence their voting behavior. We argue that interest groups influence how MPs cast their vote in Parliament, but that this effect varies across groups. While lobbying by sectional groups provides incentives for MPs to defect from their constituents, we expect that cause groups in fact strengthen the link between MPs and their voters. We test our argument based on an innovative study of 118 Swiss public referenda, which allows for directly comparing voter preferences with legislative voting of 448 MPs on these issues. Drawing on a multilevel regression analysis, this study shows that interest groups considerably affect the link between MPs and their voters. Our findings have important implications for our understanding of political representation.

• Lobbying in the European Union: Interest Groups, Lobbying Coalitions, and Policy Change

  2013

  150 Zitationen · DOI

  Introduction 1. Lobbying in Coalitions 2. How to Measure Interest Group Influence 3. Mapping European Union lobbying 4. Policy Debates, Interest Groups, and the Structure of Conflict 5. The Policy Formulation Stage: Interest Groups and the European Commission 6. The Decision-Making Stage: Bringing the Council and the European Parliament in 7. Conclusions and Implications: Interest Groups, European Politics, and Democracy Bibliography Appendix 1: Association Questionnaire Appendix 2: Company Questionnaire

• Coalition Governments and Party Competition: Political Communication Strategies of Coalition Parties

  2015

  Political Science Research and Methods · 144 Zitationen · DOI

  Coalition parties have to reconcile two competing logics: they need to demonstrate unity to govern together, but also have to emphasize their own profile to succeed in elections. We argue that the electoral cycle explains whether unity or differentiation prevails. While differentiation dominates at the beginning and the end of the legislative term in close proximity to elections, compromise dominates the middle of the term when coalition governments focus on enacting a common policy agenda. To test our theoretical claims, we draw on an innovative quantitative text analysis of more than 21,000 press releases published by coalition parties from 2000 until 2010.

• Informational Lobbying in the European Union: The Effect of Organisational Characteristics

  2012

  West European Politics · 128 Zitationen · DOI

  Information supply is an important instrument through which interest groups can exert influence on political decisions. However, information supply to decision-makers varies extensively across interest groups despite the common objective to influence policy-making. Drawing on resource mobilisation and organisational theory, a new theoretical framework is developed that identifies organisational characteristics, more specifically the resources, the functional differentiation, the professionalisation and the decentralisation of interest groups as determinants of information supply. These theoretical expectations are tested based on a large new dataset. Using multilevel modelling, this article examines information supply to the European Commission across a large number of policy issues and interest groups by combining an analysis of consultation submissions with a survey conducted among interest groups. The findings confirm the theoretical expectations suggesting that interest groups cannot equally exploit their access to decision-makers, but that resource endowment and organisational structures play a crucial role for effective informational lobbying.

• Coalition Agreements, Issue Attention, and Cabinet Governance

  2019

  Comparative Political Studies · 121 Zitationen · DOI

  Why do coalition parties settle some policy issues in great detail, whereas other issues are hardly mentioned in coalition agreements? Coalition agreements are important policy platforms that determine policy making during the legislative term. However, we know remarkably little about their content. We shed light on why issue attention in coalition agreements varies so extensively. We argue that intra-cabinet conflict positively affects issue attention as parties have stronger incentives to negotiate a detailed policy agenda that constrains their coalition partners. However, we expect that this effect is conditioned by preference tangentiality and the salience of an issue among coalition partners. Our theoretical expectations are tested drawing on a new data set based on a comprehensive content analysis of 224 agreements negotiated by 181 parties between 1945 and 2015 in 24 West and East European countries. We find support for our hypotheses and conclude that parties draft agreements to limit “ministerial drift.”

• Incentives can spur COVID-19 vaccination uptake

  2021

  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 115 Zitationen · DOI

  Recent evidence suggests that vaccination hesitancy is too high in many countries to sustainably contain COVID-19. Using a factorial survey experiment administered to 20,500 online respondents in Germany, we assess the effectiveness of three strategies to increase vaccine uptake, namely, providing freedoms, financial remuneration, and vaccination at local doctors. Our results suggest that all three strategies can increase vaccination uptake on the order of two to three percentage points (PP) overall and five PP among the undecided. The combined effects could be as high as 13 PP for this group. The returns from different strategies vary across age groups, however, with older cohorts more responsive to local access and younger cohorts most responsive to enhanced freedoms for vaccinated citizens.

• Framing in context: how interest groups employ framing to lobby the European Commission

  2015

  Journal of European Public Policy · 115 Zitationen · DOI

  Framing plays an important role in public policy. Interest groups strategically highlight some aspects of a policy proposal while ignoring others in order to gain an advantage in the policy debate. However, we know remarkably little about how interest groups choose their frames. This contribution therefore studies the determinants of frame choice during the policy formulation stage in the European Union. We argue that frame choice is a complex process which is simultaneously affected by interest groups as well as contextual characteristics. With regard to interest group characteristics, we expect that frame choice varies systematically across actor type. With regard to contextual characteristics, we hypothesize that the frames that interest groups employ are specifically tailored towards the DGs in charge of drafting the proposal. Our theoretical expectations are tested based on a new and innovative dataset on frame choice of more than 3,000 interest groups in 44 policy debates.

• Lobbying as a collective enterprise: winners and losers of policy formulation in the European Union

  2012

  Journal of European Public Policy · 111 Zitationen · DOI

  Why does lobbying success in the European Union (EU) vary across interest groups? Even though this question is central to the study of EU policy-making, only few have dealt with it. The small number of existing studies is moreover characterized by a multitude of hypotheses and contradictory findings. This article aims to overcome these shortcomings by presenting a theoretical exchange model that identifies information supply, citizen support and economic power of entire lobbying camps as the major determinants of lobbying success. The hypotheses are empirically evaluated based on a large new dataset. By combining a quantitative text analysis of interest group submissions to Commission consultations with an online survey among interest groups, the theoretical expectations are tested across a large number of policy issues and interest groups while controlling for individual interest group and issue characteristics. The empirical analysis confirms the theoretical expectations indicating that lobbying is a collective enterprise.

• Opening the black box: The professionalization of interest groups in the European Union

  2013

  Interest Groups & Advocacy · 96 Zitationen · DOI

• Responding to far right challengers: does accommodation pay off?

  2020

  Journal of European Public Policy · 89 Zitationen · DOI

  Right-wing populist and far right parties are on the rise across Europe. While established parties are suffering dramatic electoral losses, right-wing parties are celebrating one electoral victory after another. To address their radical right challengers, many established parties have adopted a so-called ‘accommodative strategy’ by taking a more immigration-skeptical policy position. However, it is unclear whether such a strategy yields the expected benefits or whether such a position shift in turn hurts a party electorally. In this article, we find that mainstream left parties benefit from ‘going tough on immigration’ whereas it neither helps nor hurts mainstream right parties electorally. We arrive at this conclusion through an analysis of 16,811 vote choices in 15 elections in six countries from 1998 until 2013. Our findings have important implications for understanding what explains the rise of far right parties and the changing nature of electoral competition across Europe.

• Voter polarisation and party responsiveness: Why parties emphasise divided issues, but remain silent on unified issues

  2015

  European Journal of Political Research · 87 Zitationen · DOI

  Abstract How does voter polarisation affect party responsiveness? Previous research has shown that political parties emphasise political issues that are important to their voters. However, it is posited in this article that political parties are not equally responsive to citizen demands across all issue areas. The hypothesis is that party responsiveness varies considerably with the preference configuration of the electorate. More specifically, it is argued that party responsiveness increases with the polarisation of issues among voters. To test these theoretical expectations, party responsiveness is analysed across nine West European countries from 1982 until 2013. Data on voter attention and voter preferences with regard to specific policy issues from a variety of national election studies is combined with Comparative Manifestos Project data on parties' emphasis of these issues in their election manifestos. The findings have major implications for understanding party competition and political representation in Europe.

• Europeanization of Lobbying Activities: When National Interest Groups Spill Over to the European Level

  2010

  Journal of European Integration · 87 Zitationen · DOI

  Abstract The increasing transfer of competencies to the European level together with the growing heterogeneity of European interest federations puts national interest groups under extensive pressure. In order to guarantee the representation of their interests at the European level, they have to lobby the European institutions directly. However, not all national interest groups do so. This article therefore analyses under what conditions national associations engage at the European level. A theoretical framework is developed, combining resource mobilization theory with rational choice institutionalism. It is empirically tested in a comparative case study of lobbying strategies of French and German agricultural interest groups in the Doha Round. Drawing on a comprehensive survey conducted in 2006/07, this study combines a comparative research design with the new multi‐value qualitative comparative analysis. The main conclusion is that resources as well as the domestic national institutional context determine whether national interest groups Europeanize their lobbying strategies.

• Biasing Politics? Interest Group Participation in EU Policy-Making

  2012

  West European Politics · 77 Zitationen · DOI

  Does lobbying success in the European Union vary systematically across interest group type? Interest groups lobby the European institutions in order to achieve policy decisions that are in line with their own preferences. While some argue that different types of interest groups are equally able to shape European policy-making, others contend that lobbying success is systematically biased towards some powerful interest groups. The empirical evidence is contradictory as previous studies focused either on a specific interest group type or on a specific policy area so that it is difficult to draw general conclusions. This study therefore presents an extensive empirical analysis of lobbying success across a wide variety of interest groups and policy issues by combining a quantitative text analysis of Commission consultations with an online survey among interest groups. The findings are promising as they indicate that lobbying success does not vary systematically across interest group type.

• Setting the Party Agenda: Interest Groups, Voters and Issue Attention

  2018

  British Journal of Political Science · 68 Zitationen · DOI

  Do political parties respond to interest group mobilization? While party responsiveness to voters has received widespread attention, little is known about how interest groups affect parties’ policy agendas. I argue that political parties respond to interest groups as lobbyists offer valuable information, campaign contributions, electoral support and personal rewards, but that party responsiveness is conditioned by voter preferences. Based on a novel longitudinal analysis studying the responsiveness of German parties to interest groups across eleven issue areas and seven elections from 1987 until 2009, it is shown that parties adjust their policy agendas in response to interest group mobilization and that interest groups are more successful in shaping party policy when their priorities coincide with those of the electorate.

• IMAGES OF AN UNBIASED INTEREST SYSTEM

  2015

  Journal of European Public Policy · 66 Zitationen · DOI

  Since political scientists were introduced to the concept of ‘the scope and bias of the pressure system’ by Schattschneider more than half a century ago, we have grappled with the lack of a standard against which to assess bias. Still, scholars have continued to address Schattschneider's provocative claim. This means that they must have in their minds at least implicit images of the unknown state of an unbiased interest system. We uncover these implicit images in this analysis both for their own intrinsic interest and perhaps as a foundation for more progressive research on biases in interest representation. Ten scholars who have done considerable work on the politics of interest representation were asked to provide a brief description of what he or she would see as an unbiased interest system. After presenting each, we summarize the themes that emerged and discuss possible avenues for empirical research on bias.

• Legislative pledges and coalition government

  2013

  Party Politics · 66 Zitationen · DOI

  When do coalitions do what they promise? Previous research has focused on the extent to which parties implement electoral pledges. In this article, we examine how coalition cabinets fulfil post-electoral legislative agendas. Many coalitions announce programmes identifying bills that they plan to introduce to parliament in the months ahead. Even though coalition parties publicly signal commitment to all such proposals, there is variation in the extent to which cabinets meet their own deadlines. We argue that pledge fulfilment is driven by differences in the divisiveness and salience of legislative initiatives. We test our theoretical expectations based on an empirical analysis of over 500 legislative pledges made by the Polish cabinet between 2008 and 2011. Our results confirm that pledges dealing with less divisive and more salient issues are likely to be fulfilled with less delay than those dealing with more divisive and less important issues.

• Audencia Business School

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  other

• Centre for Social Sciences - Hungarian Academy of Sciences Centre of Excellence

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  other

• Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung

  EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  other

• Freie Universität Berlin

  EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  university

• Hebrew University of Jerusalem

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Hertie School of Governance

  GRK 2458/2: Die Dynamiken von Demographie, demokratischen Prozessen und Public Policies (DYNAMICS)

  other

• Høyskolen Kristiania - Ernst G Mortensens Stiftelse Avd Oslo

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  foundation

• Leibniz-Institut für Globale und Regionale Studien

  EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  other

• Leibniz-Zentrum Moderner Orient

  EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  other

• London School of Economics and Political Science

  The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Support for the European Union (COVIDEU)

  university

• Pompeu Fabra University

  The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Support for the European Union (COVIDEU)

  university

• Technische Universität München

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universität Aarhus

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universität Edinburgh

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universität Exeter

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universität Hamburg

  FOR 5622/1: Maßnahmen gegen Rechtspopulismus (COUNTERRIGHT) (TP 08)

  university

• Universität Oslo

  Party-Interest Group Relationships in Contemporary Democracies: Character, Causes and Consequences

  university

• Universität Warschau

  The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Support for the European Union (COVIDEU)

  university

• Universität Wien

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universität zu Köln

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Universiteit van Amsterdam

  The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Support for the European Union (COVIDEU)

  university

• University College Dublin

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• University of Strathclyde

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Vrije Universität Amsterdam

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Freie Universität Brüssel

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  university

• Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung

  EU: Observatory for Political Texts in European Democracies: A European Research Infrastructure (OPTED)

  other

• Zentrum für Osteuropa- und internationale Studien

  EXC 2055: Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS)

  other

Name

Prof. Dr. Heike Klüver

Titel

Prof. Dr.

Fakultät

Kultur-, Sozial- und Bildungswissenschaftliche Fakultät

Institut

Institut für Sozialwissenschaften

Arbeitsgruppe

Politisches Verhalten im Vergleich

Telefon

+49 30 2093-66566

HU-FIS-Profil

Quelle ↗

Zuletzt gescrapt

26.4.2026, 01:07:36