With the breakthrough in information technology since the early 1990s pivoting in a maturing
global information network accessible for a broad mass of consumers called the internet, the
power information relays to its "owner" and the means and speed of its diffusion have been
revolutionized. In this context, looking at various societal actors, the issue of equal access to
and transparency of information triggered not only broad scientific research efforts, but again
placed the spotlight of public scrutiny on the issue of transparency of information in societal,
economical and governmental mechanisms of decision making and business conduct. Civil
society bombarding multinational enterprises with postulations to disclose supply chain
locations and their labor and environmental practices especially abroad conveys that not doing
so bears certain, if not even very lucrative, advantages for such businesses. With
governmental legislation setting the stage for businesses` profitability in many realms,
exerting "selfish" influence on national politics holds great allurement for business itself.
Fronting supranational joint efforts like the establishment of the OECD Financial Action Task
Force1 of the G-7 member states or the European Transparency Initiative2, business has ever
since the beginning of nation states found its way to interact with the mechanism ultimately
affecting their profitability in a regulatory or constraining way. Looking back at the financial
crisis of 2008, it becomes clear that nowadays business making use of their involvement in
shaping national policies has not declined at all. The multinational "Cash for Clunkers" law
and the failure of the "nutrition facts traffic light" law in Germany prove conclusive examples
of how "a passive transmission belt for corporate interest" (Stubbs 2006: 171) in form of
lobbyism successfully influences legislative outcomes which crucially benefit a certain
societal group. With a broad landscape of "industries of intermediaries" (Bac 2001: 95) which
offer not only the expertise but also the necessary connections to crucial hotspots of
legislative decision making, "Big Business" is successfully leveraging its` resources to
increase its power. Consequently civil society`s scrutiny in terms of where and to what extent
certain business actors are involved in legislative outcomes is vital to ensuring the common
good being put ahead of interests of certain societal elites.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Research question and methodology
3. The offspring of lobbyism
4. The global transparency issue
4.1 Criticism and advocacy of "full transparency"
4.2 The legislative status quo of "transparency legislation"
5. Lobbyism within a "world of full transparency"
6. Implications for "big business"
7. Conclusion and future outlook
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary research goal is to investigate how "full transparency" in legislative consultation processes, particularly regarding the mandatory disclosure of affiliation and funding of external agents, could induce structural and behavioral changes in "big business" lobbying practices and resource allocation.
- The role of information disclosure in legislative decision-making.
- The impact of transparency on lobbying practices and "industries of intermediaries".
- Structural reforms for parliamentary oversight, including registration and standardized conduct.
- The shift of corporate strategy from lobbying towards product-focused competitiveness.
- The potential for increased pluralism and the role of civil society as "watchdogs".
Excerpt from the Book
6. Implications for "big business"
The subsequent analysis rests upon the presumption of Holman’s earlier mentioned three main flaws having been overcome concerning parliamentary lawmaking procedures: "I noted the huge competitive advantage Big Business has over ordinary citizens when they leverage billions of dollars and armies of lobbyist to fight against the will of […] people and the public interest" (Elliot 2010). Elliot’s statement would not hold any further if we look at the restrictions "full transparency" would impose on lobbyism and what structural changes in behavior of business it might trigger. First of all, mandatory registration and funding disclosure of lobbying actors would create a publicly accessible pool of objective information about lobbyism activity. Disclosure of funding sources, affiliation of advisory committee members and ultimately transparency in terms of proportionality of involvement of industries and civil society in draft law consultations would provide a common ground for moral assessment of involvement of these actors. Including civil society in our considerations, it’s highly probable that actors which were, prior to our theoretical "reform", fighting for transparency, would adopt a new role of official "watchdogs" over corporate conduct.
As for instance within the banking sector brand image is the most important factor influencing consumer choices (Walen 2009), this circumstance also applies to almost every other major industry. In consequence, due to disclosure of "corporate behavior", consumer choices will be more and more influenced by the latter. "Big business" would have to reassess its cost benefit calculation regarding extensive lobbyism "in the open" against profit gains derived from such conduct. Reassessment would most probably yield an inverted relationship between the two variables. Subsequently Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) would experience a tremendous gain in relevance for corporate strategies.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Discusses the evolution of information power and the role of lobbyism in shaping legislative outcomes, highlighting the necessity of transparency for the common good.
2. Research question and methodology: Defines the scope of the study regarding transparency in interest representation and presents the central research question concerning behavioral changes in "big business".
3. The offspring of lobbyism: Outlines the historical genesis of lobbying and the trend of the "economization of interest representation" in developed democratic states.
4. The global transparency issue: Examines the definition of transparency, current legislative status quos, and the ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of disclosure policies.
5. Lobbyism within a "world of full transparency": Analyzes requirements for effective parliamentary oversight, including mandatory registration, standardization of conduct, and sanctioning systems.
6. Implications for "big business": Explores how "full transparency" would force firms to reallocate resources from aggressive lobbying to research and product development, while enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility.
7. Conclusion and future outlook: Summarizes the findings, suggesting that while lobbyism will persist, "full transparency" would function as a "panopticum" that creates a net gain for society through increased scrutiny.
Keywords
Lobbyism, Full Transparency, Legislative Consultation, Big Business, Resource Allocation, Interest Representation, Corporate Social Responsibility, Parliamentary Oversight, Information Disclosure, Pluralism, Political Accountability, Regulatory Reform, Consulting Industry, Civil Society, Public Good.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines the impact of implementing "full transparency" in legislative consultation procedures on the behavior and lobbying practices of large corporations.
What are the central thematic fields?
The study focuses on political lobbying, the legislative process, transparency legislation, corporate strategy, and the structural power of "big business".
What is the primary research question?
The research asks what behavioral changes in lobbying practices and resource allocation "big business" would undergo if full affiliationary disclosure were mandatory in the legislative consultation process.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The paper utilizes a theoretical framework, analyzing current legislative flaws and academic discourse to deduce logical consequences for corporate and political behavior.
What is covered in the main part?
The main part addresses the history of lobbying, the limitations of current transparency laws, the mechanics of parliamentary oversight, and the transition of corporate resource allocation toward sustainable, product-focused strategies.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Lobbyism, Transparency, Corporate Strategy, Pluralism, and Legislative Consultation.
How does the author define the "connections effect"?
The author discusses the "connections effect" as a potential risk where increased transparency might inadvertently assist lobbyists in identifying key decision-makers, though concludes that accountability mechanisms should mitigate this.
What does the "panopticum" metaphor signify?
The metaphor illustrates how "full transparency" places lobbyists and politicians under constant public scrutiny, effectively discouraging immoral or secretive behaviors by creating a sense of being watched.
- Quote paper
- BA Philipp Stiebeling (Author), 2010, Theorizing Full Transparency within Legislative Consultaion Procedures, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/153423
