Suchergebnisse

As elsewhere pressure groups in France operate on all levels of the political process: shaping public opinion, manipulating political parties, pressing for favorable legislation in Parliament and for desirable rulings by the executive. What distinguishes the tactics and the effects of pressure-group action from those in other countries results rather from the particu larities of the French political apparatus, from the uneven de velopment of economic growth, and from the divided loyalties of the French people. Because of the lack of disciplined par ties in a multiparty parliamentary system, interest groups can operate from within the cabinet. The question to which ex tent it has penetrated the once solidly walled sphere of the high administration is controversial. But that the rigidity and an "immobilism," characteristic of pressure groups everywhere, is transferred in France to the machinery of government, is gen erally admitted; it leads to an analogous immobilism of the political organs and hence has contributed to the crisis of the French Republic.

Lobbying is the sum of all communicated influ ences—both direct and indirect—on legislators concerning leg islation. It is indispensable to effective lawmaking which, in a democracy, is always the product of compromise. Every Member of Congress is a message center and reagent in the vast communications system through which the electorate make known their needs. The "good" representative is he who effectively accommodates opposing interests within his con stituency; who successfully relates the needs of his constituents to those of the people as a whole; and who harmonizes his re sponses to the demands made upon him with the dictates of his conscience. The touchstone of "good" lobbying and "bad" lobbying is only whether the message conveyed is intelligible and accurate, or cryptic and misleading. Legislation will be improved when more and more people learn to intervene di rectly in the conduct of our national affairs. Venal lobbying is already the subject of criminal prohibition and penalty, and indirect, or "grass-roots" lobbying is best kept within check by vigorous enforcement of the antitrust laws, to assure "the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources."

During the past few decades the number of pres sure groups has rapidly multiplied, the scope of their activities has vastly expanded, and their methods and tactics have become more professionalized and subtle. Today the more highly organized groups have lobbyists in Washington and in many state capitals, well-staffed bureaus of press agents and research personnel, and active membership groups across the nation. In general, pressure groups function in a pragmatic fashion, employing any procedures or methods which will ef fectively promote their aims. Pressure groups attempt to ex ert influence on every phase of the political process. They en deavor to influence their own members and other groups; urge political parties to endorse favored policies; work for the selec tion of "friendly" officials; and attempt to secure favorable decisions from executive, legislative, and judicial officials. Pos sibly the most significant contemporary development in pres sure-group activity is the continual increase in their efforts to mold public sentiment by utilizing the media of mass communi cation. Noteworthy recent developments in this area include the widespread use of institutional advertising and the estab lishment of the foundation, committees, councils, and institutes which have as their basic purpose the influencing of public attitudes.

WOS:000362040900008 ; This study puts forth the importance of effects of pressure groups on environmental sustainability. A comprehensive literature review has revealed that there are just case studies in theoretical modelling that attempt to analyze the relation between special interest groups and environmental sustainability. When special interest groups act in an organized manner, they turn into pressure groups. For this reason, pressure groups should have a negative impact on environmental sustainability. According to the results of the first empirical analysis in this field, which was based on the data from 127 countries, there is a negative correlation between the level of environmental sustainability and pressure groups. The negative correlation between the pressure groups and environmental sustainability reaches the most significant level in developed countries. Therefore, we can conclude that as the number of pressure groups increases, the level of environmental sustainability decreases. Consequently, the implementation of policies which are created and applied to raise the level of welfare of today's and future generations depend on developed countries which work without bowing to pressure groups.