Samenvatting

Interest groups play a big role in the functioning of the democracy of the EU. These players that lobby for different interests can make a positive, but also a negative contribution to EU politics. The influence of the interest groups on the EU institutions can vary, and some will always be more influential than others. What this phenomenon exactly is, and how it can be achieved, is not always clear. Therefore, several scholars have tried to analyse influence and have examined what other factors play a role. Scholars such as Jan Beyers, Adreas Dür and Pieter Bouwen, have attempted to measure influence by concentrating on access, resources, external factors, and alternative strategies used by interest groups (Bouwen, 2002). Furthermore they have tried to find methods to measure influence, such as process tracing and assessing the degree of preference attainment (Dür, 2008b). By using different approaches, the scholars in the literature review have all concluded that an interest group needs access to political actors to be successful and influential (Beyers, 2004). Therefore, the objective of this dissertation was to determine if the access is really the most crucial component for interest group influence, and what role other circumstances can play in this phenomenon.
This dissertation concentrated on the different theories by the scholars. After reading the articles by the scholars, four hypotheses was constructed, and a method to measure influence was selected. The hypotheses derived from the literature stated that:
1. Resources are very important to be influential,
2. The organisational structure of interest groups contributes to the strategies used,
3. Access to politicians is crucial for interest groups to successfully lobby at EU level,
4. When interest groups have access, they find it unnecessary to use other strategies.
The influence was measured and the hypotheses were tested by conducting a case study, in which several interviews with three interest groups were conducted. These organisations, FIA, FEMA and ACEM, lobbied the European Commission and the European Parliament, during the decision-making process of the regulation on the type approval and marked surveillance of two and three-wheeled vehicles and quadricycles. The proposal of this regulation was published in 2010 by the European Commission, and the final regulation was adopted in 2012. To detect influence, the preferences of the interest groups were considered and compared with the content of the final adopted regulation. Additionally, the case study was used to find the reason behind that influence. The combination of the information gained from the case study, the interviews, and more desk research allowed to answering the hypotheses and detect the interest groups’ influence.
The findings of the case study confirmed that access is the most critical element for an interest group to successfully lobby at EU level, and especially the European Parliament. The findings showed that resources are important, but when those resources are not used at the right time and the right place, they do not make a difference. Additionally all three interest groups had personal contact with the political actors and have used information from their members Clubs or companies to gain access. Access was also gained because according to the interviewees, the political actors, especially in the European Parliament, were open to discuss the issues with them. Apart from access, the interest groups also used other strategies, but argued that, because they already had direct contact with the political actors, those strategies were considered to be less important. Almost all interest groups were able to gain influence, and edit or keep a certain topic in the regulation. Therefore it could be said that, to a certain extent, the interest groups were successful, and that this success was achieved by having direct contact with the political actors and by knowing at what time and what place other strategies and resources could be used. Because in the end, lobbying is all about knowing the right people, having the right resources and using those at the right time and place in the legislative process.