The policy-planning capacity of the American corporate community: corporations, policy-oriented nonprofits, and the inner circle in 1935–1936 and 2010–2011

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Tom Mills, G. William Domhoff
{"title":"The policy-planning capacity of the American corporate community: corporations, policy-oriented nonprofits, and the inner circle in 1935–1936 and 2010–2011","authors":"Tom Mills, G. William Domhoff","doi":"10.1007/s11186-023-09527-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Using a combination of network analysis and descriptive statistics, this study examines the extent to which six important and longstanding policy-oriented nonprofit organizations — foundations, think tanks, and policy-discussion groups — were connected via their directors with the 250 largest corporations in the United States in 1935–1936 and 2010–2011. The results demonstrate that the six nonprofit organizations included in the study were well integrated into corporate networks in both periods, and had an even greater integrative role in 2010–2011 than they did in 1935–1936. This finding supports the hypothesis that policy-oriented nonprofit organizations allow the corporate community to develop proposals, and to reach consensus, on major policy issues. This hypothesis is further supported by an overview of existing studies that illustrate the success of these organizations in shaping policy outcomes on a range of issues. Based on the overall results, the longstanding claim that corporations influence government primarily or solely at the “interest-group” level can be supplemented by the conclusion that policy-oriented nonprofits support a policy-planning process that links the corporate community to government on general issues. In addition, the findings cast doubt on the claim that the corporate community has lost its capacity for policy cohesion in recent decades, due primarily to a “fracturing” caused by a decline in bank centrality. Since general policies have been created within the policy-planning process since at least the mid-1930s, the decline in bank centrality is irrelevant to the corporate community’s ability to formulate general policy proposals.","PeriodicalId":48137,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Society","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-023-09527-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Using a combination of network analysis and descriptive statistics, this study examines the extent to which six important and longstanding policy-oriented nonprofit organizations — foundations, think tanks, and policy-discussion groups — were connected via their directors with the 250 largest corporations in the United States in 1935–1936 and 2010–2011. The results demonstrate that the six nonprofit organizations included in the study were well integrated into corporate networks in both periods, and had an even greater integrative role in 2010–2011 than they did in 1935–1936. This finding supports the hypothesis that policy-oriented nonprofit organizations allow the corporate community to develop proposals, and to reach consensus, on major policy issues. This hypothesis is further supported by an overview of existing studies that illustrate the success of these organizations in shaping policy outcomes on a range of issues. Based on the overall results, the longstanding claim that corporations influence government primarily or solely at the “interest-group” level can be supplemented by the conclusion that policy-oriented nonprofits support a policy-planning process that links the corporate community to government on general issues. In addition, the findings cast doubt on the claim that the corporate community has lost its capacity for policy cohesion in recent decades, due primarily to a “fracturing” caused by a decline in bank centrality. Since general policies have been created within the policy-planning process since at least the mid-1930s, the decline in bank centrality is irrelevant to the corporate community’s ability to formulate general policy proposals.
1935-1936年和2010-2011年美国企业界的政策规划能力:公司、政策导向的非营利组织和核心圈
本研究结合网络分析和描述性统计,考察了1935-1936年和2010-2011年间,六个重要且长期以政策为导向的非营利组织——基金会、智库和政策讨论小组——通过其董事与美国250家最大公司的联系程度。结果表明,研究中包括的六个非营利组织在两个时期都很好地融入了企业网络,并且在2010-2011年的整合作用比1935-1936年更大。这一发现支持了一个假设,即政策导向的非营利组织允许企业社区在主要政策问题上提出建议并达成共识。对现有研究的概述进一步支持了这一假设,这些研究说明了这些组织在一系列问题上形成政策结果方面的成功。基于总体结果,长期以来企业主要或仅在“利益集团”层面影响政府的说法可以得到以下结论的补充:以政策为导向的非营利组织支持将企业社区与政府在一般问题上联系起来的政策规划过程。此外,研究结果对最近几十年企业界失去政策凝聚力的说法提出了质疑,这种说法主要是由于银行中心地位下降造成的“破裂”。由于至少从20世纪30年代中期开始,一般政策就在政策规划过程中制定,因此银行中心地位的下降与企业界制定一般政策建议的能力无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theory and Society
Theory and Society SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.90%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Theory and Society is a forum for the international community of scholars that publishes theoretically-informed analyses of social processes. It opens its pages to authors working at the frontiers of social analysis, regardless of discipline. Its subject matter ranges from prehistory to contemporary affairs, from treatments of single individuals and national societies to world culture, from discussions of theory to methodological critique, from First World to Third World - but always in the effort to bring together theory, criticism and concrete observation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信