“游说是为失败者服务吗?”:企业行为与加拿大军事采购合同

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Andrea Migone, David Chen, Bryan Evans, Alex Howlett, Michael Howlett
{"title":"“游说是为失败者服务吗?”:企业行为与加拿大军事采购合同","authors":"Andrea Migone, David Chen, Bryan Evans, Alex Howlett, Michael Howlett","doi":"10.1111/rego.12658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lobbying is a multi‐faceted phenomenon that involves interest groups and corporations contacting politicians and officials in order to try to achieve their policy preferences. While interest group policy‐related lobbying has received a great deal of attention, studies of corporate contract lobbying are rarer even though this is a much older phenomenon. The article critically examines the commonly‐held position that in the latter case “lobbying is for winners”; that is, that large scale corporate lobbying helps secure contracts that might otherwise have gone to a different firm. It argues instead that firms enjoying technological and other market‐related strengths enjoy an “insider advantage” and lobby less than firms in more competitive situations. In other words that in many situations “lobbying is for losers,” a tool used by weaker firms trying to match or offset the technological and other advantages enjoyed by dominant firms. The article draws on government lobbying registers to examine recent defense‐related procurement efforts in Canada to purchase fighter jets, naval surface ships, patrol vessels, and search and rescue aircraft and the contract lobbying they engendered. Evidence from the four cases provides support for the “loser” thesis with respect to large‐scale technologically advanced goods but also the need to carefully define what constitutes an “inside advantage” allowing firms to forego or delay their lobbying activity, often until only <jats:italic>after</jats:italic> a contract has been awarded.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"180 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Is Lobbying for Losers?”: Corporate Behavior and Canadian Military Procurement Contracting\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Migone, David Chen, Bryan Evans, Alex Howlett, Michael Howlett\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rego.12658\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Lobbying is a multi‐faceted phenomenon that involves interest groups and corporations contacting politicians and officials in order to try to achieve their policy preferences. While interest group policy‐related lobbying has received a great deal of attention, studies of corporate contract lobbying are rarer even though this is a much older phenomenon. The article critically examines the commonly‐held position that in the latter case “lobbying is for winners”; that is, that large scale corporate lobbying helps secure contracts that might otherwise have gone to a different firm. It argues instead that firms enjoying technological and other market‐related strengths enjoy an “insider advantage” and lobby less than firms in more competitive situations. In other words that in many situations “lobbying is for losers,” a tool used by weaker firms trying to match or offset the technological and other advantages enjoyed by dominant firms. The article draws on government lobbying registers to examine recent defense‐related procurement efforts in Canada to purchase fighter jets, naval surface ships, patrol vessels, and search and rescue aircraft and the contract lobbying they engendered. Evidence from the four cases provides support for the “loser” thesis with respect to large‐scale technologically advanced goods but also the need to carefully define what constitutes an “inside advantage” allowing firms to forego or delay their lobbying activity, often until only <jats:italic>after</jats:italic> a contract has been awarded.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"volume\":\"180 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12658\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12658","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

游说是一种多方面的现象,涉及利益集团和公司联系政治家和官员,以试图实现他们的政策偏好。虽然与利益集团政策相关的游说受到了极大的关注,但对公司合同游说的研究却很少,尽管这是一个更古老的现象。本文批判性地审视了普遍持有的立场,即在后一种情况下“游说是为了赢家”;也就是说,大规模的企业游说有助于获得原本可能流向其他公司的合同。相反,它认为,享有技术和其他市场相关优势的公司享有“内部优势”,比竞争更激烈的公司游说更少。换句话说,在许多情况下,“游说是为失败者准备的”,是实力较弱的企业试图赶上或抵消优势企业所享有的技术和其他优势的工具。本文利用政府游说登记册来研究加拿大最近在购买战斗机、海军水面舰艇、巡逻舰和搜救飞机方面的国防相关采购努力,以及它们所产生的合同游说。这四个案例的证据为大规模技术先进产品的“失败者”论点提供了支持,但也需要仔细定义什么是“内部优势”,允许公司放弃或推迟其游说活动,通常直到合同授予之后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“Is Lobbying for Losers?”: Corporate Behavior and Canadian Military Procurement Contracting
Lobbying is a multi‐faceted phenomenon that involves interest groups and corporations contacting politicians and officials in order to try to achieve their policy preferences. While interest group policy‐related lobbying has received a great deal of attention, studies of corporate contract lobbying are rarer even though this is a much older phenomenon. The article critically examines the commonly‐held position that in the latter case “lobbying is for winners”; that is, that large scale corporate lobbying helps secure contracts that might otherwise have gone to a different firm. It argues instead that firms enjoying technological and other market‐related strengths enjoy an “insider advantage” and lobby less than firms in more competitive situations. In other words that in many situations “lobbying is for losers,” a tool used by weaker firms trying to match or offset the technological and other advantages enjoyed by dominant firms. The article draws on government lobbying registers to examine recent defense‐related procurement efforts in Canada to purchase fighter jets, naval surface ships, patrol vessels, and search and rescue aircraft and the contract lobbying they engendered. Evidence from the four cases provides support for the “loser” thesis with respect to large‐scale technologically advanced goods but also the need to carefully define what constitutes an “inside advantage” allowing firms to forego or delay their lobbying activity, often until only after a contract has been awarded.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
×
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