Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:52:23.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

French Interest Group Politics: Pluralist or Neocorporatist?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Frank L. Wilson
Frank L. Wilson*
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although France is not among those countries most frequently cited as examples of the trend toward corporatism, some observers have seen evidence of corporatist patterns of interest group-government contacts. Others assert that French groups have a distinctive protest form of action, and still others see France as a preserve of traditional pluralism. Interviews with 99 French interest group leaders in 1979 suggest that the pluralist model most accurately describes the actions reported by these leaders. Although the group leaders described some corporatist activities, such as participation in statutory commissions, and indicated a willingness to engage in protest, the most common actions were those more consistent with pluralism: personal contacts with government officials and lobbying. These activities were also the forms judged to be most effective in influencing policy, although the overall impression was of a political system in which organized interests had relatively limited impact.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 4 , December 1983 , pp. 895 - 910
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashford, D. E. The British and French social security systems: welfare state by intent and by default. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 1981.Google Scholar
Barjonet, A.La CGT. Paris: Seuil, 1968.Google Scholar
Berger, S.Peasants against politics: rural organizations in Brittany, 1911–1967, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Brizay, B.Le patronat. Paris: Seuil, 1975.Google Scholar
Caillois, J.-P.Sept années de conférence annuelle. Information Agricole. 10, 1977, pp. 23–31.Google Scholar
Crouch, C.The changing role of the state in industrial relations in Western Europe. In Crouch, C. & Pizzorno, A. (Eds.). The resurgence of class conflict in Western Europe since 1968, v. 2. New York: Holmes & Meier, 1978.Google Scholar
Crozier, M.The bureaucratic phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Crozier, M.The stalled society. New York: Viking, 1974.Google Scholar
Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E.L'acteur et le système. Paris: Seuil, 1978.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, H. W.Organized business in France. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1957.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, H. W.French bureaucracy and organized interests. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1961, 5, 534–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fomerand, J.Political formulation and change in Gaullist France: the 1968 Orientation Act of Higher Education. Comparative Politics, 1975, 8, 59–89.Google Scholar
Frears, J. R.France in the Giscard presidency. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1981.Google Scholar
Granick, D.Managerial comparisons of four developed countries: France, Britain, United States, and Russia. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Harlow, J. S.French economic planning: a challenge to reason. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Harrison, R. J.Pluralism and corporatism: the political evolution of modern democracy. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980.Google Scholar
Hayward, J.Institutional inertia and political impetus in France and Britain. European Journal of Political Research, 1976, 4, 341–359.Google Scholar
Hayward, J.The one and indivisible French republic. New York: Norton, 1973.Google Scholar
Hayward, J.The politics of planning in France and Britain: the transatlantic view. Comparative Politics, 1975, 7, 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayward, J.Interest groups and the demand for state action. In Hayward, J. & Berki, R. N. (Eds.). State and society in continental Europe. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S.Decline or renewal: France since the 1930s. New York: Viking, 1974.Google Scholar
Keeler, J. T. S.Corporatism and official union hegemony: the case of French agricultural syndicalism. In Berger, S. (Ed.). Organized interests in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
King, A.Overload: problems of governing in the 1970s. Political Studies, 1975, 23, 284–296.Google Scholar
Klinsky, M.Continuity and change in European society. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Lancelot, M.-T.Le courrier d'un parlementaire. Revue Française de Science Politique, 1962, 12, 426.Google Scholar
Lehmbruch, G., & Schmitter, P. C.Patterns in corporatist policy-making. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1982.Google Scholar
McArthur, J. H., & Scott, B. R.Industrial planning in France. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration, 1969.Google Scholar
Meynaud, J.Les groupes de pression en France. Paris: Armand Colin, 1958.Google Scholar
Meynaud, J.Nouvelles études sur les groupes de pression en France. Paris: Armand Colin, 1962.Google Scholar
Mignot, G., & d'Orsay, P.La machine administrative. Paris: Seuil, 1968.Google Scholar
Mothé, D.Comment prendre la température des masses?Esprit, 02, 1970, pp. 352–354.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D., & Pollak, M.Theatom besieged: extralegal dissent in France and Germany. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Orren, K.Standing to sue: interest group conflict in the federal courts. American Political Science Review, 1976, 70, 723–741.Google Scholar
Peyrefitte, A.The trouble with France. New York: Knopf, 1981.Google Scholar
Pitts, J. R.Continuity and change in bourgeois France. In Hoffmann, S.et al. (Eds.). In search of France. New York: Harper, 1965.Google Scholar
Reynaud, J.-D.Les syndicats, les patrons, l'état: tendances de la négociation collective en France. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1978.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. J., & Jordan, A. G.Governing under pressure: the policy process in a post-parliamentary democracy. London: Martin Robertson, 1979.Google Scholar
Rimareix, G., & Tavernier, Y. 1963. L'élaboration et le vote de la loi complémentaire à la loi d'orientation agricole. Revue Française de Science Politique, 1963, 13, 389.Google Scholar
Roussillon, H.L'association générale des producteurs de blé. Paris: Armand Colin, 1970.Google Scholar
Schain, M. A.The dynamics of labor policy in France: industrial relations and the French trade union movement. The Tocqueville Review, 1980, 2, 86–88.Google Scholar
Schmitter, P. C., & Lehmbruch, G. (Eds.). Trends toward corporatist intermediation. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1979.Google Scholar
Schonfeld, W.Obedience and revolt: French behavior toward authority. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage: 1976.Google Scholar
Shonfield, A.Modern capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Suleiman, E. N.Politics, power, and bureaucracy: the administrative elite in France. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Suleiman, E. N.Industrial policy formulation in France. In Warnecke, S. J. & Suleiman, E. N. (Eds.). Industrial policies in Western Europe. New York: Praeger, 1975.Google Scholar
Suleiman, E. N.Elites in French society: the politics of survival. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Tavernier, Y.Le syndicalisme paysan et la Cinquième République, 1962–65. Revue Française de Science Politique, 1966, 16.Google Scholar
Tavernier, Y.L'univers politique des paysans dans la France contemporaine. Paris: Armand Colin, 1972.Google Scholar
Thoenig, J.-C., & Despicht, N.Transport policy. In Hayward, J. & Watson, M. (Eds.). Planning, politics, and public policy: the British, French and Italian experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Wilensky, H. L.The “newcorporatism”:centralization and the welfare state. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1976.Google Scholar
Williams, P. M.Crisis and compromise: politics in the Fourth Republic. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor, 1966.Google Scholar
Wilson, F. L.Alternative models of interest intermediation: the case of France. British Journal of Political Science, 1982, 12, 173–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, L.Social change at the grass roots. In HoffMann, S.et al.In search of France. New York: Harper, 1965.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.