Democracy, lobbying and economics

Žák, Milan Article Democracy, lobbying and economics Review of Economic Perspectives Provided in Cooperation with: Masaryk University, Faculty of Economics and Administration Suggested Citation: Žák, Milan (2019) : Democracy, lobbying and economics, Review of Economic Perspectives, ISSN 1804-1663, De Gruyter, Warsaw, Vol. 19, Iss. 3, pp. 193-210, https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2019-0011 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/227528 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ Review of Economic Perspectives – Národohospodářský obzor Vol. 19, Issue 3, 2019, pp. 193–210, DOI: 10.2478/revecp-2019-0011 © 2019 by the authors; licensee Review of Economic Perspectives / Národohospodářský obzor, Masaryk University, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Brno, Czech Republic. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license, Attribution – Non Commercial – No Derivatives. Democracy, Lobbying and Economics Milan Žák 1 Abstract: The paper deals with the issue of lobbying, defined as a democratic means of promoting interests. The text tries to find answers to the problems in the current economic theory. The basic links are defined by using a simple graphic model, which are further examined by the SWOT analysis. The result is the knowledge that the basic coordination mechanism is the market – the information market. The role of government lies above all in creating a favourable institutional environment that does not interfere with spontaneous market relations. However, there are certain situations that the government could or should regulate. These situations are described by three hypothetical scenarios – a society without lobbying, a society where lobbing exists, but it is not transparent, and a society where lobbing is transparent, leading to a final discussion of possible directions and ways of its regulation. Keywords: Impact of Lobbying on Democracy, Public Choice, New Institutional Economy, New Political Economy JEL Classification: A11, A12, C70, D72, D82 Received: 28 December 2019 / Accepted: 17 June 2019 / Sent for Publication: 9 September 2019 Introduction The initial research question of this text iswhether and how the processes of lobbying are explained by economic theory. The aim is to build a grafical model of lobbing and on this model to provide thedescription and the analysis of the individual relationship between subjects in the negotiation processes. Based on this analysis, find the possibilities of intervention of the central decision making authority in the range - rules, regulations. For the purpose of this article, we use the method of SWOT analysis. This contribution, having the character of a summary of knowledge, freely picks up where three previously published texts. In particular the article 'Lobbying in the European Union and the Czech Republic' by Laboutková and Žák (2010) in which we have tried to define the issue of lobbying in general. Then the speech at the conference in Karviná in 2016 (Laboutková and Žák, 2016) where the basic graphical model of the fundamental links between the entities directly involved in the lobbying process was introduced. And the text 'Markets, Interests, Information and Lobby as the Issues of Economic Theory,' 1 University of Economics and Management, Prague, Czech Republic, m[email protected] Review of Economic Perspectives 194 (Žák, 2016), which deals with the extent to which economic theory is able to explain the links that have been designated in previous works. Definition of lobbying and economic theory In line with the wording of the task, which is defined by the project title 'Impact of Transparency of Lobbying on Democratisation, 2 we should, by way of introduction, at least briefly explain to what extent lobbying brings the society, democratic values, or more specifically, what organised interest groups can contribute (as much as possible) to the democratisation of society and how. A simple explanation can be obtained from Bionty (2018), who explains the demonstrated increase in lobbying by a crisis of representative democracy, where ever-closer economic integration, the penetration of new technologies, the processes of liberalisation and privatisation, and the growth of nongovernmental organisations and other private actors on the public market have created an entirely new institutional framework for promoting interests for a much larger number of entities than was the case in societies led by traditional political parties. By defining the concept of lobbying, we have consistently devoted ourselves to a number of already published articles 3 in the aforementioned project. The most well-known, and in the European context today probably the most common definition of lobbying is the definition by Graziano (2001), an expert on the issue of lobbying at the European level : 'Lobbying is a specialised and professional representation of interests by means of a wide variety of tools which, in principle, eliminate a corruptive change of services. It is by its nature very different from the general non-specialised representation provided by elected representatives. As a representative of particular interests, a lobbyist provides information and technically professional expertise which can be useful and sometimes decisive for defining legislative and administrative regulation.' A newly formulated mission can be found in the 'Draft recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the legal regulation of lobbying in public decision making' , which states (CDCJ 2017, p. 4): Lobbyist means any natural or legal person who engages in lobbying, whether for private, public or collective purposes, whether for compensation or without it, and lobbying is defined as an activity involving any direct or indirect communication with a public official, which is carried out, managed or directed to influence public decision making. In an attempt to define lobbying, we established that 'most definitions characterised lobbying as interfering with legislative and decision-making processes or promoting specific interests different from those that may be seen as society-wide, and there was no single definition acceptable to all'. The following text concludes that, 'this is also due to the constant development and shifts in the understanding of politics, public affairs, and interests', and 'if we summarise the above definition, we can say that lobbying pri2 Grant Agency of the Czech Republic, Project No 16-08786S 'Impact of Transparency of Lobbying on Democratisation and Its Consequences'. 3 For example Laboutková and Vymětal (2018), Laboutková (2018), Laboutková and Žák (2010) and Laboutková and Žák (2016). Volume 19, Issue 3, 2019 195 marily aims at promoting interests and is an indispensable source of information, while the greatest challenge involves making lobbying distinct from corruption' . The political process thus becomes a bargaining game between private and public officials and has a non-negligible impact on democracy. Stefan (2012) considers the effect lobbying has on democracy on three levels. First, lobbying serves as an information channel. This is due to the increasing complexity of decision-making processes and the related administration, including the requirement for greater (more democratic) awareness-raising among EU citizens. Second, lobbying is a tool for removing the democratic deficit resulting from the multilevel bureaucratic process, and third, there are certain positive impacts of lobbying on the decision-making process. Decision-making becomes more democratic, as it allows more entities to become involved in the final decisions. Lobbying is currently becoming more and more a topic of political science and therefore, or in spite of that, the purpose of this text is to look for and find the economic context of this phenomenon, in particular with regard to the fact that the major effects influence economic-policy decisions that have economic impacts. It is clear from the above that, in general, lobbying and lobbying groups are perceived as a category of political science rather than economics. If we are looking for an 'economic footprint' when explaining how the lobby works, we find it more likely outside Europe. For example, an explanatory comment from the 'American League of Lobbyists defines lobbying as a more general activity related to the provision of information (What is Lobbying, 2009). Lobbying is something much more than just persuading lawmakers. Its basic components are researching and analysing legislation or other regulatory proposals; monitoring and development reports; participating in meetings of the House of Representatives committees; working with coalitions interested in the same issue; and educating not only government officials but also of employees or representatives of companies about the possible consequences of various changes. What people regard as the core of lobbying – communication with government officials – is only a small part of the lobbyist’s programme; much more time is spent on preparation, providing information, and communication. As far as the overview of the professional literature is concerned, we can say the following. Of course, the literature on lobbying is a huge amount, texts 4 that would comprehensively discuss the interpretation of this phenomenon from the point of view of economic theory but relatively little. In addition, if some attempts to anchor the subject in economic theory are visible in some texts, it is generally only a partial connection with some theories largely outside the mainstream of economic theory. At this relatively wide range, we can try to summarize (and categorize) the focus of research topics with conclusion that none of them deals significantly with theoretical basics or approaches to economic theory to define or explain the lobbying process. 4 It is mainly (but not only) about these periodicals : Journal of Public Economics, Journal of Corporate Finance, Journal of International Economics, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,International Rewiev of Law and Economics,Ecological Economics,Public Relations Review,EUROPEA Economic Review,Games and Economic Behaviorin years 2012 – Q2 2018 Review of Economic Perspectives 196 According to our approach to the matter, we can divide the contributions into approximately four groups, with their unifying element being the understanding of lobbying mainly as a political activity. In the texts, the model approach with pre-defined limits of negotiation in specific situations (mostly budget, environment) prevails, forming the first group. The second is the relationship between lobbying and corruption, the third is the issues of negotiation in particular with regard to information asymmetry and moral hazard, and finally, the fourth is the attempts to address the issue through experimental economics. Lobbying is viewed as a democratic means of promoting the interests of non-decision makers, to whom the existence of lobbying is a welcome and indispensable part of the legislative processes, in particular as a source of decision-making information. In explaining the lobbying process, economic theory can operate both with traditional market schemes (the information market) as well as some non-mainstream processes, particularly the public choice theory and the new institutional economics. During negotiations between entities, these concern the underlying functional processes of the political market, to which some conclusions derived from the game theory may be applied. Whether there are any ties with the political/economic cycle (and if so, what they are) remains largely an open question, just like the issues related to the long and short terms (although the latter has been dealt with, in part, for example, by the application of the prisoner's dilemma). If we try to summarise this brief overview of the views and approaches to the chosen topic we can state that the problem of lobbying is perceived by the economy as an area of promoting interests and rent-seeking, which leads to a dialogue between the economic policy actors in an effort to change the balance between the costs and revenues to their advantage and from the point of view of the decision-making authorities to possible government failure. And on the other hand, to the finding that the basis of this dialogue is the exchange of information exchanged on the information market with all the possible problems that markets can provide, i.e. including information asymmetries, the possibility of creating a monopoly and the subsequent possible regulation. The basic theoretical approach is New Political Economy, which in this particular case includes not only classic but also political markets, draws on the Public Choice Theory, the New Institutional Economics, and game theory. Information is the basic commodity traded in the political markets. Question is how the information market, which is the basis of the economic view of lobbying and lobbyism, does it work. Entities and their ties in the lobbying process The basic defined economic entities are: citizens (the public), the state (government or other central decision-making authority), and businesses. The ties between businesses and citizens involve a plain model of purely economic markets where market relationships exist. Citizens act as consumers, businesses as manufacturers, and citizens as employees and businesses as employers – here, the standard market relationships exist. Volume 19, Issue 3, 2019 197 The situation is a little different in the relations to the state. Here we enter the area of non-market decision making, an area of functioning political markets. Political markets 5 in democratic societies aim to achieve consensus, and in negotiations, they use mainly information that acts as a commodity. The result is a simple model of relationships between market and non-market actors (Ibid, p. 21), which has been the basis for the creation of the 'model of basic relations in the lobbying process'. Before we proceed to the discussion of this model, let’s summarise the baseline characteristics of the basic entities 6 : the state is a bureaucratic institution and determines the rules and in the nonmarket decision-making gets (statistics) or buys information for decision-making, businesses hire lobbies to promote their own interests, and citizens decide in the elections and have the ability between the elections to influence decision-making and to promote their interests through interest groups. This simple scheme, based on the exchange of information is entered by lobbyists whose interests can be characterised as follows: • they process information for decision-making and are interested in selling it and somehow 'extra' promote the interests of the hirers and the interests of their own • they are hired and paid for promoting interests – seeking rent from the state and trying to influence decision-making – fulfilling the assignment • their activity can not only be controlled but also partly restricted – regulated Based on the described contexts and ties, we can now proceed to describe the basic relationships in the lobbying process (fig 1). 7 This model will be used in the following text as a basic and default description of all considerations. Based on the analysis of these relationships, we will try to determine the theoretical basis for the interpretation of the individual types of behaviour of the above-mentioned entities in the monitored processes. As stated above, the state is a bureaucratic institution and makes the rules (link 1). It adopts decisions using the information it obtains from its own sources (knowledge of officials and politicians, state institutions supplying the information) or from the public non-governmental sector (2a) and the private sector (2a). Information obtained from interactions between the lobbying community and the state (2b) represents a situation where companies hire professional lobbyists or set up professional lobbying groups (3), 5 Gregor, M., (2005) divides these markets into three groups 1. Primary political market. A market between politicians and citizens. Trading with public policies or with competing political programmes during elections. 2. Market of administrative measures. A market between politicians and the bureaucracy, and 3. Market of executive policy. A market between executive politicians and groups influenced by a policy. A commodity is formed by any executive measure changing the position of the given groups. 6 For more details see Žák, M., (2016). 7 The first presentation of the model published herein was introduced at the conference in Karviná in 2016, where the basic links between the subjects relevant to further research are described – see Laboutková, Š. and Žák, M. (2016). Review of Economic Perspectives 198 while civil society spontaneously creates (4) interest groups developing lobbying efforts to influence the state’s decisions, i.e. the way rules are made. In the following text, we will try to sort out thus defined relations logically in the following steps. The first step is to determine the nature of the relationship and find its 'reflection' in economic theory, the second is defining the complicating factors, and the third is the attempt to capture the problem in its complexity using the SWOT analysis and the formulation of partial conclusions. Figure 1. Model of basic relationships in the lobbying process Source: Laboutková, Š., Žák, M., (2016). Link 1 – Demand for information Nature of the relationship and its reflection in economic theories: Here, information is a commodity to which the standard supply and demand model applies, which means that the price is determined by an agreement between the offering party and the seller – this is a state of equilibrium. Complicating factors The basic question is whether there are factors influencing equilibrium on the demand side and on the supply side. On the demand side, the only possible complicating factor is the inability of the interested party to distinguish the relevance of the information to decision-making – the theory of bureaucracy, or the abuse of position in selecting the offering parties – rent-seeking. Both these complications are described and solved in the public choice theory. In addition to this fundamental question, it is still possible to raise Volume 19, Issue 3, 2019 199 the issue of market structure and the related information asymmetry, which, however, can be refused (refined?) by stating that even monopolies are a natural market structure and, in the case of information understood as a commodity, they express the degree of scarcity of the information provided. Analysis of the relations and the possibility of the regulation (inspired by SWOT) Advantages: The market solution is spontaneous and favourable to both sides Disadvantages: The possibility of information asymmetry in favour of the offering parties resulting from the 'poor quality' of public administration Opportunities: In functioning markets, the state as a bureaucratic apparatus should not intervene Barriers: Absolute – the state can at most seek to increase the qualifications and loyalty of its own officials – contracts, codes of ethics Partial conclusion The information market is a standard market that works – and can continue to work on the demand side without state intervention, both in relation to the public (citizens, citizens’ initiatives, and civic interest groups) and in relation to businesses and interest groups. The role of the state as a factor in the spontaneous processes on the demand side actually involves ensuring the quality of the bureaucratic apparatus. Link 2a – Supply of information from the general public and businesses Nature of the relationship and its reflection in economic theories: The same applies here as for link 1. Here, information is a commodity to which the standard supply and demand model applies, which means that the price is determined by an agreement between the offering party and the seller (state of equilibrium). Complicating factors Factors influencing equilibrium on the supply side do not exist if we exclude the concept of the nature of the market structure and the associated information asymmetry. The reason lies in the fact that even monopolies are a natural market structure and in the case of information seen as a commodity, they express the degree of scarcity of the information provided. Review of Economic Perspectives 200 Analysis of the relations and the possibility of regulation of link 2a Advantages: The market solution is spontaneous and favourable to both sides Disadvantages: On the supply side, however, this is (or can be) the promotion of one’s own interests, both personal and group – the theory of interest groups, which leads (can lead) to the abuse of information superiority Opportunities: The ability to recognise relevant information means not succumbing to the pressures of interests, both individual and corporate, and depends on the ability of the decision-making authority to ensure the development of the qualifications and loyalty of its own officials. Barriers: Do not exist – market adaptation exists Partial conclusion The information market is a standard market that works – and can continue to work on the supply side without state intervention, both in relation to the public (citizens, citizens’ initiatives and civic interest groups) and in relation to businesses and interest groups. The role of the state as a factor in the spontaneous processes on the demand side actually involves ensuring the quality of the bureaucratic apparatus. Link 2b – Supply of information from lobbying groups Nature of the relationship and its reflection in economic theories The same does not apply here as for links 1 and 2. Basically, this relationship is crucial for the understanding of the impact of lobbying. Here too, information is mainly a commodity to which the standard supply and demand model applies, but this is not an equilibrium state in terms of the actors. The lobbies are here clearly tempted to abuse information asymmetry (superiority) in their favour. Therefore, the basic condition of market equilibrium is not complied with. Due to the complexity of the relationship, we divide the theoretical views on behaviour by individual actors, the state and the lobby. In accordance with the above-mentioned theory of political markets, the state sets the rules and can enforce and control them, but in the asymmetric information model, it has no choice when selecting the information it necessarily needs. This is especially true for one-time relationships, while in the long term, where the prisoner’s dilemma leads to cooperation 89 , the state bureaucracy is exposed to the possibility of pursuing its own 8 Prisoner’s dilemma is a type of game with a non-zero sum, in which both players have two Volume 19, Issue 3, 2019 207 Table 3. Lobbying regulation options Degree of intensity Low Medium High Regulation of registration rules Basic More specific Extremely thorough Definition of lobbying objectives For members of the legislature and their staff only Ditto, plus the executive branch and their staff, agency managers, public administration and officials Ditto Targeting of expenses Without clear rules Weak (selective) regulation of individual expenses Strict regulation Electronic oversight Weak oversight Massive oversight without the 'paperwork' Ditto Public oversight Publication List of lobbyists, incomplete and subject to random additions Ditto Detailed and subject to additions Ditto, plus a detailed view of expenses Enforceability Vague Low Systemic – such rules are put in place that no regulation is required Source: our own elaboration The selection of regulatory measures is associated exclusively with the functioning of public administration, with bureaucratic management. At a certain stage in the development of society, bureaucratic management replaces the role of the market and free competition or supplements it appropriately on the basis of social consensus. As there are market failures, there may also be a bureaucratic failure 16 . The risk of a bureaucratic failure is the effect of two fundamental causes: first, the absence of a market for managers in the public sector, and second, an 'accountability failure' experienced by public authorities. The absence of a market for managers is due to a monopoly on the information domain, typically translating itself into the 'tenure' requirement. This not only leads to the inability of the public sector to respond to new impetus and to stale thinking and management but also creates room for corruption. Accountability failure is the result of differences in administration between the private and public sectors: while in the private sector accountability is taken care of by the market, in the public sector no such solution is available. The consequence is that efficiency in the public sector is not measurable. In deciding on the choice of regulatory measures, the central decisionmaking authority should be guided by efforts to achieve the desired objectives, in par16 This is a specific type of Government failure. Review of Economic Perspectives 208 ticular by cost analyses in order to reduce public spending to a minimum. 17 It is important for policy-makers to compare estimated costs with benefits. Conclusions In a democratic society, through the conclusions of the economic theory, lobbying is a legitimate tool for promoting the interests of businesses, citizens, and interest groups. The nature of the mutual relationships in the lobbying process is based largely on information sharing where the information market plays a dominant role. To achieve the highest degree of transparency in the information market, the government, as the central decision-making authority, must put in place precise rules governing the actions of all stakeholders in the decision-making processes, including the enforceability of such rules. Problems related to market failures primarily exist due to informational asymmetry. In addition to setting the rules as referred to above, the solution rests in first improving the bureaucratic structures and only then introducing regulatory measures. Regulation should provide an answer to the question of whether – or not – regulatory measures could be replaced by rules or with spontaneous adaptation. Funding: This research received funding from the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic, Project No 16-08786S 'Impact of Transparency of Lobbying on Democratisation and Its Consequences'. Disclosure statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author. References Acocella, N., (2005). Economic Policy in the Age of Globalisation, Cambridge University Press, pp. 116-117. Ball, R. J., (1995). Interest Group, Influence and Welfare, Economics and Politics, vol. 7/1995. Bednářová, P., (2018a.). How Expensive Transparent Lobbying Is. ACC Journal, 24 (2), pp. 7-19. DOI: 10.15240/tul/004/2018-2-001. Bednářová, P., (2018b). What Benefits Does Transparent Lobbying Bring. DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, 9 (3), pp. 193-205. DOI: 10.2478/danb-2018-0012. Bénassy-Quéré, A., Coeuré, B., Jacquet, P., Pisani – Ferry, J., (2010). Economic Policy – theory and Practise, Oxford University Press. 96 pp. ISBN 978-0-19-532273-6. 17 Here, we refer to two articles by Bednářová, (2018a, 2018b). In the text 'How Expensive Transparent Lobbying Is' (2018a) she theoretically defined the regulatory costs associated with transparent lobbying and in 'What Benefits Does Transparent Lobbying Bring' (2018b) the benefits associated with transparent lobbying are defined and evaluated. Volume 19, Issue 3, 2019 209 Bionty A. (2018). Lobbying in Europe. Studying influence to understand democracy [online]. Available at: http://www.thegoodlobby.eu/lobbying-in-europe-studyinginfluence-to-understand-democracy/. Accessed 28 May 2018. CDCJ (2017). Definition of ‘lobbying’ [online]. Available at: http://www.coe.int/. Accessed 22 Feb. 2018. Graziano, L., (2001). Lobbying, Pluralism, and Democracy, New York, Palgrave. 248 pp. ISBN 0333920562. Gregor, M., (2005). Nová politická ekonomie, Karolinum Publishing House, Prague. ISBN 80-346-1066-3. Gregorová, L., Žák, M., (2008). Byrokratická bariéra kvality regulace. Politická ekonomie, no. 2, pp. 196-228. DOI: 10.18267/j.polek.637 Grossman, G. M., Helpman, E., (2001). Special Interest Politics, MIT Press Cambridge 2001. Isakson, K., (2018). Transparency and Legal Regulation of Lobbying [presentation], Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic, Prague 13/03/2018. Laboutková, Š., (2009). Prosazování zájmů v EU, studie NHÚJH 7/2009. Laboutková, Š., (2018). Open government partnership: unutilized potential in postcommunist EU members? (Case of the Czech Republic), Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 31(3),350-376, DOI: 10.1080/13511610.2017.1415803 Laboutková, Š., Šimral, V., (2019). Measuring the Link between Democracy and Transparent Lobbying. Critical Policy Studies. forthcoming. Laboutková, Š., Vymětal, P., (2017). Transparency in Economic and Political DecisionMaking: The Identification of Sunshine Rules for Transparent Lobbying. DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, 8 (3), pp. 157–171. DOI: 10.1515/danb-2017-0011. Laboutková, Š., Vymětal, P., (2018). Key Elements of Transparent Lobbying: Relevance of Wider Approach. Public Policy and Administration, 17(2), pp. 165-176. DOI: 10.13165/VPA-18-17-2-01. Laboutková, Š., Vymětal, P., (2019). A Black Box Assessment of Institutional Quality: Evaluation of Transparency of Lobbying as a Challenge. Political Studies. forthcoming. Laboutková, Š., Žák, M., (2010). Lobbování v Evropské unii a ČR. Politická ekonomie, Vol. 58, Issue 5, pp. 579-594. Laboutková, Š., Žák, M., (2016). Transparency of Lobbying: a Theoretical Approach. In. Majerová I. and Kotlánová E. (ed.). Proceedings of 14th International Conference Economic Policy in the European Union Member Countries. Karviná: Silesian University, 2016, pp. 368–377. ISBN 978-80-7510-210-2. Macháček, M., (2015). Soumrak ekonomie? K problému formalizace a krize smyslu ekonomické vědy. Series on Advanced Economic Issues, vol. 34, VST-TU, Ostrava. ISBN 978-80-248-3749-9. Review of Economic Perspectives 210 Mlčoch, L., 2005. Institucionální ekonomie. Karolinum Publishing House, Prague. ISBN 80-246-1029-9. Muller, K., Laboutková, Š., Vymětal, P., (2010). Lobbing v moderních demokraciích, Grada. ISBN 978-80-247-3165-0. Rausser, G. C., Foster W.E., (1990). Political Preference Function and Public Policy Reform, American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 72/1990. Rausser, G. C., Swinnen, J., Zusman, P., (2011). Political Power and Economic Policy, Cambridge University Press. Stefan, C., (2012). The influence of Lobbying on EU Democracy, Revista Continuitate si schimbare in guvernantka europeana, vol. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 35–50. Voigt, S., (2008). Institucionální ekonomie, Alfa Nakladatelství a Liberální Institut, Prague, ISBN 978-80-87197-13-4. What is Lobbying, 2009, American League of Lobbyist. Available at: https://www.opensecrets.org/. Accessed 22 Feb. 2018. Žák, M. (2016)., Markets, Interests, Information and Lobby as the Issues of Economic Theory. Perspectives, Journal on Economic Issues, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 5-19.. Žák, M., (2014). Veřejný zájem a obecný prospěch. In Havlíček, A., Krbec, L., ed., Hodnoty, stát a společnost, Filozofická fakulta UJEP v Ústí nad Labem, pp. 106-120. ISBN 978-80-7414-735-7.