The Insider/Outsider Distinction: An Empirical Investigation
| Author | Edward C. Page |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-856X.00011 |
| Published date | 01 June 1999 |
| Date | 01 June 1999 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
British Journal of Politics and International Relations,
Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1999, pp. 205–214
The insider/outsider distinction:
an empirical investigation
EDWARD C. PAGE
Abstract
The distinction between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ occupies a central role in thinking about
the relationship between government and interest groups in Britain. Usually, the accuracy of
such distinctions are based on studies of small numbers of groups. The results of a survey of
381 groups reveals that relatively few groups could be classed as pure outsiders, while a
much larger number have the features of the insider. While the methodology employed
means that the results are suggestive rather than conclusive, the implications of the findings
for the study of government-group relations in Britain are that the insider/outsider
distinction is at best an oversimplification and at worst misleading.
The insider/outsider thesis
As they used to say about the Ritz, the process of consultation between
groups and government is ‘open to everyone’. Government consults on
matters large and small; the process has even become more immediately
apparent over the past few years through the practice of posting con-
sultation documents on the Internet (on the broad pattern of consultation
see Cavanagh, Marsh and Smith 1995; Jordan and Maloney 1995). Yet,
although the process of seeking the views of interested parties is supposed
to be open, one important strand of thinking about pressure-group politics
in Britain believes that only a minority of groups are ‘insiders’ and truly
count in the process of decision-making. The ‘insider’ group is the one with
© Political Studies Association 1999. Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA 205
To continue reading
Request your trial