When Does Interest Group Policy Information Matter? A Dynamic Study of New Technology Interest Groups? Use of Information in Congressional Hearings

Endnotes

The larger project examines interest group hearing testimonies in two new technology policy areas:

computers/Internet and biotechnology as well as two existing policy areas: agriculture and environmental regulation
of the chemical industry. It is expected there is variation in the types of information used across time as well as
across policy contexts.

Previous interest group studies that have used case studies (for example Hojnacki & Kimball 1998, John 2002)

selected cases based on variability in publicity and scope of conflict. Previous literature has made the claim that
interest groups have greater influence on issues that are low-profile, low partisan and technical (Smith 1995). The
cases for my larger project study were chosen with this variation criterion. The biotechnology case fit well for new
technology because it has both complexity (technical issues) and low-profile characteristics. The Internet case is
technical and a mix where some issues are low-profile and some are high profile, particularly in the last few years.
Other possible new technology issues on the policy agenda (i.e. superconductors, nanotechnology) were rejected
because they were either too new or had too few hearings to be useful. Then, for existing issues, agricultural policy
was chosen because it is a stable existing issue, has mixed profile (some agriculture issues are very low and others
such as major farm bills are much publicized). Environmental regulation of chemicals was chosen for its technical
and low profile characteristics as well as its testable comparison to biotechnology since chemical manufacturing is
an old technology. Both biotechnology and environmental regulation of chemicals are science based public policy
issue areas; the question is whether it is the new technology policy context or the technicality of science based
public policy that gives interest groups their informational influence. The idea here was to make sure that new
technology groups are not just deriving their information advantages from the complexity of the issues, but due to
the new technology context. If interest groups have informational advantages on an existing issue that is technical
and low profile, then this would cast some doubt on my theory (the other test is tracing whether new technology
groups' informational advantage changes over time, as the new technology policy area becomes an existing issue).
The following table summarizes the characteristics of each issue area:

Policy Context

New Technology

Issue

Technical

Visibility

Partisan

context

Biotechnology

Y High

Low

Internet

Y Mixed

Mixed

Low

Environmental

Regulation of Chemicals

N High

Low

Mixed

Issue
Area

Agriculture

N Low

Mixed