Conceptual Distinctions and Public Understanding of Lobbying, Advocacy and Influence Peddling in Romania

Abstract

Interest representation, championing causes of public interest and active participation of citizens serve to strengthen a well-functioning democracy as well as participatory governance centered on the needs and desires of citizens. Although in Romania there are mechanisms through which individuals can express their interests to public authorities, lobbying remains unregulated and advocacy is not so popular. The two concepts are often confused. Moreover, in the absence of clear national regulations, some actions undertaken by the private and non-governmental sector to advance their interests are viewed with suspicion, under the shadow of influence peddling. In order to provide concrete solutions aimed at addressing this issue, it is first necessary to assess the level of understanding of the distinction between the three concepts. In this context, this paper aims firstly to identify how clearly understood is the difference between lobbying, advocacy and influence peddling among the Romanian society, and secondly to highlight the theoretical and practical differences between them. The research involved the development of three hypothetical scenarios depicting a case of lobbying, one of advocacy and one of influence peddling, and presenting them to a group of participants, who were tasked with correlating each scenario with the activity it represented.