Public Affairs and Social Constructionism: An Explanatory Paradigm

Abstract

Our paper focuses on some of the controversies concerning the fi eld of public aff airs. Considered to be a constantly evolving discipline, public aff airs encompass a large and diverse repertoire of tools and techniques, amongst which the most renowned is, by far, lobbying. Regardless of the formal defi nition preferred (the simplest one, quoted by Phil Harris and Craig Fleisher, is the totality of government aff airs or relations), the nucleus of public aff airs work concerns the process of policy formulation and its possible impact on corporations. Evidently, the latter entails the involvement of further stakeholders (individuals, interest groups, communities) that could be aff ected by the issue at stake. Usually, solving this issue proves to be dependent on legislative or regulatory bodies. When lobbyists infl uence the government and its policies, they actually produce relevant modifi cations of the external environment in terms of politics, economics or the justice system. Although these practices have quite a long history in many countries, scholars still strive to fi nd appropriate theoretical frameworks in order to provide better explanations. Using an idea articulated by Rob de Lange and Paul Linders, we argue that constructionism represents a valuable option both in terms of explanatory power and in terms of anti-essentialist standpoint.