An [[advocacy group]] is a group or an organization whichthat tries to influence the government but does not hold power in the government. Advocacy groups are generally classified according to two broad typologies: their core aims (group–cause typology), and their relationship to government (insider–outsider typology).<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013">{{cite book|last1=Fairclough|first1=Paul|last2=Lynch|first2=Philip|title=AS UK Government & Politics|date=2013|publisher=Hodder Education|isbn=978-1-4441-8352-8|edition=Fourth edition.|pages=119–140}}</ref>

Early attempts to classify advocacy groups, first developed in the [[United Kingdom]] by J. D. Stewart in the 1950s, generally focused on who or what causes they represented.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Stewart|first1=J. D.|title=British Pressure Groups: Their Role in Relation to the House of Commons|journal=The Journal of Politics|date=February 1959|volume=21|issue=011|pages=142–144|doi=10.2307/2126656|jstor=2126656 |url=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=6086112|accessdate=8 May 2016}}</ref>

Sometimes referred to as "promotional groups" or "public interest groups", these organisations campaign for a specific cause or objective, promoting approaches, issues or ideas that may not be of direct benefit to group members.<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" /> They are invariably and explicitly non-[[Partisan (politics)|partisan]]<ref name="Heffernan2012" /> and represent a segment of society whose primary purpose is focused on promoting a particular cause or value.<ref name="Britannica" /> This therefore makes them more inclusive, as they generally try to establish wide popular support and do not implement as many restrictions on group membership. For example, the [[Royal Society for the Protection of Birds]] (RSPB) has become one of the largest and most visible UK cause groups,<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" /> with over 1 million members (including 200,000 youth members), over 2,000 staff members and 13,000 volunteers nationwide.<ref>{{cite news|title=About us|url=https://www.rspb.org.uk/about/|accessdate=7 May 2016|work=The RSPB}}</ref>

*'''Sectional cause groups''' – aims to protect a specific section of society, but one whichthat is distinct from its own membership. For example, although the [[National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children]] (NSPCC) works on behalf of the rights of children, the majority of its members and supporters are adults;

*'''Political cause groups''' – aim to achieve certain political objectives, e.g. [[Charter 88]],<ref name="Fairclough2012">{{cite book|author=Paul Fairclough|title=AQA AS Government & Politics Student Unit Guide New Edition: Unit 1 People, Politics and Participation|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=k-uV9nCfTDYC&pg=PT69|date=8 June 2012|publisher=Hodder Education|isbn=978-1-4441-6187-8|pages=69–82}}</ref> now [[Unlock Democracy]],<ref>{{cite web|title=About us|url=http://www.unlockdemocracy.org/about-us/|website=Unlock Democracy|accessdate=7 May 2016|quote=Unlock Democracy was founded in November 2007 following the merger of Charter 88 and the New Politics Network.}}</ref> clearly has a political objective. The [[Chartists]] in the nineteenth century are also sometimes contemporarily classified as a political cause group.<ref name="Fairclough2002"/>

The issues surrounding the classification of advocacy groups according to their core aims has led writers such as [[Wyn Grant]] to divide groups according to the insider–outsider typology, i.e. how close a particular advocacy group is to the government of the day, and to what extent it can develop secure and positive relationships with politicians and officials.<ref name="Grant2004">{{cite journal|last1=Grant|first1=Wyn|title=Pressure Politics: The Changing World of Pressure Groups|journal=Parliamentary Affairs|date=1 April 2004|volume=57|issue=2|pages=408–419|doi=10.1093/pa/gsh033|url=http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/57/2/408.abstract|accessdate=7 May 2016|language=en|issn=0031-2290}}</ref>

Insider groups are thosegroups whichthat enjoy close access to thosegovernment inagencies governmentand officials.

*'''Core insiders''': Those which havewith strong two-way relationships over a range of issues (e.g. the BMA and, to an extent, the NFUCBI);

*'''Specialist insiders''': Those who are granted insider status but are limited to a narrower area of expertise (e.g., the WWF);

*'''Peripheral insiders''': Those who are granted insider status but are barely ever consulted by the government due to the narrow nature of their cause (e.g. the [[Dogs Trust]]).<ref name="Fairclough2012"/>

Those organisations which workOrganisations outside of the "political loop" are described as outsider groups.<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" /> These fall under three subcategories: potential insiders, outsiders by necessity, and ideological outsiders.

*'''Potential insiders''' – groups whichthat may achieve insider status in the future but are lacking in terms of support or experience.<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" /> Charter 88 was considered a potential insider before 1997<ref name="Fairclough2012"/> (at which point the organisation became an insider group).

*'''Outsiders by necessity''' – groups which are forced to operate as outsiders and as a result are unlikely to have any realistic consultation with the government due to the nature of their cause or actions taken, e.g. [[Fathers4Justice]].<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" />

*'''Ideological outsiders''' – groups whichthat prefer to distance themselves from the government orfor ideological reasons. For example, [[Amnesty International]] avoids forging close relationships with governments in order to present itself as a neutral, objective organisation, and many [[alter-globalisation]] protests may not wish to become part of the government as they see it as part of the problem at hand.<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" />

The insider–outsider typology partially addresses the issues inherent in categorising advocacy groups by their aims, but ignores the fact that some groups may differ in being insiders or outsiders dependantdependent on the government of the day, and does not mention the fact that many outsider groups can quickly become insider groups and vice versa (see: [[Overton window]]). For example, [[Charter 88]] was clearly an outsider group prior to the [[1997 United Kingdom general election|1997 general election]], but assumed more influence following Labour's victory that year.<ref name="Fairclough2002"/>

[[Wyn Grant]] mentions that, in contrast, the [[National Farmers Union of England and Wales|National Farmers' Union]] insider status was threatened following control of Britain's agricultural policy by the [[European Union]] and a period of 13 years whereby the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] was in opposition.<ref name="Grant2004" /> Consequently, she says that it is more appropriate to divide insider groups into "high profile" insiders and "captive" or "prisoner" groups. "High profile" insider groups attract the attention of the media alongside working with government, "captive" or "insider" groups are reliant solely on the government for their survival because the government played a part in their creation – e.g. the [[Equality and Human Rights Commission]] was established under the [[Equality Act 2006]].<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" />

Richard Heffernan argues that both organised and disorganised social movements, such as those campaigning for gender, racial and sexual equality or for the civil, political and social rights of those being discriminated against can be influential on sectional groups (such as trade unions, professional associations and trade organisations) as well as cause groups.<ref name="Heffernan2012" /> Although social movements differ from pressure groups – as they are generally not centrally organised and reflect broader societal shifts – social movements can bring together elements of various pressure groups and political parties; for example, [[Green politics]] in the United Kingdom can bring together pressure groups such as [[Greenpeace]] and the [[Soil Association]], alongside political parties such as the [[Green Party of England and Wales|Green Party]];<ref name="Fairclough-Lynch2013" /> the Green Party however denies that it is a single-issue political party, and has a manifesto including a wide range of non-ecologically related issues.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Hall|first1=Darren|title=Is the Green Party a Single Issue Party?|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/darren-hall/green-party-policy_b_6761706.html|accessdate=7 May 2016|work=The Huffington Post UK|date=24 April 2015|language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Jones|first1=Jenny|title=There are many shades of Green|url=httphttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jun/16/green-party-policies|accessdate=7 May 2016|work=The Guardian|date=16 June 2009}}</ref>

[[Category:Advocacy groups| *]]

[[Category:Lobbying organizations|Classification systems]]