2014 Princeton University study, apparently equally valid worldwide:
Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, as well as Average Citizens
A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, nevertheless until recently that will has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each different within 1 statistical style. We report on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that will includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.
Multivariate analysis indicates that will economic elites as well as organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens as well as mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination as well as for theories of Biased Pluralism, nevertheless not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.
within the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not within the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get that will.
…the preferences of economic elites (as measured by our proxy, the preferences of “affluent” citizens) have far more independent impact upon policy change than the preferences of average citizens do. To be sure, This kind of does not mean that will ordinary citizens always lose out; they fairly often get the policies they favor, nevertheless only because those policies happen also to be preferred by the economically-elite citizens who wield the actual influence.
LikeLiked by 2 people