{ "model": { "rank": 6006, "code": "thing-q187117", "model_id": "vr.tr.lobbying", "name": "lobbying", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise lobbying activity, assess its objectives, representation, progress and constraints, and identify justified next actions.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q187117/", "tier": 2, "score": 63, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "regulatory capture", "lobbying campaign", "fossil fuels lobby", "public affairs industry", "grassroots lobbying" ], "aliasCount": 5, "merged": 5, "knownIn": 63, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q187117", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q187117", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T10:50:46Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.01158176, "turns": 1, "seconds": 257.9, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 131.2, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a07b74-3b02-7910-9058-3f9b8bf166d6\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: lobbying\nRegistry id: vr.tr.lobbying\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA Vercy" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q187117", "registryId": "vr.tr.lobbying", "name": "lobbying", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q187117/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.lobbying", "name": "lobbying", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise lobbying activity, assess its objectives, representation, progress and constraints, and identify justified next actions.", "definition": "Lobbying is organised communication, typically by or on behalf of a private, commercial, or civic interest, with public officials that is intended to influence the making, amendment, or administration of legislation, regulation, or other public decisions, and that most legal systems treat as regulated political speech rather than as a crime unless a corrupt exchange is involved.", "scope_statement": "This model owns an organised effort to influence a public decision through engagement with decision-makers, their staff or intermediaries, including the represented interests, requested changes, influence routes and evidence of response; the treatment of indirect mobilisation remains an explicit boundary question.", "in_scope": [ "The public decision being influenced and the specific outcome sought", "Lobbyists, represented interests, funders and authority to speak", "Contacts, submissions, meetings and intermediary routes used to influence the decision", "Arguments, evidence and commitments presented to decision-makers", "Applicable access, disclosure and conduct requirements and evidence of compliance", "Decision-maker responses, changes in the requested outcome and evidence of contribution" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The complete legislative, regulatory or administrative decision process", "An organisation's general governance, finances and personnel", "Election campaigns, party organisation and political donations as standalone activities", "Public relations and public campaigning without an identified public decision target", "Bribery, corruption and other misconduct investigations as independent cases", "Implementation and delivery of an adopted public policy" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An identifiable public decision or decision agenda is the intended object of influence, even when the effort seeks to prevent action.", "The activity seeks a particular decision outcome rather than merely requesting information or explaining an existing rule.", "The influence route reaches a decision-maker, staff member or intermediary; public messaging alone requires further boundary assessment.", "The actor advances an identifiable interest or position, including its own, rather than exercising the target decision-making authority.", "Classification follows the activity's intent, target and route; payment, professional title or registration status alone does not establish or exclude lobbying." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Requested decision change", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "initiate | amend | adopt | block | delay | retain | other specified", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes the intended outcome from general support for an issue." }, { "name": "Decision target", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to the public decision, responsible authority and relevant decision stage", "why_it_matters": "Identifies where the requested change can be made and whether an opportunity remains." }, { "name": "Representation relationship", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Actor-to-interest links specifying client, employer, membership, coalition or self-representation", "why_it_matters": "Makes visible whose position is advanced and the basis for speaking on their behalf." }, { "name": "Influence route", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "direct contact | formal submission | intermediary engagement | mobilisation directed at officials | mixed | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Supports boundary assessment and selection of an appropriate engagement route." }, { "name": "Effort stage", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "planned | active | paused | concluded | abandoned | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Separates an intended lobbying effort from activity already undertaken." }, { "name": "Attributed lobbying expenditure", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Currency amount over a stated period, with attribution method and exclusions", "why_it_matters": "Allows resource intensity to be assessed without treating an organisation's entire budget as lobbying expenditure." }, { "name": "Obligation assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "unassessed | applicability unresolved | applicable obligations identified | evidence incomplete | evidence supports compliance | potential breach identified", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an agent from treating an unchecked disclosure or access requirement as satisfied." }, { "name": "Requested outcome attainment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "pending | achieved | partly achieved | not achieved | superseded | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Records what happened to the request while leaving causal attribution to separate evidence." } ], "affordances": [ "Compare observed activity with the lobbying boundary and flag ambiguous cases.", "Trace each requested change to its decision target, represented interests and authorised spokesperson.", "Identify relevant decision windows and prepare a supported engagement or submission.", "Check applicable participation and disclosure requirements before proposing an action.", "Compare arguments, contacts and official responses to identify unanswered requests or contradictory positions.", "Assess outcome attainment and qualify claims that lobbying caused the result." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "oecd-lobbying-2010", "title": "Recommendation of the Council on Principles for Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying", "url": "https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0379", "what_it_supports": "Specialist definition of lobbying as communication with public officials to influence legislation, policy or administrative decisions; international benchmark for transparency and integrity rules.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "us-lda-1995", "title": "Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-65, 2 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1614", "url": "https://www.senate.gov/legislative/lobbyingdisc.htm", "what_it_supports": "United States legal definition, registration thresholds (including the 20% time test), in-house versus lobbying-firm treatment, and quarterly expenditure reporting.", "url_status": "blocked" }, { "id": "eu-tr-2021", "title": "Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register", "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021Q0611(01)", "what_it_supports": "EU framing as interest representation; mandatory Transparency Register covering the three institutions; identification numbers and activity scope.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "uk-lobbying-act-2014", "title": "Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014", "url": "https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/4/contents", "what_it_supports": "Narrow UK statutory category of consultant lobbying of ministers and permanent secretaries, and the contrast with largely unregistered in-house lobbying at Westminster.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "canada-lobbying-act", "title": "Lobbying Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 44 (4th Supp.)", "url": "https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-12.4/", "what_it_supports": "Canadian coverage of both consultant and in-house lobbying, the significant-part-of-duties test, and the federal Registry of Lobbyists.", "url_status": "live" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "decision-and-request", "name": "Decision and request", "description": "The public choice the effort seeks to influence and the change it asks decision-makers to make.", "rationale": "Lobbying cannot be understood or evaluated without separating its desired decision from the broader issue it concerns.", "layers": [ { "id": "public-decision-target", "name": "Public decision target", "description": "The decision, authority and procedural opportunity addressed by the effort.", "findings": [ { "id": "target-and-authority", "name": "Target and authority", "description": "Record the identifiable public decision and who can make, shape or prevent it, marking uncertain authority links.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which public decision, proposed measure or agenda choice is this effort intended to influence?", "kind": "definition", "id": "target-and-authority-q01" }, { "text": "Which officials or bodies can change its outcome, and what evidence establishes their role at the current stage?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "target-and-authority-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "requested-outcome", "name": "Requested outcome", "description": "The concrete position advanced and its relationship to the current decision baseline.", "findings": [ { "id": "decision-change-sought", "name": "Decision change sought", "description": "Record the requested adoption, amendment, delay, rejection or retention and any stated fallback position.", "questions": [ { "text": "What exact decision, wording, timing or non-action would satisfy the request relative to the current baseline?", "kind": "definition", "id": "decision-change-sought-q01" }, { "text": "What observable result would count as full, partial or failed attainment of that request?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "decision-change-sought-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "representation-and-interests", "name": "Representation and interests", "description": "Who acts, whose interests are advanced and what authority and support connect them.", "rationale": "The person making contact may differ from the principal, funder or beneficiary, and these differences affect interpretation and permissible commitments.", "layers": [ { "id": "mandate-to-represent", "name": "Mandate to represent", "description": "The basis and limits of a lobbyist's authority to advance a position.", "findings": [ { "id": "principal-and-mandate", "name": "Principal and mandate", "description": "Record the represented parties, agreed position and limits on speaking or negotiating for them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who is being represented, and what evidence authorises this actor to advance the stated position?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "principal-and-mandate-q01" }, { "text": "Which concessions, assurances or commitments require further approval from the represented parties?", "kind": "action", "id": "principal-and-mandate-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "support-and-benefit", "name": "Support and benefit", "description": "Funding, coalition participation and expected benefits relevant to the influence effort.", "findings": [ { "id": "funders-and-beneficiaries", "name": "Funders and beneficiaries", "description": "Distinguish documented financial or organisational support from claimed or inferred benefits of the requested decision.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who provides money, staff, research or access for this effort, and which sources document that support?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "funders-and-beneficiaries-q01" }, { "text": "Whose interests would the requested outcome advance, and which beneficiary claims remain disputed or inferred?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "funders-and-beneficiaries-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "influence-and-engagement", "name": "Influence and engagement", "description": "How the effort reaches relevant officials and what it presents to influence their choices.", "rationale": "Contacts and messages must be connected to a decision request to distinguish lobbying activity from unrelated communication.", "layers": [ { "id": "access-and-contact", "name": "Access and contact", "description": "Actual and proposed routes into the decision process.", "findings": [ { "id": "engagement-route", "name": "Engagement route", "description": "Record intended recipients, intermediaries, channels and whether an engagement was attempted or occurred.", "questions": [ { "text": "Through which meeting, submission, communication or intermediary does the request reach someone able to influence the decision?", "kind": "definition", "id": "engagement-route-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes a proposed contact, an attempted contact and a completed exchange?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "engagement-route-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "arguments-and-assurances", "name": "Arguments and assurances", "description": "Claims, supporting material and commitments used to make the requested outcome persuasive.", "findings": [ { "id": "case-presented", "name": "Case presented", "description": "Record the argument delivered, its evidential basis and any assurances offered by the lobbying actor.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which claims, evidence and proposed wording were actually presented to support the requested decision?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "case-presented-q01" }, { "text": "Which claims need verification or qualification, and which assurances need authority checks before reuse?", "kind": "action", "id": "case-presented-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "constraints-and-results", "name": "Constraints and results", "description": "The conditions governing engagement and the evidence used to judge its progress and effects.", "rationale": "An agent needs both a grounded basis for permissible next steps and a way to distinguish successful requests from proven influence.", "layers": [ { "id": "participation-and-disclosure", "name": "Participation and disclosure", "description": "Requirements applicable to the particular actor, jurisdiction, institution and activity.", "findings": [ { "id": "applicable-engagement-obligations", "name": "Applicable engagement obligations", "description": "Record verified requirements concerning access, registration, reporting, conflicts or conduct, without assuming universal applicability.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which current authoritative rules apply to this actor and activity, and what establishes their applicability?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "applicable-engagement-obligations-q01" }, { "text": "What registration, disclosure, conflict review or other prerequisite must be completed before the proposed engagement?", "kind": "action", "id": "applicable-engagement-obligations-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "response-and-contribution", "name": "Response and contribution", "description": "Decision-maker responses, observed outcomes and the strength of any claimed contribution.", "findings": [ { "id": "outcome-and-attribution", "name": "Outcome and attribution", "description": "Record responses and decision changes separately from evidence that the lobbying effort contributed to them.", "questions": [ { "text": "How does the observed decision compare with the recorded request, and what remains pending?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "outcome-and-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence connects this effort to the outcome, and what competing explanations limit that attribution?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "outcome-and-attribution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Direct (insider) lobbying of legislators and officials", "Grassroots lobbying that mobilises the public to contact officials", "In-house / corporate government-affairs lobbying", "Consultant / multi-client contract lobbying", "Legislative lobbying of parliaments and assemblies", "Regulatory and administrative lobbying of agencies and ministries", "Foreign-principal lobbying (on behalf of a non-domestic client or government)", "Peak-body and trade-association lobbying on behalf of members" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Wikidata", "value_or_pattern": "Q187117", "note": "Item for the activity lobbying." }, { "scheme": "EU Transparency Register identification number", "value_or_pattern": "NNNNNNNNNNNN-NN", "note": "Twelve-digit identifier plus two-digit suffix assigned to organisations on the EU Transparency Register." }, { "scheme": "United States LDA registrant identifier", "value_or_pattern": "House and Senate lobbying-disclosure registrant IDs", "note": "Assigned to organisations and firms filing under the Lobbying Disclosure Act." }, { "scheme": "Canada Registry of Lobbyists registration number", "value_or_pattern": "numeric registration ID", "note": "Assigned by the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada to consultant and in-house registrations." }, { "scheme": "United Kingdom Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists listing", "value_or_pattern": "named consultant-lobbyist / client entry", "note": "Statutory register of consultant lobbyists, not a general in-house register." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "OECD Recommendation of the Council on Principles for Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying (OECD, 2010; later revised as the Recommendation on Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying and Influence).", "United States: Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 as amended by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (Congress); Foreign Agents Registration Act 1938 (Department of Justice) for foreign principals.", "European Union: Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 on a mandatory transparency register (European Parliament, Council and Commission).", "United Kingdom: Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014 (UK Parliament); Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists.", "Canada: Lobbying Act and associated regulations (Parliament of Canada; Commissioner of Lobbying).", "France: Sapin II (Law No. 2016-1691) répertoire des représentants d'intérêts (HATVP).", "Germany: Lobbyregistergesetz (Lobbying Register Act) for the Bundestag and Federal Government (2021, in force 2022).", "Ireland: Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 (Standards in Public Office Commission).", "Australia: Lobbying Code of Conduct for third-party lobbyists (Australian Government / Attorney-General's portfolio).", "Council of Europe GRECO evaluations and UN Convention against Corruption Article 18 (trading in influence) sit beside, but are not, lobbying codes." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Corporate government-affairs offices and hired firms meeting legislators, ministers and regulators in Washington, Brussels, Ottawa, Canberra and national capitals.", "Trade associations and peak bodies filing on member issues (tax, procurement, product standards, market access).", "NGOs and unions using the same meeting and register machinery as companies, often preferring the label advocacy.", "Quarterly or annual register filings listing clients, issues, officials contacted and spend bands.", "Ministers' and commissioners' published meeting diaries used to reconstruct who sought what decision.", "Revolving-door hiring of former officials as in-house or consultant lobbyists, subject to cooling-off rules where they exist." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Annual lobbying expenditure (organisation, one jurisdiction)", "typical_range": "Most US federal filers well under 100000; large corporates commonly 1-20 million; US federal total around 4 billion a year", "unit": "USD per year" }, { "quantity": "Share of a person's work time spent on lobbying communications", "typical_range": "Legal thresholds often around 20 (US LDA; Canadian in-house significant-part test)", "unit": "percent of time" }, { "quantity": "Consultant-firm compensation per client per quarter (US LDA trigger)", "typical_range": "Registration threshold 3000; billed amounts from a few thousand to hundreds of thousands", "unit": "USD per quarter" }, { "quantity": "Count of registered lobbyists or interest representatives", "typical_range": "Thousands at US federal level; EU Transparency Register on the order of 12000 organisations", "unit": "persons or organisations" }, { "quantity": "Meetings with designated public office holders", "typical_range": "From a handful per year for a small filer to hundreds for a large government-affairs shop", "unit": "meetings per year" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Undisclosed or 'shadow' lobbying (strategic consulting, public-affairs advice) that evades registers while still targeting officials.", "Bribery or trading in influence dressed as fees, gifts, hospitality or jobs.", "Regulatory capture when a supervised industry dominates the information and personnel flowing to its regulator.", "Revolving-door conflicts when former officials lobby their old departments inside cooling-off windows or without disclosure.", "Astroturfing: manufactured grassroots pressure presented as spontaneous public opinion.", "Foreign interference through unregistered agents of a foreign principal.", "Resource inequality: well-funded interests obtain systematically more access than diffuse publics.", "Over-broad rules that chill ordinary civic petitioning or NGO advocacy.", "Misleading technical evidence supplied to officials who cannot independently verify it." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "United States: 'lobbying' is a statutory term of art under the LDA (time and spend tests); the Petition Clause of the First Amendment protects the underlying activity; FARA is a separate foreign-principal regime.", "United Kingdom: statute mainly captures consultant lobbyists communicating with ministers and permanent secretaries; most in-house lobbying is outside the statutory register.", "European Union: official language is 'interest representation' / représentation d'intérêts; 'lobbying' is often pejorative in public debate; the Transparency Register is the main instrument.", "Canada: both consultant and in-house lobbying are registrable; a 20% duties test and a dedicated Commissioner of Lobbying.", "Australia (Commonwealth): the Lobbying Code of Conduct is aimed at third-party lobbyists; in-house government-affairs staff are treated differently.", "France and Germany: named 'interest representative' registers (HATVP; Bundestag Lobbyregister) rather than a US-style lobbyist licence.", "Many NGOs in Europe and the Global South use 'advocacy' for the same official-facing work that companies call government affairs." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "name": "Public relations", "difference": "PR targets media and public reputation; lobbying targets a public official's decision. The same firm may do both, but the audience test splits them." }, { "name": "Electoral campaigning and campaign finance", "difference": "Campaigning seeks votes or donations for candidates or parties; lobbying seeks an official act. Money to a campaign is regulated as political finance, not as a lobbying contact." }, { "name": "Bribery and trading in influence", "difference": "A corrupt quid pro quo or the sale of real or supposed influence is a crime (e.g. UNCAC Arts. 15-18). Lawful lobbying is disclosed persuasion without improper consideration." }, { "name": "Litigation and amicus practice", "difference": "Court-directed argument under judicial procedure versus communication aimed at a political or administrative decision-maker." }, { "name": "Formal public consultation", "difference": "An invited, usually published administrative process with a docket, versus unsolicited or informal attempts to move a decision outside that process." }, { "name": "Diplomacy", "difference": "Sovereign-to-sovereign representation by accredited agents versus a private or commercial interest seeking to move a host-government decision (the latter may still trigger FARA-type rules)." }, { "name": "Think-tank research", "difference": "Knowledge production offered as analysis, versus client-directed communication whose purpose is to obtain a specified official outcome. Intent and instruction, not the existence of a report, is the test." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of lobbying this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Should the model's default unit be a single influence effort around a decision, a continuing lobbying programme or an individual engagement, and how should these units link?", "Where should the catalogue boundary fall between lobbying, individual constituent casework, formal consultation participation and grassroots advocacy?", "Should efforts directed at public procurement, adjudication or state-owned enterprises use this model directly or require specialised neighbouring models?", "Which jurisdictional and institutional sources are needed to establish applicable definitions, exemptions and obligations without treating one regime as universal?", "What evidence standard should support a claim of lobbying contribution when contacts are private and multiple actors seek the same outcome?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 9, "findings": 16, "questions": 24 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "abstract concept", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a lobbying, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise lobbying activity, assess its objectives, representation, progress and constraints, and identify justified next actions.", "characteristics": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: regulatory capture, lobbying campaign, fossil fuels lobby, public affairs industry, grassroots lobbying.", "5 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 63 Wikipedia languages, which is a measure of how widely the thing is known, not of how important it is." ], "openQuestionsForResearch": [ "Which of the bundles below does a real task actually need, and which are ceremony?", "What does this thing have that the facets do not capture at all?", "Which neighbouring kind is most often confused with a lobbying, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "something that happens over time", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "observe it, measure it, record its state" ], "howItIsRecognised": [ "Nothing to see. What is recognised is an instance of it, and which instances count is exactly what is argued about." ], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "regulatory capture", "lobbying campaign", "fossil fuels lobby", "public affairs industry", "grassroots lobbying" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 63 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 5 finer distinctions are held inside this entry as names rather than as separate models.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one lobbying from another, and a lobbying from things that resemble it.", "rationale": "Recognition comes before every other claim. Without stable identity nothing else in the model can be trusted to be about the same thing twice.", "layers": [ { "id": "naming-and-identifiers", "name": "Names and identifiers", "description": "The names this thing goes by and the identifiers that survive translation and time.", "findings": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases", "name": "Preferred name, aliases and local names", "description": "Which name to use, which names mean the same thing, and which merely sound similar.", "questions": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the name of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the name of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the name of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers", "name": "Stable identifiers and external keys", "description": "Identifiers that keep pointing at this kind of thing across systems and languages.", "questions": [ { "id": "stable-identifiers-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an identifier for a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an identifier for a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an identifier for a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-granularity", "name": "Classification and granularity", "description": "Where a lobbying sits among kinds, and how finely a task needs to cut it.", "findings": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents", "name": "Kind, parents and neighbouring kinds", "description": "The classes this thing belongs to and the ones it is next to.", "questions": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the kind of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the kind of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the kind of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features", "name": "Distinguishing features", "description": "What separates a lobbying from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about what distinguishes a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once what distinguishes a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "state-and-lifecycle", "name": "State and lifecycle", "description": "The states a lobbying passes through and the events that move it between them.", "rationale": "Most decisions about a thing depend on what state it is in now, which is a claim with a time on it, not a property.", "layers": [ { "id": "lifecycle-stages", "name": "Lifecycle stages", "description": "From coming into existence to ceasing to be one of these.", "findings": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions", "name": "Stages and transitions", "description": "The stages worth naming and what moves a lobbying between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the lifecycle of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the lifecycle of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observations-and-status", "name": "Observations and current status", "description": "What is observed about a lobbying, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a lobbying is recorded so that it can be superseded rather than overwritten.", "questions": [ { "id": "observation-record-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an observation of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an observation of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an observation of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "process-and-outcome", "name": "Process, inputs and outcome", "description": "How a lobbying proceeds, what it needs and what it leaves behind.", "rationale": "An activity is known by its steps and its results, and both have to be recordable while it is still running.", "layers": [ { "id": "steps-and-sequence", "name": "Steps and sequence", "description": "The steps of a lobbying, their order and what may run in parallel.", "findings": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions", "name": "Steps, preconditions and completion", "description": "What has to be true before each step of a lobbying and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a step of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a step of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-results", "name": "Inputs, resources and results", "description": "What a lobbying consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a lobbying takes and the results it leaves, wanted or not.", "questions": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the inputs and results of a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the inputs and results of a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the inputs and results of a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "definitions-in-contest", "name": "Definitions and who holds them", "description": "What lobbying is taken to mean, and by whom.", "rationale": "When a field disagrees about a concept, the disagreement is the content. A model that picks one definition silently destroys the information.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-definitions", "name": "Competing definitions", "description": "The main readings and the traditions behind them.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-map", "name": "Definitions and their holders", "description": "Each definition with the school or body that holds it.", "questions": [ { "id": "definition-map-q01", "text": "Which definitions of lobbying are in use, and which tradition or body holds each?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "definition-map-q02", "text": "What turns on the difference between them in practice?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operationalisation", "name": "Operationalisation", "description": "How it is measured or applied when it has to be.", "findings": [ { "id": "operational-record", "name": "Measures and proxies", "description": "Instruments and indicators used to stand in for it.", "questions": [ { "id": "operational-record-q01", "text": "How is lobbying operationalised or measured in practice, and by what instrument?", "kind": "measurement" }, { "id": "operational-record-q02", "text": "What does that operationalisation leave out, and when does that matter?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "instances-and-use", "name": "Instances, use and consequence", "description": "What counts as an instance of lobbying and what follows from calling something that.", "rationale": "Applying a concept is an act with consequences, so a model must say what the label licenses and what it does not.", "layers": [ { "id": "instances", "name": "What counts as an instance", "description": "Clear cases, borderline cases and non-cases.", "findings": [ { "id": "instance-tests", "name": "Tests for an instance", "description": "What would settle whether something falls under it.", "questions": [ { "id": "instance-tests-q01", "text": "What would settle whether something is an instance of lobbying?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "instance-tests-q02", "text": "Which borderline cases are argued about, and on what grounds?", "kind": "definition" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequence", "name": "Consequence of application", "description": "Rights, duties or decisions that follow from the label.", "findings": [ { "id": "consequence-record", "name": "What the label licenses", "description": "What an agent may do once something is classified this way.", "questions": [ { "id": "consequence-record-q01", "text": "What follows practically once something is treated as lobbying?", "kind": "action" }, { "id": "consequence-record-q02", "text": "What must an agent not infer from the label alone?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a lobbying came from and when it held.", "rationale": "A claim without a source and a time cannot be superseded, only overwritten, and an agent that overwrites loses the ability to explain itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-and-authority", "name": "Source and authority", "description": "Who said it, on what evidence, and how strongly.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-provenance", "name": "Claim provenance and confidence", "description": "The authority behind each claim about a lobbying and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a claim about a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a claim about a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "time-and-versions", "name": "Time, versions and supersession", "description": "When a claim was true, when it was learnt, and what replaced it.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession", "name": "Validity period and supersession", "description": "How an old claim about a lobbying is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a lobbying, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the validity of a claim about a lobbying, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the validity of a claim about a lobbying is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 14, "questions": 38 } } } }