Knowledge production in and about public policy by economic interest groups in France – that is, the professional groups that represent and defend the economic sector and its affiliated companies – has given rise to almost no specific studies. Consequently, although historical (Guillaume, 2004; Lefranc, 1976) and sociological (Offerle, 2013) studies abound on ‘employer organisational space’, knowledge of the conditions of the production of public policy analysis conducted by major employers themselves remain vague. This is undoubtedly linked to the paucity of studies on political economy and industrial relations, and to the existing division between the approaches used in the analysis of public policy on the one hand and the analysis of interest groups on the other. The portmanteau word ‘expertise’ has simply been a point of convergence (Restier-Melleray, 1990). Policy analysis has thus been primarily and implicitly perceived as knowledge manipulated by policymakers to legitimise public policies, or as one of the sets of action used by interest groups (Robert, 2008).

This chapter focuses on three areas: first, it analyses organisations in order to identify and highlight the types of analytical structures in place; second, it analyses selected texts from sectors from which our field study was conducted and for which we have sufficient reliable data (for instance, we have very specific data on transport and small and medium enterprises); third, it analyses the documentation issued by organisations within the context of the 2012 presidential elections. We have decided against proposing an overview of doctrinal positions and instead we have chosen to focus on how analytical approaches and structures have been developed.

We defend two key ideas: first, although there is a long-held perception of France as a dominant state which tends to impose its expertise, a presentation of the traditional co-production of encrypted data reveals a lasting and more complex relationship between economic interest groups and the French government. In this sense, even during the ‘golden age of the State’ (Courty and Suleiman, 1997), the authorities long depended on the data and studies provided by economic interest groups. Moreover, the process of producing standards meant that policy analysis conditions varied greatly from one type of text to another – that is, regulatory or legislative – and across sectors. This puts the perception of an ad hoc, unequivocal and national French model into perspective.