Table I

Supply of Access Goods

	BEST PROVIDED ACCESS GOOD	RANKING OF CAPACITIES TO PROVIDE ACCESS GOODS
Individual Firm	EK	EK > IDEI > IEEI
European Association	IEEI	IEEI > EK > IDEI
National Association	IDEI	IDEI > EK > IEEI
Consultant	(EK)

Table II

Demand for Access Goods

	CRITICAL RESOURCE	RANKING OF DEPENDENCIES
European Parliament	IEEI	IEEI > IDEI > EK

Table III

Hypotheses: Ranking of Access to the European Parliament

European Associations > National Associations > Individual Firms > Consultants

Table IV

MEPs' Preferential Contacts (*)

Organizational Form	1st Choice	2nd Choice	3rd Choice	4th Choice
European Association	12	9	3	1
National Association	9	13	3	0
Individual Firm	4	2	13	6
Consultant	0	1	6	18
No Answer	2	2	2	2
Total	27	27	27	27

df=9, 2=72.98, p=smaller than 0.001 and the Cramer coefficient C=0.493

(*) The "No" answers are not included in the calculation of ² and the Cramer coefficient and therefore N=25.

Table V

Interval Scale Values Based on Paired Comparison and Composite Ranking (**)

	EP
European Association	1.71
National Association	1.69
Individual Firm	0.80
Consultant	0.00
Composite Ranking	EA>NA>IF>Cons

(**) The same composite rankings are obtained when using the weighted sums of the rank values. This is an instance of successful methodological triangulation.

Graph 1

Relative Access to the European Parliament

Source: Own data (N=25)