Does direct democracy increase civic virtues? A systematic literature review

Abstract

Due to widespread citizen disenchantment with representative democracy, the introduction of direct-democratic institutions is often promoted as a promising remedy to overcome the current democratic crisis. Theorists of participatory democracy have argued that direct democracy can foster civic virtues, given that the opportunity to participate in referendums and initiatives is generally expected to empower and enlighten citizens. By conducting a systematic literature review, this article aims to provide an overview of scholarship on how direct democracy delivers on its promise to increase individual civic virtues. To that end, it focuses on the effects of direct democracy on those four areas to which scholars have devoted much attention so far: (1) electoral turnout, (2) external and internal efficacy, (3) political knowledge, and (4) subjective wellbeing and satisfaction with democracy. Based on 67 selected studies, it turns out that there is only little positive overall effect of direct democracy on civic virtues, with a great deal of variation. The empirical analysis establishes a negative time trend, indicating that researchers have increasingly reported negative findings over the years. This main result calls into question the expectations advanced by the theorists of participatory democracy and gives some credit to more skeptical views. This review concludes by providing scholars with new avenues for research.

Impact of episodes of regime transformation on subjective well-being: A panel event study

“…The variance explained by the impact of episodes of regime transformation was generally very low or even negligible. Given that the idea of a link between democracy and psychological well-being is wellestablished in Western culture (Bernhard, 2024;Dutt & Radcliff, 2009;Inglehart, 1988Inglehart, , 1990Radcliff, 2001;Toshkov & Mazepus, 2022), the lack of a significant impact needs to be explained. In my opinion, the impact of episodes of regime transformation is very complex and many psychological, social, economic, and governance factors intervene and affect each citizen's well-being.…”

“…The idea that psychological well-being is strongly associated with democracy is well established in the Western culture (Bernhard, 2024;Dutt & Radcliff, 2009;Inglehart, 1988Inglehart, , 1990Kavetsos et al, 2021;Kundu et al, 2024;Liu et al, 2023;Radcliff, 2001;Toshkov & Mazepus, 2022). However, while there is indeed some evidence of an association between democracy and well-being (e.g., Dorn et al, 2007;Inglehart et al, 2008;Inglehart & Klingemann, 2000;Owen et al, 2008), the magnitude of this relationship is small or even negligible when controlling for covariates (Prati, 2022a).…”

“…However, while there is indeed some evidence of an association between democracy and well-being (e.g., Dorn et al, 2007;Inglehart et al, 2008;Inglehart & Klingemann, 2000;Owen et al, 2008), the magnitude of this relationship is small or even negligible when controlling for covariates (Prati, 2022a). The direction of this relationship is a question to which the literature still struggles to find a definitive answer (e.g., Bernhard, 2024;Bjørnskov, 2003;Dorn et al, 2008;Inglehart et al, 2008;Inglehart & Klingemann, 2000;Kundu et al, 2024;Prati, 2022aPrati, , 2023Schyns, 1998;Toshkov & Mazepus, 2022;Veenhoven, 2000). Nevertheless, liberal democracies are characterized by features that are thought to be conducive to well-being, such as a wide range of free choice, equal protection of civil rights, human rights, freedom of expression, and civil liberties (Dorn et al, 2007;Frey & Stutzer, 2002;Inglehart, 1988;Inglehart et al, 2008;Mishchuk et al, 2019).…”