Does direct democracy make for better citizens? A cautionary warning based on cross-country evidence

Abstract

It has been shown that both formal existence and actual use of direct democratic institutions have effects on a number of variables such as fiscal policies, quality of governance but also economic growth. Further, it has been argued that direct democratic institutions would not only have an impact on policy outcomes but influence citizen participation and attitudes toward politics. For the first time, these conjectures are tested in a large cross-country sample here. Overall, we do not find strong effects and some of the significant correlations are rather small substantially. In contrast to previous studies, voter turnout is not higher when direct democracy is available or used. Further, and also in contrast to previous studies, citizens do not express a greater interest in politics in countries with direct democracy institutions. Finally, they display lower trust in government and parties but not in parliament. These results shed some doubt on the hope that direct democracy would make for better citizens.

Boosting Political Trust with Direct Democracy? The Case of the Finnish Citizens’ Initiative

“…Furthermore, even when majorities do prevail, it does not necessarily lead to better policies (Achen & Bartels, 2016, p. 76). Such arguments and several empirical studies (Dyck, 2009;Ladner & Fiechter, 2012;Voigt & Blume, 2015) cast doubt on whether direct democracy can help restore positive attitudes towards the political system.…”

“…Nevertheless, being politically active can also be a frustrating experience that does not necessarily appeal to ordinary citizens (Hibbing & Theiss-Morse, 2002). Accordingly, Dyck (2009) and Voigt and Blume (2015) both find that direct-democratic involvement reduces levels of political trust and Ladner and Fiechter (2012) find that the impact of direct democracy at the local level in Switzerland is negligible.…”

“…Direct-democratic mechanisms give citizens the chance to take part in political decision-making (Altman, 2011;Qvortrup, 2013;. Despite their popularity, it remains unclear how involvement in these affects developments in political trust (Bauer & Fatke, 2014;Kern, 2017), and critical voices maintain that such mechanisms frequently fail to improve democracy (Achen & Bartels, 2016;Blaug, 2002;Dyck, 2009;Ladner & Fiechter, 2012;Voigt & Blume, 2015). Bauer and Fatke (2014) note that people involved in direct-democratic instruments may experience negative developments in political trust because of their involvement even when the availability has positive effects.…”

Do direct-democratic procedures lead to higher acceptance than political representation?

“…The mere threat of a referendum may also discipline the representatives and induce them to align with the electorate more closely (Hajnal et al 2002;Matsusaka and McCarty 2001). However, recent cross-country evidence on this issue offers rather sobering insights (Voigt and Blume 2015). Frequent ballots may lead to voter fatigue and thus reduce, rather than increase, electoral participation and decision quality (Bowler et al 1992;Freitag and Stadelmann-Steffen 2010).…”

The Winner Takes It All: Revisiting the Effect of Direct Democracy on Citizens’ Political Support

“…Most empirical studies have relied on cross-sectional data to study whether citizens' support is higher in states or cantons in which direct democratic rights or experiences are more extensive (e.g. Bauer and Fatke 2014;Dyck 2009;Hug 2005;Stadelmann-Steffen and Vatter 2012;Voigt and Blume 2015). These studies provide inconsistent findings with positive, non-significant and negative relationships between direct democracy on the one hand, and variables such as political trust and democratic satisfaction on the other hand.…”