Content uploaded by Norbert Kersting
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Norbert Kersting on Sep 09, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
319
LOCAL DEMOCRACY – LOKALNA DEMOKRACIJA
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Local Political Participation in Europe:
Elections and Referendums
Norbert Kersting*
UDK 342.573:352/353(4)
352.075.31(497.5)
342.84:352(497.5)
Preliminary scientific paper / prethodno znanstveno propćenje
Received / primljeno: 12. 11. 2014.
Accepted / prihvaćeno: 17. 4. 2015.
Since the 1970s, political protests have been growing in
many democracies and the demand for political participa-
tion has become obvious. The 1990s also saw more open,
dialogue-oriented participatory instruments (century of
participation). The proliferation of participatory instru-
ments in the field of talk-centric deliberative democracies
is called the deliberative turn. Most new instruments of
participation are implemented at the local level. However,
it is argued that these instruments do not lead to binding
decisions. Compared to elections, the number of citizens
participating is rather small and selective. New forms of
vote-centric direct democracy (referendums and other ini-
tiatives) are also implemented. The paper presents a model
of offline and online participation with focus on represen-
tative and direct participation that can lead to binding de-
* Norbert Kersting, Professor, University of Muenster, Institute of Political Science,
Chair of Local and Regional Government, Germany (prof. dr. sc. Norbert Kersting, Insitut
za političke znanosti, Sveučilište u Muensteru, Njemačka, e-mail: norbert.kersting@uni-mu-
enster.de)
320
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
cisions. Legal frameworks of different European countri-
es are presented and compared. Is the turnout declining?
Who is included and who is excluded? The article uses the
analyses of the latest opinion polls survey data (World Va-
lue Survey).
Key words: participation, Internet, referendum, elections,
local government
1. A Conceptual Framework for Political
Participation
Political participation is defined as an activity to influence political de-
cision-making at the local, regional, and (supra-) national level. Not all
forms of communal self-help, such as civil engagement, can be classified
as political participation. The focus on the production of certain services
often does not consider any kind of decision-making competencies. It is
a kind of communal self-help and co-production that is not primarily ori-
ented towards the influence of decision-making. This civic engagement,
however, has an important social function especially when it comes to the
development of social capital.
Political participation can be divided into four different political spheres –
participation in representative democracy, participation in direct democ-
racy, deliberative participation and demonstrative participation (see for
details Kersting, 2013, 2014). These spheres are characterized by different
intrinsic logics and specific online and offline participatory instruments.
Thus, in the following part, online and offline instruments of political par-
ticipation, as well as their main and collateral functions will be described
using a model of participation with four spheres of participation.
321
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Figure 1: Hybrid and blended participation
Source: Kersting 2012, 2013
The first sphere of participation is called demonstrative democracy. Indi-
vidualism, societal change of values and political disenchantment lead to
new forms of expressive participation, inter alia, political demonstrations,
and wearing campaign batches. Online participations comprise civil soci-
ety protests like shit storm and flash mobs (Della Porta, 2013). Demon-
strations are locally realized, like in the case of Puerta del Sol in Madrid,
Tahir Square in Cairo, and Maidan in Kiev. A look at the major issues of
the demonstrations range from, among others, protests against the war,
nuclear power, and austerity policies to local issues such as nuclear waste
repository, or building of railway stations. While some of these demon-
strations focus on national or international politics, it is obvious that the
triggering effect is often related to local politics such as the building of
a big shopping mall in Istanbul, the increase in local bus fares in Rio de
Janeiro and the building of a new railway station in Stuttgart.
Protest against local project is smaller than national protest. In Stuttgart
2010, around 60,000 (official police data) and 150,000 (organizers’ data)
were on the streets against the building of a new railway station. This was
322
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
between 15 per cent and 30 per cent of Stuttgart’s population. Even five
years later after smaller demonstrations, a process of mediation, and a
binding referendum a group still met at the railway to protest. Protest can
be much bigger on the Internet. Online shit storms focus on local politics
but more on individual websites or companies. These can mobilize around
1 million participants globally (Kersting, 2012).
Deliberative participation is by nature talk-centric. It has its origins in the
deliberative turn in the last decade of the 20th century (Kersting, 2008,
2014: 62). There are three types of deliberative instruments. Open forums
are based on self-selection of the participants. New representative mini
publics (citizen juries) consist of groups which choose representative ran-
dom samples out of the citizenship and use these participants for the dis-
cussion on certain political and planning issues. Stakeholder conferences
encompass new modern forms of advisory boards representing particular
interest groups such as youth parliaments or advisory boards for old peo-
ple, for disabled or handicapped people or for foreigners and sub-munic-
ipal councils, to mention the most important. Deliberative instruments
were positively influenced by local agenda processes in the 1990s. Par-
ticipatory instruments such as participatory budgeting were developed in
Porto Alegre in the new millennium, became popular in Brazil and Latin
America and spread all over Europe and other continents (Diaz, 2014;
Sintomer et al., 2008).
The rate of offline deliberative participation is generally small by nature.
In Online participatory budgeting processes there are a couple of hundred
participants. For example, in bigger cities there are up to 10,000 partici-
pants in the online participatory budgeting process (Kersting, 2012).
The following two spheres are not talk-centric, but vote-centric. Direct
democratic and representative participation are part of the numeric de-
mocracy. This means that they are focusing on large numbers and repre-
sentativeness. However, these are also included in the legal framework
with certain controlled procedures, rules, and regulations regarding dem-
ocratic principles like openness, transparency, control of power, as well as
majority rules and minority rights.
The sphere of direct democracy participation is the third area of demo-
cratic involvement, which is issue oriented and vote-centric. Direct de-
mocracy participation is mainly used in the form of referenda and citizen
initiatives which can produce binding decisions. There are other online
and offline instruments that are vote centric and issue oriented such as
opinion polls.
323
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Representative participation, representation, and elections are a charac-
teristic of modern liberal democracies. In modern liberal democracies all
other forms of direct democratic instruments, deliberative instruments as
well as demonstrative participation are secondary to representative de-
mocracy. Representative democracy is vote-centric based on elections.
Online participation includes internet-voting or direct contact to politi-
cians via e-mail or Facebook (Kersting, 2012: 17f; 2014: 66ff). Despite
the fact that representative participation is faced with a severe crisis and
is gradually declining, elections clearly remain the most important forum
and have become an instrument of political participation.
2. Representative Participation at the Local Level
Representative participation is a dominant form of liberal democracies.
European local governments are primarily based on the competition be-
tween political parties and political candidates. The institutions of rep-
resentative democracy are formalized and enshrined in the constitution,
local charters, and other legal frameworks. Representative democracy is
characterized as numerical democracy where delegate trustees are cho-
sen by a majority on one hand, while on the other hand, minorities’ rights
have to be protected. Representative participation encompasses other
forms of participation, such as direct contact with the incumbents, mem-
bership in political parties, campaigning, and candidature for political
mandates etc.
Most European countries are experiencing a decline in local elections vot-
er turnout (see Dalton et al., 2003). With a few exceptions (for a long time
France had a very high local voter turnout), voter turnout in local elec-
tions is mostly lower than at the national level (see Kersting et al., 2009).
For example, during the last decade only 35 per cent and 60 per cent
cast their votes at local elections in England and Germany respectively.
Sweden holds national and local elections simultaneously and this leads to
a higher turnout of 78 per cent. France is an exception because its voter
turnout at the local level is around 69 per cent, which is even higher than
that of national elections. The comparative study shows that regarding
the electoral turnout there is no significant relationship between countries
with different electoral systems (list proportional or FPTP), directly elect-
ed mayors, different terms of office/mandate etc. (see Table 1). However,
electoral turnout is relatively high in some Eastern European countries
with notable variations (see Romania, Poland).
324
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Table 1: Local Elections and Referenda
Country
Population (Mio.)
Number of
Municipalities
Council:
Voting System
Term of Office
Voted at local election %
Mayor (in) direct Elec-
tion/ Appointm.
Term of Office
Recall
Re ferendum
Germany 82.6 12,366*
Cumulative
and Panache,
PR
4–5 62.8 Direct 6–8 Yes Referendum/
Initiative
England 60.9 82 FPTP 5 35* (Mostly)
indirect 5 No Re fere n dum
Sweden 9.5 290 Open list PR 5 77.5 Indirect 5 No Refere n dum
Netherlands 16.9 418 List
Pro-portional 4 63.0 Indirect
appointment 4 No –
France 60.2 35,000 List
Pro-portional 5 69* Indirect 5 No Refere n dum
Spain 46.6 8,117 List
Pro-portional 4 61.9 Indirect 4 No –
Slovakia 5.4 1,890
Majoritarian
(Multi member
districts)
4 53* Direct 4 Yes Referendum/
Initiative
Estonia 1.3 226 List
Pro-portional 4 50.3 Indirect 4 No –
Croatia 4.3 556 List
Pro-portional 4 44* Direct 4 No –
Slovenia 2.1 211 List
Pro-portional 4 51.6 Direct 4 Yes Referendum/
Initiative
Poland 38.5 2,479 List
Pro-portional 4 60.7 Direct 4 Yes Referendum
Romania 19.9 3,181 List
proportional 4 70.1 Direct 4 No –
Source: For additional sources, see Kersting et al., 2009; CCRE 2012; World Value Survey,
2014
*Here real turnout at the last local election is used according to Statistical Offices. All other
data on voter turnout are based on opinion polls from World Value Survey 2014 (‘have done’
etc.), because these data are used in the further detailed analysis of the voters.
It can be shown that certain groups are no longer motivated to cast their
vote in national elec tions. The younger generation, migrants are absent
in some countries. The strong relation ship between social status, educa-
tional level, and income is obvious (Dalton, 2008). This is also the case
for second order elections such as local government elections (see further
details in Kers ting et al., 2009). Marginalized groups are characterized by
325
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
a precarious social situa tion and, generally, lower education. This group is
less active in participating in elections (s. Bertelsmann, 2013). Similarly,
it can be shown that local elections turnout is lower because of different
reasons. These are not only related to a lack of media coverage, but also
to a lack of competencies, and weaker laymen candidates in these second
order elections (see Kersting et al., 2009).
The following discussion will focus on providing deeper analysis of the
groups which in the surveys claimed they ‘will never vote at local elec-
tions’. Who is this group that would never vote at a local election? The
analysis shows that the reasons for non-voting differ within the countries.
In the following analysis France, England, Slovakia, and Croatia are not
included because they were not part of this comparative survey (6th wave
of the World Value Survey 2010-2014) or these data were not published.
The overall analysis confirms other studies that education and age are
relevant aspects for voting behaviour and voter turnout (see e.g. Dalton,
2008). There is a strong positive relationship between political interest
and voting. Citizens who have a higher interest in elections will not claim
that they will never vote. The same applies to people who trust political in-
stitutions; here a combined index for trust in government, political parti-
es, parliament, and administration is used. Members of clubs and associa-
tions are more likely to vote at local elections. Women are more likely to
claim that they will never vote. Social trust is not significant when it comes
to local elections. However, these overall results hide national differen-
ces. The logistic regression analysis shows that the models for individual
European countries differ. In Germany and the Netherlands, the level of
education is relevant to voting. Only in Germany and Romania the mem-
bership in clubs is related to voting in local elections. However, in all other
countries there is no difference when it comes to voting and non-voting in
the local elections. In all countries there is significant relationship betwe-
en age and voting abstention. Younger age groups vote locally less frequ-
ently. Social trust is not relevant to local voting behaviour, but we can see
that trust in institutions at the national level is significant in Germany,
the Netherlands, Poland, and Estonia. However, there is no significant
correlation in the other countries. The most interesting is the educational
level and voting. Only in Germany, the Netherlands and Romania high
education is significantly related to voting in local elections and low edu-
cation level to voter abstention. In all other countries non-voters at the
local level have all educational degrees. Thus, even well-educated citizens
claim that they will never vote in local elections. Meanwhile, in the first
group of countries, electoral apathy predominates as a reason for non-
326
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
voting and non-voters are not interested because of a lack of knowledge.
In all other countries there is also political cynicism. Well-educated and
poorly-educated citizens are not interested in local elections.
Table 2: Electoral Abstention at Local Government Election Logistic Re-
gression (‘Would never do’) Voting at Local Elections
Full
Model GER NED SWE ESP POL ROM SLO EST
(Intercept) 1.39*** 2.32*** 2.66*** 0.53 -0.92*0.61 -0.86 -0.72 0.97
(0.18) (0.34) (0.37) (0.57) (0.46) (0.57) (0.61) (0.48) (0.66)
Secondary
education -0.53*** -1.17*** -0.76*** -0.01 -0.03 -0.37 -1.44*0.33 -0.10
(0.09) (0.17) (0.21) (0.47) (0.31) (0.35) (0.59) (0.36) (0.56)
Higher
secondary
education
-0.58*** -0.96*** -0.95** -0.20 0.01 -0.43 -0.69 0.43 -0.60
(0.11) (0.23) (0.30) (0.39) (0.27) (0.46) (0.45) (0.50) (0.56)
University
education -0.89*** -1.54*** -1.18*** -0.53 0.02 -0.72 -1.55** 0.54 -0.80
(0.12) (0.32) (0.26) (0.46) (0.33) (0.48) (0.55) (0.39) (0.58)
Female 0.24*** -0.02 0.18 0.21 0.13 0.55*-0.13 0.52*0.57***
(0.07) (0.15) (0.16) (0.24) (0.21) (0.27) (0.29) (0.23) (0.16)
Age
centred -0.04*** -0.05*** -0.04*** -0.04*** -0.06*** -0.02** -0.04*** -0.04*** -0.02***
(0.00) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01)
Age
centred
squared
0.00*** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*** 0.00*** 0.00 0.00*0.00*
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Member
sports/
recreational
club
-0.52*** -1.09*** -0.35*-0.25 -0.22 -0.43 0.12 -0.35 -0.30
(0.08) (0.17) (0.17) (0.26) (0.31) (0.42) (0.43) (0.26) (0.23)
Political
interest
(Scale, 1–4)
-0.67*** -0.58*** -0.65*** -0.80*** -0.76*** -0.64*** -0.42*-0.76*** -0.69***
(0.04) (0.09) (0.09) (0.15) (0.14) (0.16) (0.17) (0.15) (0.11)
Trust oth-
ers yes -0.11 0.10 -0.16 -0.16 -0.29 -0.18 0.09 0.04 -0.19
(0.08) (0.15) (0.17) (0.25) (0.28) (0.35) (0.51) (0.29) (0.17)
Institutional
trust (In-
dex, 1–4)
-0.49*** -0.51*** -0.81*** -0.29 -0.01 -1.01*** -0.46 -0.41 -0.46***
327
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
(0.06) (0.13) (0.15) (0.21) (0.19) (0.25) (0.24) (0.23) (0.13)
AIC 6098.84 1224.74 1095.42 521.94 644.32 468.84 457.42 590.52 1050.74
BIC 6228.61 1285.44 1155.12 574.89 698.46 520.69 514.72 644.41 1108.26
Log
Likelihood -3031.42 -601.37 -536.71 -249.97 -311.16 -223.42 -217.71 -284.26 -514.37
Deviance 6184.31 1299.34 1073.42 501.26 636.52 448.63 425.08 568.52 1038.98
Num. obs. 9994 1842 1682 910 1014 824 1351 991 1380
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.Logistic Regression. Dep. var.: Vote at local elections
“would never do”. Standard errors in parentheses. Reference category education: No formal
or only primary education. Reference category countries: Estonia. Weights applied.
Education combined “complete” and “incomplete” categories. Trust index combines trust
in government, political parties, parliament, and administration (one dimensional, high
Cronbach’s Alpha).
Source: WVS, 2010–2014
3. Direct Democratic Participation
Direct democracy encompasses instruments such as mandatory referen-
da, plebiscites, and initiatives (see Qvotrup, 2014). Mandatory referenda
are more often held on constitutional reforms at the national level, where-
as plebiscites or council referenda are frequently an element of opposition
and oppositional parties. These are organized in a top-down manner wit-
hin the parliament or initiated by the executive (by the mayor). Initiatives
are an important element because they have agenda-setting functions and
they have stronger effects on the political behaviour of politicians and the
executive (Damocles’ sword). Referenda can be binding or consultatively
determined by constitutions or electoral law. There are different defined
legal settings such as quorums, time frames, and other legal requirements
for direct democracy. In the following sub-chapter a brief overview will be
presented. It focuses on legal settings of local direct democracy and on
the reality of implementation.
Participation in direct democracy focuses on direct decision-making and
on making thematic decisions directly, and not on the election of incum-
bents. Direct democracy is vote-centric. Direct democracy is en vogue
at the national level but internationally. The legal base for referenda at
the local level is to be found predominantly in European countries (and
Northern America). In some European countries, direct initiatives, or-
ganized through a bottom-up approach, seem to boom at the local level
(Schiller, Setälä, 2013; Qvotrup, 2014). In the 1990s, in many European
328
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
countries local referenda became part of the local Charters. However,
particularly in Southern European countries, such as Portugal and Gree-
ce, as well as in some countries in Eastern Europe, such as in the Baltic
region, referenda have not been well established yet. At the local level (as
well as at the national level) Switzerland is one of the few countries that
often use direct democracy instruments. With the exception of the agen-
da initiative (which exists and is used extensively in Poland), most direct
democracy instruments lead to a ballot vote. Here it is important whether
it is a binding or an advisory referendum. Consultative local referenda
have been introduced in Italy, Sweden, Bulgaria, Norway, and Finland.
Binding referenda exist in Switzerland, Germany, Slovenia, the Czech Re-
public, and Poland as well as France, Lichtenstein, and Slovakia.
The legal framework for (local) direct democracy exists in a number of co-
untries. However, the requirements to start referenda are sometimes very
restrictive (Schiller, 2012). In countries such as Switzerland, Germany,
Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Italy, and Sweden (since 2010)
requirements are liberal. Countries such as France, Lichtenstein, Slova-
kia, the Roman cantons in Switzerland, Bulgaria, Denmark, Norway, and
Finland have very restrictive procedures to start a local referendum espe-
cially in bigger cities (see Schiller, 2012; Schiller, Setälä, 2013). It seems
though, that binding referenda mostly have stronger restrictive thresholds
and quorums.
Mandatory referenda are very rare at the local level. There are only a few
mandatory referenda outside of Switzerland. Obligatory referenda at the
local level exist in Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Poland,
and the United Kingdom. These obligatory referenda are mostly connec-
ted to territorial reforms and mergers. In most other European countri-
es referenda are facultative, which means organized top-down (by the
mayor, the council) or bottom-up (by the citizen).
Plebiscites, which are initiated either by the mayor or by the municipal
council, exist in few countries. In Finland and Norway and to a certain
extent in Germany, municipal councils can start a referendum and coun-
cils use this instrument quite often.
Some scholars define the recall of the mayor as a form of an instrument of
local direct democracy. In Europe, a recall can be found in Austria where
it is initiated by the municipal council, and in Germany, Poland as well as
in Slovakia where between 10 per cent and 30 per cent of the electorate
can start the recall. With the introduction of direct election of mayors in
some countries the recall was often introduced. Accordingly, the recall is
also used at the local level in Uganda and Ethiopia.
329
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
In the Czech Republic, Germany, as well as in Italy, referenda were im-
plemented to restrict party dominance. Citizen initiatives to initiate local
referenda are possible in Germany, Austria, Finland, Switzerland, Italy,
the Czech Republic, and Hungary. In countries such as Denmark, Fin-
land, Norway, though, with the exception of Germany, there is almost no
local binding initiative. The initiative implies an important veto function
for civil society groups.
Countries with a strong parliamentary tradition are often hesitant to in-
troduce local direct democracy instruments. Until recently, Sweden, Uni-
ted Kingdom, and Italy did not use consultative referenda. This changed
with the introduction of advisory local referenda in Sweden and Italy,
and the referenda on the direct election of mayors in the UK. In France,
the legal regulation of local democracy was, until recently, strictly com-
mitted to the principle of representative democracy, which is historically
and conceptually probably rooted in the Jacobinist doctrine that the so-
vereignty of the nation, as embodied in the national parliament, does not
tolerate any rival source of decision-making. Furthermore, in practical
and local power terms, mayors, politically well entrenched in cumul de
mandats, were wary of local referenda as possibly challenging their local
powers. The 1992 and 1995 local referenda, although merely consulta-
tive in nature, were allowed by national legislation. It was only in 2003
that binding referenda (referendums décisionnels) were finally adopted in
national legislation, though with the proviso that the initiative for a local
referendum lies solely with the local council.
Here there is no space to discuss the impact of local referenda, but it can
be shown that with certain thresholds there is no inflation of referenda.
With thematic exclusions some topics are not on the agenda, such as mi-
nority rights. In general, referenda are sometimes focused on a particular
interest (not in my backyard initiatives), but can also be more conservati-
ve (against privatization), often focusing on fiscal austerity (against mega
sport events, big infrastructural projects such as airports etc.) (Schiller,
2011; Qvotrup, 2014).
Voter turnout at referenda is extremely low and it is mostly lower than
the turnout at local government elections. In the Czech Republic and
Germany, it is in general below 50 per cent. In some cases it does not
meet the obligatory quorums and participatory thresholds. However,
Switzerland shows that at local referenda citizens have more possibilities
to vote and fewer citizens are excluded from the elections and referenda
(see Serdult, 2012). When it comes to representativeness in referenda,
330
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
social composition of the voters is regarded as similar to local government
elections. Nevertheless, participation is generally lower and depends on
the appeal of the topic. Local politics is less interesting to young people,
but there are some exemptions because politics such as town planning or
sustainability can attract a higher percentage of the younger generation.
4. Conclusions
In the last decade, a democratic innovation has become obvious (Smith,
2009). The possibilities for political participation are growing (Fung,
Wright, 2003; Kersting et al., 2009). New information and communicati-
on technologies include online instruments often intermingling, interde-
pendently in blended participation. Some of the online instruments are
online imitations of existing offline instruments and in some cases they
enhance the quality of offline instruments.
Democratic innovation at the local level includes new ‘deliberative instru-
ments’ such as open forums, participatory budgeting, stakeholder confe-
rences, and sub local councils (see Dryzek, 2002; Kersting, 2013). Deli-
berative democracy focuses on communication and community-building
processes. It allows the development of social capital within the group.
It forms part of the decision-making process and is important for agenda
setting and the articulation of protest. However, because of the non-re-
presentativeness and the lack of legal requirements, its results are non-
binding and consultative. The critique of deliberative democracy is often
that it is mostly consultative.
In recent decades more direct democratic instruments have been imple-
mented at the local level, such as local referenda and initiatives. These
instruments of vote-centric numeric democracy are regulated (thematic
exclusion, thresholds) and can lead to binding decisions. It can be shown
that these often produce quite a few positive effects for local government
(Sword of Damocles against excessive local government spending).
The analysis shows that despite a decline in voter turnout because of a
lack of citizen duty (Dalton, 2008), local election and to a certain extent
referenda are still by far the most popular participatory instruments. In
most Eastern European countries, the voter turnout at the local level
is relatively high. In Western Europe, local elections are becoming less
attractive to mar ginalized groups (lower education and lower income) but
this marginalization is even stronger in the majority of other participa-
331
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
tory deliberative instruments. Additionally, in Eastern Europe the better
educated social groups are more cynical about politics and do not vote in
local elections.
The invented space – and here in most countries direct democracy is
included – is defined by constitutional and other legal frameworks and
regulations. The new deliberative instruments are consultative and cannot
lead to binding decisions. Exceptions can exist at the sub-local level and
within certain policy fields. Power still lies in the hands of elected repre-
sentatives such as councillors. The fact that deliberative instruments are
consultative does not mean that they are powerless. In order to make
them more sustainable, institutionalization and legal and constitutional
bases are necessary.
In order to include them into the process of binding decision-making pro-
cess, deliberative instruments have to be combined with ‘direct democra-
tic instruments’ such as referenda and initiatives. The question is how
to combine both to overcome certain fallacies in direct and deliberative
democracies to connect these participatory instruments (‘first talk, then
vote’; Goodin, 2008). This combination can reinvigorate local representa-
tive democracy and become the future of local governance.
References
Banks, Arthur S., Kenneth Wilson A. (2014) Cross-National Time-Series Data
Archive. Jerusalem: Databanks International
Barnes, Samuel H., Max Kaase (1979) Political Action: Mass Participation in
Five Western Democracies. Sage: Beverly Hills
Bennett, Lance, Alexandra Segerbert (2013) The Logic of Connective Action.
Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Cambridge:
Cambridge Studies on Contentious Politics
CCRE (2012) Local and Regional Government in Europe. Strasbourg: CCRE
Dalton, Russel J. (2008) Citizenship Norms and the Expansion of Political Parti-
cipation. Political Studies 56, 76–98
Dalton, Russel J., Susan E. Scarrow, Bruce E. Cain (ed.) (2003) Democracy Tran-
sformed? Expanding Citizen Access in Advanced Industrial Democracies.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Della Porta, Donatella (2013) Can Democracy Be Saved: Participation, Delibera-
tion and Social Movements. Cambridge: Polity Press
DETR (1999) A Better Quality of Life. www.environment.gov.uk/sustain able/qu-
ality/life
332
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Diaz, Nelson (2014) Hoped-for Democracy: 25 Years of Participatory Budgeting
Worldwide. Todo In Loco
Dryzek, John (2002) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Con-
testations. Oxford: Oxford University Press
ESS (2010-2012) European Social Survey 2010–12
Fung, Archon, Erik Olin Wright (eds.) (2003) Deepening Democracy. London:
Verso
Goodin, Robert E. (2008) Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Prac-
tice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Kersting, Norbert (2013) Online Participation: From ‘Invited’ to ‘Invented’ Spac-
es. International Journal of Electronic Governance 4: 270–280
Kersting, Norbert (2008) Politische Beteiligung. Einführung in dialogorientierte
Instrumente politischer und gesellschaftlicher Partizipation. Wiesbaden: VS
Verlag
Kersting, Norbert (2014) Online Beteiligung, Elektronische Partizipation – Qual-
itätskriterien aus Sicht der Politik. In: Katrin Voss (ed.) Internet und Partizi-
pation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, pp. 53–90
Kersting, Norbert (Hrsg.) (2012) Electronic Democracy. Opladen: Verlag Bar-
bara Budrich
Kersting, Norbert, Philippe Schmitter, Alexander Trechsel (2008) Die Zukunft
der Demokratie. In: Norbert Kersting (Hrsg.) Politische Beteiligung. Wies-
baden: VS Verlag, pp. 40–64
Norris, Pippa (2012) Political Mobilization and Social Networks. The Example of
the Arab Spring. In: Norbert Kersting (ed.) Electronic Democracy. Opladen:
Verlag Barbara Budrich, pp. 53–76
Qvotrup, Matt (2014) Referendums around the World. London: Palgrave
Schiller, Theo (2011) Local Direct Democracy in Europe. Wiesbaden: VS
Schiller, Theo, Maja Setälä (2013) Citizen Initiatives in Europe. London: Palgrave
Sintomer, Yves, Carsten Herzberg, N. Röcke (2008) Der Bürgerhaushalte in Eu-
ropa. Wiesbaden: VS
Smith, Graham (2009) Democratic Innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press
World Value Survey (2010–2014) World Value Survey – Data Sets. 6th Wave. Rep-
resentative Comparative Opinion Polls
333
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
LOCAL POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN EUROPE:
ELECTIONS AND REFERENDUMS
Summary
Political protests are growing in emerging and established democracies. Since the
1970s, the demand for political participation has become obvious. The 1990s
saw more open dialogue-oriented participatory instruments, which began to be
implemented in some countries (‘century of participation’). The proliferation
of participatory instruments in the field of talk centric deliberative democracies
has been called the ‘deliberative turn’ (Dryzek, 2002). A new push is also attrib-
uted to the open government data, the movement initiated by the US President
Obama’s government when it set up its open government data initiative in 2009.
These include online and offline participation (Kersting, 2013). It is a practice
that most new instruments of participation are implemented at the local level.
It is frequently argued that these deliberative forums do not lead to binding
decisions. However, compared to elections, the number of citizens participating
is rather small and selective. New forms of vote-centric direct democracy such
as referenda and other initiatives are implemented in some countries. The paper
presents a model of offline and online participation. The focus will be on rep-
resentative and direct democratic participation. Participation in elections and
proliferation of referenda and initiatives will be analysed. Participation in these
spheres of numeric democracy can lead to binding decisions. Legal frameworks
of different European countries is presented and compared. Is the turnout at the
local level small and declining? Who is included and who is excluded? In the
empirical part, the article predominantly uses the analyses of the latest survey
data from representative comparative opinion polls such as the World Value
Survey (WVS).
Key words: participation, Internet, referendum, elections, local government
334
Kersting, Norbert (2015) Local Political Participation in Europe ...
HKJU – CCPA 15(2): 319–334
CROATIAN AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
LOKALNA POLITIČKA PARTICIPACIJA U EUROPI:
IZBORI I REFERENDUMI
Sažetak
Politički protesti postaju učestaliji i u novim i u starim demokracijama. Od
1970-ih insistiranje na političkoj participaciji postaje očigledno. U nekim su
se zemljama tijekom 1990-ih počeli primjenjivati otvoreniji, dijalogu okrenu-
ti participativni instrumenti (stoljeće participacije). Bujanje participativnih
instrumenata u na pregovore usredotočenim predstavničkim demokracijama na-
ziva se predstavničkim zaokretom (Dryzek, 2002). Novi trend pripisuje se i
otvorenom pristupu državnim podacima, pokretu koji je inicirala vlada američ-
kog predsjednika Obame prilikom pokretanja svoje inicijative za otvoren pristup
vladinim podacima 2009. To uključuje participaciju na Internetu i izvan njega
(Kersting, 2013). Praksa je da se većina novih instrumenata participacije pri-
mjenjuje na lokalnoj razini. Često se prigovara da takvi forumi ne vode do obve-
zujućih rezultata. U usporedbi s izborima, broj građana koji sudjeluju u takvim
forumima vrlo je malen i selektivan. Novi oblici izravne demokracije usmjerene
na birače, poput referenduma i drugih inicijativa, primjenjuju se u određenim
državama. Rad analizira model participacije putem Interneta i izvan njega. U
središtu pozornosti je predstavnička i izravna demokratska participacija. Ana-
lizira se sudjelovanje na izborima i bujanje referenduma i drugih inicijativa.
Participacija u tim sferama brojčane demokracije može dovesti do obvezujućih
rezultata. Prikazuju se i uspoređuju pravni okviri u različitim europskim ze-
mljama. Je li izlaznost na lokalnoj razini mala te smanjuje li se i dalje? Tko
je uključen, a tko isključen? U empirijskom dijelu rad se uglavnom koristi ana-
lizama najnovijih podataka dobivenih iz komparativnih anketa poput World
Value Survey (WVS).
Ključne riječi: participacija, Internet, referendum, izbori, lokalna samouprava
