5 political participation - harvard university...activism, including the spread of demonstrations...
TRANSCRIPT
Modes of Political Participation
StructureStructure
I. Theoretical overview: • Civic decline or evolution in political activism?p
II. Evidence1. Trends in party membership & civic activism p y p2. Rise of protest and cause-oriented politics3. Generational patterns of activism
III. Conclusions• Causes & consequences of trends?
ConceptsConcepts
Research on political activism compares the ways that citizens participate, the processes that y p p , plead them to do so, and the consequences of these acts.Readings:– Dalton Ch 3– Dalton Ch 3– Norris ‘Political activism’ online chapter
ClassicsClassics
Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba’s The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (1963),Sidney Verba and Norman Nie’s Participation in America (1972), Sid V b N H Ni d J Ki ’ Sidney Verba, Norman H. Nie, and Jae-on Kim’s Participation and Political Equality: A Seven-Nation Comparison (1978), and p ( ),Samuel Barnes and Max Kaase’s Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies (1979).
Democratic Phoenix
Newer themesNewer themes(i) Growing recognition of the importance of the institutional ( ) g g p
context of formal rules & multilevel analysis eg for electoral turnout;
(ii) Widespread erosion of party membership in established (ii) Widespread erosion of party membership in established democracies;
(iii) Revived interest in voluntary associations and social trust spurred by theories of social capital; andspurred by theories of social capital; and
(iv) The expansion of diverse forms of cause-oriented forms of activism, including the spread of demonstrations and protests,
liti f i l i t t d consumer politics, professional interest groups, and more diffuse new social movements and transnational advocacy networks.
Democratic Phoenix
The civic decline thesisThe civic decline thesis
Half-empty ballot box? (Wattenberg)Desertion of party members? (Dalton Mair)Desertion of party members? (Dalton, Mair)Partisan dealignment? H h i i ll ?Hemorrhaging union rolls?Emptying church pews?Anemic voluntary organizations? (Putnam)Rising political cynicism? (Nye et al)Rising political cynicism? (Nye et al)
Model of changeModel of changeFigure 1: Typology of the evolution of political action
REPERTOIRES
Citizen-oriented
repertoires, including
voting party work and
Cause-oriented
repertoires, including
consumer politicsvoting, party work and
contact activity
consumer politics,
demonstrations and
petitions
Traditional voluntary associations, including
churches, unions and
political parties
Older generation
ES
AG
ENC
I
New social movements
and advocacy
networks, including
environmental and
Younger generation
humanitarian
organizations
If participation is changingIf participation is changing…
Causes?– Long-term processes of societal modernization?
• Growing educational & civic skills• Decline of deferential loyalty to hierarchical institutions• Gradual ‘bottom up’ generational shift in ‘critical citizens’Gradual bottom up generational shift in critical citizens
– Result of changing institutions of representative democracy?• ‘Top down’ explanations• Globalization, decentralization & role of nation state• Growth of cross-cutting issues not accommodated by parties• Rational response to context of choices and channels of influencep
If participation is changingIf participation is changing…
Consequences?1. Social inequality?
» Greater civic skills, more demanding acts?» Who participates by class, income, education, gender, ethnicity
2 Quality of deliberative democracy2. Quality of deliberative democracy» F-to-f interaction, on-going co-operation, social trust?» Rise of more demanding citizens?
3 F ?3. For governance?» Stability and violence?» Fragmentation of policy process?
Evidence: civic activismEvidence: civic activism
US TurnoutUS TurnoutUS Turnout 1932-2000
(Presidential Vote/VAP)
40 0
60.0
80.0
%
0.0
20.0
40.0%
1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000
Source: U.S.Census Bureau 1932-1996.
US Turnout: 59.5% in 2000, 63.8% in 2004 (Vote/VAP) Source: US Census Bureau www.census.gov
Trends official party membersTrends official party membersTable 6.1 Phoenix
Change in N mbersParty membership as a
% of the electorate, late-1990s
% Change (i) Change in Numbers of Members
Change in Numbers as Percentage of
Original MembershipFrance 1978-1999 1.6 - 3.48 - 1,122,128 - 64.59
Italy 1980-1998 4.0 - 5.61 - 2,091,887 - 51.54
US 1980-1998 1 9 - 2.20 - 853,156 - 50.391.9Norway 1980-1997 7.3 - 8.04 - 218,891 - 47.49
Czech Rep 1993-1999 3.9 - 3.10 - 225,200 - 41.32
Finland 1980-1998 9.6 - 6.09 - 206,646 - 34.03
Netherlands 1980-2000 2.5 - 1.78 - 136,459 - 31.67
Austria 1980-1999 17.7 - 10.82 - 446,209 - 30.21
Switzerland 1977-1997 6.4 - 4.28 - 118,800 - 28.85
Sweden 1980-1998 5.5 - 2.87 - 142,533 - 28.05
Denmark 1980-1998 5.2 - 2.16 - 70,385 - 25.52
Ireland 1980-1998 - 1 86 - 27 856 - 24 47Ireland 1980-1998 3.1 - 1.86 - 27,856 - 24.47
Belgium 1980-1999 6.5 - 2.42 - 136,382 - 22.10
Germany 1980-1999 2.9 - 1.59 - 174,967 - 8.95
Hungary 1990-1999 2.1 + 0.04 + 8,300 + 5.02
Portugal 1980-2000 3.9 - 0.29 + 50,381 + 17.013.9Slovakia 1994-2000 4.1 + 0.82 + 37,777 + 29.63
Greece 1980-1998 6.8 + 3.58 + 375,000 + 166.67
Spain 1980-2000 3.4 + 2.22 + 808,705 + 250.73
ALL ABOVE
Party membershipParty membership
Decline in many Western nationsBroader erosion of partisanshipBroader erosion of partisanshipYet substantial cross-national variationsD i f b hi tt ?Does erosion of membership matter?– For party in government?– For party finance and staff? – For party or campaign activism?
Campaign Activism, US 1952-2000
20
25
15
20
10
15
5
10
01952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000
Meeting Party Work Button Money
Trends in Gross Union DensityTrends in Gross Union DensitySource: Bernhard Ebbinghaus and Jelle Visser. 2000. Trade Unions in Western Europe since 1945. London: Macmillan. CD-Rom.
Note: Net density I (Total union membership as a share of the gainfully employed wage and salary earners.)
40
60
80
Net
den
sity
R-Square = 0.31
Austria Belgium Denmark Finland
R-Square = 0.67
R-Square = 0.43R-Square = 0.89
20
N
France Germany Italy Neth
60
80
sity
Norway Switz UK
20
40
60
Net
den
s
R-Square = 0.72
R-Square = 0.41
R-Square = 0.13
R-Square = 0.77
20
40
60
80
Net
den
sity
R-Square = 0.53R-Square = 0.02
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
20
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
R-Square = 0.93
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
U n i o n D e n s i t y , 1 9 9 5
B e l a r u s S w e d e n
0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 1 0 0
S w e d e n A z e r b a i j a n
R u s s i a n F e d e r a t i o n I c e l a n d
D e n m a r k F i n l a n d
M a l t a C h i n a
C y p r u s H u n g a r y S l o v a k i a
N o r w a y B u l g a r i a
R o m a n i a L u x e m b o u r g
B e l g i u mB e l g i u m A u s t r i a C z e c h R e p u b l i c
I r e l a n d B r a z i l
C a n a d a M e x i c o
I t a l y E g y p t G e r m a n y
A u s t r a l i a T a i w a n
P o l a n d E s t o n i a U n i t e d K i n g d o m G h a n aG h a n a M a u r i t i u s
A r g e n t i n a G u y a n a
N i c a r a g u a N e w Z e a l a n d I s r a e l P h i l i p p i n e s
N a m i b i a T u r k e y S e n e g a l N e t h e r l a n d s S o u t h A f r i c a
S w i t z e r l a n d S w a z i l a n d
P o r t u g a l Union DensitP o r t u g a l J a p a n
T a n z a n i a D o m i n i c a n R e p u b l i c N i g e r i a C a p e V e r d e K e n y a
B o l i v i a C h i l e
G r e e c e V e n e z u e l a C a m e r o o n
P a n a m a C a n a l Z o n e Z i m b a b w e M a l i S i n g a p o r e
Union Density:
Table 9.1S i n g a p o r e
C o s t a R i c a C o t e D ' I v o i r e
U n i t e d S t a t e s Z a m b i a
U r u g u a y B o t s w a n a S p a i n
E c u a d o r T u n i s i a
P a r a g u a y K o r e a , R e p u b l i c O f
P e r u E l S a l v a d o r E r i t r e a C o l o m b i aC o l o m b i a
F r a n c e P a k i s t a n I n d i a
M o r o c c o H o n d u r a s G u a t e m a l a B a n g l a d e s h E t h i o p i a U g a n d a
T h a i l a n d M a u r i t a n i a I n d o n e s i a G u i n e a G a b o n
InterpretationInterpretation
No simple decline in union membership across Western EuropepSubstantial cross-national variations worldwideInstitutional explanations not secular trendsInstitutional explanations not secular trends
Secularization TrendsBelgium Den France GB
Secularization Trends% Church attendance Eurobarometer 1970-2000
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
chur
ch
Belgium Den France GB
Germany Greece Ire Italy
20 0
40.0
60.0
80.0
chur
ch
Lux Neth NI Portugal
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
chur
ch
Spain
20.0
c
60.0
80.0
rch
1970 1980 1990
year
20.0
40.0chur
Interpretation?Interpretation?
Evidence of secularization in W.EuropeDevelopment is linked to secularizationDevelopment is linked to secularizationPolitical implications?
Experience of Political ActivismpSource: WVS mid-1990s
% ‘Have done’ All
Discuss politics 70.0
Voting turnout 64.5
Civic activism 62.4
Signed a petition * 28.5
Att d d d t ti * 15 7Attended demonstrations* 15.7
Joined in boycott * 8.9
Active union member 5.4Active union member 5.4
Joined unofficial strike * 5.0
Active party member 4.6
Occupied buildings * 1.6
Rise of Protest PoliticsRise of Protest Politics% ‘Have done’ in 8 postindustrial societies: WVS
Mid 1970 1980 1990 id 1990Mid-1970s 1980s 1990 mid-1990s
Signed petition 32 46 54 60
Demonstrated 9 14 18 17
Consumer Boycott 5 8 11 15
Unofficial Strike 2 3 4 4Unofficial Strike 2 3 4 4
Occupied buildings 1 2 2 2
Source: World Values Surveys
Protest & democracyProtest & democracy
Protest & econ developmentProtest & econ development
Generational shifts?Generational shifts?
Age differences?Age differences?
Age differences?– If so three possible causes:If so three possible causes:
• Generational effects, • Period effects, and • Lifecycle effects.
European Social Survey 2002p y15 European nations (22)
Type of actsType of acts
Citizen-oriented repertoires– Voted– Contacted a politician or official– Donated money to political organization– Party member– Worked for a political party
Cause-oriented repertoires– Bought products for political reasons– Signed a petition
B tt d t i d t – Boycotted certain products – Lawfully demonstrated– Took part in illegal protest
Age profile of activistsAge profile of activistsAll Younger
(i)Middle-
Aged (ii)Older
(iii)Age Gap
(i-iii)
18-29 30-59 60+
Citizen-oriented repertoires
Voted 72 50 79 84 -34
Contacted a politician or official 16 12 19 14 -2Contacted a politician or official 16 12 19 14 -2
Donated money to political organization 8 7 9 8 -1
Party member 6 3 6 8 -4
Worked for a political party 5 4 5 5 -1
Cause oriented repertoiresCause-oriented repertoires
Bought products for political reasons 24 24 28 17 7
Signed a petition 22 23 24 15 8
Boycotted certain products 15 14 17 11 3Boycotted certain products 15 14 17 11 3
Lawfully demonstrated 6 9 6 3 6
Took part in illegal protest 0.9 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.8
Citizen oriented actsCitizen-oriented acts1.6
1.4
activ
ism
sca
le 1.2
1.0Major Region
zen-
orient
ed a
c
.8
.6
Nordic Europe
Northern Europe
1980-19851970 1979
1960-19691950 1959
1940-19491930 1939
1920-1929
Mea
n Citiz
.4
.2
Mediterranean Europe
Postcommunist Europ
Cases weighted by DWEIGHT
Cohort
1970-19791950-19591930-1939
Citizen oriented acts by cohortC h R bli Fi l d G H
Citizen-oriented acts by cohort
0.5
1.0
1.5
Citiz
en-orie
nted
act
Czech Republic Finland Greece Hungary
C
Ireland Israel Netherlands Norway
0.5
1.0
1.5
zen-or
iented
act
Poland Portugal Slovenia Spain
Citiz
1.0
1.5
n-or
iented
act
Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
0.5
Citiz
en-
1.0
1.5
iented
act
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort
0.5
Citiz
en-orie
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort
Mean age of activistsMean age of activists
4850
52
50
55
40 40
44 44 4446
47 4748
45
40 40
35
40
d y s s n s n y y d r
Demonstrated
Protes
ted illeg
ally
Boycott
ed prod
ucts
Bough
t prod
ucts
Signed
a pe
tition
ALL Res
ponde
nts
Contacte
d a po
litician
Donated
mon
ey
Worked f
or part
yVote
d
Party m
embe
r
Note: Whether the respondent did these acts during the previous 12-monthsSource: The European Social Survey, 2002
Cause oriented actsCause–oriented acts
1.6
1.4
1 2
ctiv
ism
sca
le 1.2
1.0
.8Major Region
ause
-orie
nted
ac
.6
.4
Nordic Europe
Northern Europe
1980-19851970-1979
1960-19691950-1959
1940-19491930-1939
1920-1929
Mea
n C
a
.2
0.0
Mediterranean Europe
Postcommunist Europ
Cases weighted by DWEIGHT
Cohort
1970 19791950 19591930 1939
Czech Republic Finland Greece Hungary
Cause-0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
Caus
e-or
ient
ed a
ctCzech Republic Finland Greece Hungary
Cause-oriented
Ireland Israel Netherlands Norway
0 0
0.5
1.0
1.5
Caus
e-or
ient
ed a
ct
acts by cohort
Poland Portugal Slovenia Spain0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
Cau
se-o
rient
ed a
ct
cohortSweden Switzerland United Kingdom0.0
C
0.5
1.0
1.5
ause
-orie
nted
act
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort
0.0
C
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Cohort
Age of membersAge of members
525455
43
46 46 4647 47
4849 49 49
45
50
4243
40
45
35
Sport
ation
alnd
ents
Union
mental
Hobby
ssion
alnit
arian
sumer
Church
Other
Party
al clu
b
SEdu
cat
ALL R
espon
d UEnv
ironm H
Profes
sHum
anit
Consu Ch O
Social
Membership in associationsMembership in associationsci
atio
ns
3.0
2.5
volu
ntar
y as
soc
2.0
1.5Major Region
Tot.
mem
bers
in
1.0
.5
Nordic Europe
Northern Europe
Mediterranean Europe
1980-19851970-1979
1960-19691950-1959
1940-19491930-1939
1920-1929
Mea
n T
0.0
Mediterranean Europe
Postcommunist Europ
Cases weighted by DWEIGHT
Cohort
ConclusionsConclusions
From the politics of loyalties to the politics of choice?– Citizen oriented action peak in middle age– Cause-oriented acts most common among young Cause oriented acts most common among young
people – Associations: Mixed patternp– Young people not more engaged in new social
movements