IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijurrs/v32y2008i2p473-491.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Electoral Impact of Direct‐Democratic Practices

Author

Listed:
  • EVA ANDUIZA
  • JOAN FONT
  • PAU MAS
  • SERGI DE MAYA

Abstract

In recent years there has been a growing interest in the integration of mechanisms of direct citizen participation in the institutional structure of representative democracy, particularly at the local level. This essay examines the electoral impact of mechanisms of direct citizen participation. Although it is often considered that participatory schemes can be a means to achieve electoral success in the hands of politicians seeking re‐election, quantitative analyses of 65 Spanish municipalities demonstrate that electoral success is far from being an immediate consequence of direct democratic practices (DDPs). The qualitative analysis of four cases shows that electoral consequences directly attributable to participatory devices depend on their design and on how they fit into the whole political process. Participatory processes that are too rigid and those, especially, that generate expectations that cannot be translated into real policies may end up having a negative effect. On the other hand, DDPs may account for network‐building and improved information among citizens that, in turn, may have electoral consequences. DDPs are thus neither a blessing nor a cure per se in their electoral effects. Instead, as with representative democracy, their consequences and success will ultimately depend upon their procedural dimension. Résumé Ces dernières années ont connu un intérêt croissant pour l’intégration de mécanismes de participation directe des citoyens dans le cadre institutionnel de la démocratie participative, notamment au niveau local. Cet article examine l’impact électoral des mécanismes de participation directe. Même si on estime souvent que les systèmes participatifs peuvent permettre la victoire d’hommes politiques en quête de réélection, des analyses quantitatives sur 65 municipalités espagnoles montrent que le succès électoral est loin de résulter automatiquement des pratiques de démocratie directe (PDD). L’analyse qualitative de quatre cas révèle que les incidences électorales imputables directement aux dispositifs participatifs dépendent du concept utilisé et de la manière dont ceux‐ci s’intègrent dans le processus politique global. Si les démarches participatives sont trop rigides, et notamment si elles suscitent des attentes qui ne peuvent se traduire dans des politiques publiques concrètes, elles sont susceptibles d’avoir, en fin de compte, un effet négatif. En revanche, les PDD peuvent expliquer la construction de réseaux et l’amélioration de l’information entre les citoyens, ce qui peut influer sur des élections. Les PDD ne sont donc ni une bénédiction ni une malédiction en termes d’incidences électorales. A l’instar de celles de la démocratie représentative, leurs conséquences et leur réussite vont finalement dépendre de leur dimension procédurale.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Anduiza & Joan Font & Pau Mas & Sergi De Maya, 2008. "The Electoral Impact of Direct‐Democratic Practices," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 473-491, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:32:y:2008:i:2:p:473-491
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00764.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00764.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00764.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:32:y:2008:i:2:p:473-491. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.