IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v7y2019i2p173-186.html

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

Author

Listed:
  • Henrik Serup Christensen

    (Social Science Research Institute—Samforsk, Åbo Akademi University, Finland)

Abstract

Complementing representative democracy with direct-democratic instruments is perceived to boost levels of political trust. This was why Finland in 2012 introduced an agenda initiative, which gives citizens the right to propose legislation and thereby provides citizens a say between elections. However, it remains unclear whether involvement in such mechanisms helps restore political trust and what factors shape developments in political trust during involvement. This article contributes to this research agenda by examining how using the Finnish agenda initiative affected developments in political trust. The study uses two surveys to determine developments in political trust: a four-wave panel survey (n = 809 - 1419) and a cross-sectional survey (n = 481) where the perceived change method is used. The results suggest that using the citizens’ initiative did not necessarily cause positive developments in political trust. Nevertheless, positive developments in political trust occurred when users achieved their intended aim and/or the process was seen as fair, which shows that direct-democratic instruments can increase levels of political trust under some circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Henrik Serup Christensen, 2019. "Boosting Political Trust with Direct Democracy? The Case of the Finnish Citizens’ Initiative," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 173-186.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v7:y:2019:i:2:p:173-186
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v7i2.1811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1811
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v7i2.1811?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo Blaug, 2002. "Engineering Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 50(1), pages 102-116, March.
    2. Joseph L. Arvai & Ann Froschauer, 2010. "Good decisions, bad decisions: the interaction of process and outcome in evaluations of decision quality," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 845-859, October.
    3. Anna Kern, 2017. "The Effect of Direct Democratic Participation on Citizens’ Political Attitudes in Switzerland: The Difference between Availability and Use," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 16-26.
    4. Joachim Åström & Magnus E. Jonsson & Martin Karlsson, 2017. "Democratic Innovations: Reinforcing or Changing Perceptions of Trust?," International Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(7), pages 575-587, June.
    5. Stefan Voigt & Lorenz Blume, 2015. "Does direct democracy make for better citizens? A cautionary warning based on cross-country evidence," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 391-420, December.
    6. Ellen Quintelier & Jan W. Deth, 2014. "Supporting Democracy: Political Participation and Political Attitudes. Exploring Causality Using Panel Data," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62, pages 153-171, April.
    7. Christopher Carman, 2010. "The Process is the Reality: Perceptions of Procedural Fairness and Participatory Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 731-751, October.
    8. Hetherington, Marc J., 1998. "The Political Relevance of Political Trust," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(4), pages 791-808, December.
    9. Curini, Luigi & Jou, Willy & Memoli, Vincenzo, 2012. "Satisfaction with Democracy and the Winner/Loser Debate: The Role of Policy Preferences and Past Experience," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 241-261, April.
    10. Anna Kern, 2017. "The Effect of Direct Democratic Participation on Citizens’ Political Attitudes in Switzerland: The Difference between Availability and Use," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 16-26.
    11. Christopher Carman, 2010. "The Process is the Reality: Perceptions of Procedural Fairness and Participatory Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 731-751, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henrik Serup Christensen, 2019. "Boosting Political Trust with Direct Democracy? The Case of the Finnish Citizens’ Initiative," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 173-186.
    2. Luis Guirola & Gonzalo Rivero, 2022. "Polarization contaminates the link with partisan and independent institutions: evidence from 138 cabinet shifts," Working Papers 2237, Banco de España.
    3. Luís Aguiar-Conraria & Pedro C. Magalhães, 2018. "Procedural Fairness, the Economy, and Support for Political Authorities (Forthcoming at Political Psychology (submitted pre-print version))," NIPE Working Papers 05/2018, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    4. Ziller, Conrad & Helbling, Marc, 2019. "Antidiscrimination Laws, Policy Knowledge and Political Support," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 1027-1044.
    5. Pedro C. Magalhães & Luís Aguiar-Conraria, 2017. "Procedural Fairness and Economic Voting," NIPE Working Papers 07/2017, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    6. Salil Benegal & Mikhael Shor, 2016. "Procedural Justice and Political Risk," Working papers 2016-30, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    7. Ankush Goyal & Rajender Kumar, 2022. "Does Social Welfare Programmes Influence Households Trust in Local Administration and Their Political Participation? Evidence from the MGNREG Scheme in India," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 16(3), pages 602-617, December.
    8. Marlene Mauk, 2022. "Electoral integrity matters: how electoral process conditions the relationship between political losing and political trust," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1709-1728, June.
    9. Zhu, Zhongkun & Ma, Wanglin & Sousa-Poza, Alfonso & Leng, Chenxin, 2020. "The effect of internet usage on perceptions of social fairness: Evidence from rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    10. Jungin Kim, 2021. "The Effects and Antecedents of Perceived Fairness in the Deliberative Process for Sustainable Citizens’ Participation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-12, July.
    11. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    12. Alfred Wong & Sofia Fang & Dean Tjosvold, 2012. "Developing business trust in government through resource exchange in China," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 1027-1043, December.
    13. Manuel Hensmans, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/321232, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    14. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Georgina Blakeley, 2010. "Governing Ourselves: Citizen Participation and Governance in Barcelona and Manchester," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 130-145, March.
    16. Marija Džunić & Nataša Golubović & Srđan Marinković, 2020. "Determinants Of Institutional Trust In Transition Economies: Lessons From Serbia," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 65(225), pages 135-162, April – J.
    17. Faisal Z. Ahmed, 2017. "Remittances and incumbency: Theory and evidence," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 22-47, March.
    18. Joachim Åström, 2020. "Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 84-93.
    19. Yann Algan & Pierre Cahuc & Marc Sangnier, 2016. "Trust and the Welfare State: the Twin Peaks Curve," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(593), pages 861-883, June.
    20. Erica Poma & Barbara Pistoresi, 2024. "Government Support Measures, Trust in Institutions and Effects on Satisfaction with Democracy During the COVID-19 Outbreak," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 66(2), pages 355-387, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:poango:v7:y:2019:i:2:p:173-186. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.