Voter turnout and civic
participation in the EU
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Overview
1. Relevance of participation
2. Turnout in EP elections
-
Development since 1979
Comparison with NP elections
Types of voters
Multivariate analysis
3. Non-electoral participation in Europe
-
Frequencies
Dimensions of non-electoral participation
Multivariate analysis
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Relevance of participation
• Two important approaches in theories of democracy:
– Input-oriented approaches:
aim: maximum of turnout/participation
low turnout/participation: declining support, symptom for a crisis
– Output-oriented approaches:
elections as an instrument for the allocation of power and
legitimation of the political system
low turnout/participation: satisfaction and consent with the
political system
 General evaluation of turnout/participation level is quite
difficult.
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Turnout in EP election 2004
100.0
90.8
90.0
89.0
82.4
80.0
73.1
compulsory voting
71.2
70.0
63.4
58.8
60.0
48.4 47.9
50.0
40.0
EU-turnout: 45.7%
45.1
43.0 42.8 42.4
41.3
39.4 39.3 38.8 38.6 38.5
37.8
28.3 28.3 26.8
30.0
20.9
20.0
17.0
10.0
0.0
BE LU MT IT CY EL IE LT DK ES DE FR AT LV FI NL UK PT HU SE CZ SI EE PL SK
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
100.0
Development of EPE turnout
(selected countries)
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1979
1984
BE
FP6 CivicActive
1989
NL
DE
1994
IT
IE
UK
1999
ES
FI
2004
EU
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Comparison of EPE and NPE
turnout
10.0
LT
0.0
LU
IE
BE
-10.0
IT
EL MT
-20.0
-30.0
CY
PL
LV FR
UK
PT HU
CZ FI
EE ES SI
DE
-40.0
AT DK
SK
NL
SE
-50.0
Difference EPE 04-closest NPE
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Database for analysis of turnout
• Mass survey from Intune-project
http://www.intune.it/
• Timing: March-April 2007
• 17 European countries: AT, BE, BG, DE, DK, EE,
EL, ES, FR, HU, IT, PL, PT, SI, SK, SR, UK
• Turnout: last EPE, last NPE
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Logistic regression: Turnout EPE
• Nagelkerke‘s R2= 0.252
• Most important predictors:
– Perceived duty to vote (EU/Nat.)
– Strength of party identification
– Media consumption
– EU support
– Internal efficacy
– EU identity
– Trust in EU institutions
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Voter types
BE
9.9 1.5
EL
13.0
IT
7.4
DK
7.8
1.8
1.9 6.2
3.5
1.1
2.5
13.9
2.3
8.7
AT
2.0
9.3
69.9
69.0
20.5
16.4
SI
16.0
3.0
PT
15.8
3.3
SK
15.9
4.2
3.5
18.0
68.8
12.2
67.9
14.5
66.6
16.3
64.6
16.3
2.8
63.6
24.1
23.7
EE
70.5
17.0
FR
UK
72.5
5.5
11.7
DE
74.9
18.6
15.2
HU
78.8
14.2
13.1
ES
86.8
4.9
22.1
31.7
PL
14.9
Europe
3.1
2.9
12.9
West
0%
2.8
10%
FP6 CivicActive
49.3
19.9
45.2
16.0
26.6
East
55.0
66.2
3.7
17.6
52.0
15.7
20%
68.5
30%
EPE-/NPE-
40%
50%
EPE+/NPE-
60%
EPE-/NPE+
70%
80%
EPE+/NPE+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
90%
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
100%
Logistic regression: EPE-only (1)
versus NPE-only (0) voters
• Nagelkerke‘s R2= 0.103
• Most important predictors:
– Strength of party identification
– EU Identity
– Satisfaction with democracy EU
– EU Benefit
– Class
– Perceived economic situation
– Urbanisation
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
-
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Logistic regression: EPE- and
NPE-voters (1) vs. NPE-only (0) voters
• Nagelkerke‘s R2= 0.134
• Most important predictors:
– Perceived duty to vote (EU/nat.)
– Media consumption
– Strength of party identification
– EU Identity
– EU Support
– Perceived economic situation
– Internal efficacy
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
+
+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Conclusions turnout EPE
• Important variables for turnout in EPE:
– Perceived duty to vote
– Strength of party identification
– EU Identity/Support/Trust
• Possibilities to boost turnout in EPE:
– Raise perceived importance of European level
– Emphasise duty to vote
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Database for analysis of civic
participation
• ESS, Round 1, 2002/03
• 17 EU member states: AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, ES,
FI, FR, GB, GR, HU, IE, IT, LU, NL, PL, PT, SE, SI
• 11 forms of non-electoral participation: contact
politician, work in party, work in organisation,
display badge, sign petition, public
demonstration, boycott product, buy product,
donate money, illegal protest, party member
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Rel. frequencies of non-electoral
activities in the EU
30.0
25.5
24.2
25.0
20.0
16.9
14.5
15.0
13.5
9.3
10.0
7.4
6.6
4.0
5.0
3.3
1.3
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
illegal protest
party member
work in party
donate money
display badge
public
demonstration
work in
organisation
contact
politician
boycott
product
buy product
sign petition
0.0
Number of non-electoral
activities in EU countries
SE
FI
22.4
22.7
27.1
20.2
24.3
19.0
37.2
FR
21.1
39.7
AT
18.4
36.5
DE
21.1
35.2
GB
26.2
31.4
DK
16.3
26.1
25.0
25.0
24.6
23.8
13.2
19.4
46.7
23.1
CZ
46.2
24.9
12.2
13.2
14.2
10.1
72.4
13.9
68.3
17.0
74.4
HU
10%
20%
FP6 CivicActive
15.7
7.4
76.7
SI
16.7
14.8
PT
PL
17.4
13.5
72.5
GR
19.4
8.6
66.8
IT
20.5
15.7
NL
0%
26.9
21.2
58.3
ES
15.0
15.1
49.0
EU
27.1
14.9
23.3
45.1
IE
14.6
17.6
26.3
37.8
BE
29.6
13.6
26.0
34.2
LU
34.7
30%
40%
0 modes
1 mode
11.0
5.1
8.2
5.2
8.0
7.2
6.5
8.6
6.1
15.3
50%
2 modes
60%
70%
80%
5.0
90%
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
more than 2 modes
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
5.3
100%
Dimensions of non-electoral
participation in the EU
Variable
Party member
Work in party
Donate money
Contact politician
Work in organisation
Buy product
Boycott product
Sign petition
Illegal protest
Public demonstration
Display badge
Eigenvalue
Explained
variance (%)
FP6 CivicActive
1: Conventional
0.761
0.731
0.597
0.497
0.414
2: Consumerism
3: Protest
0.816
0.794
0.568
0.734
0.707
0.530
2.06
1.87
1.58
18.8
17.0
14.4
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Multivariate regression:
conventional participation
• R2= 0.143
• Most important predictors:
– Strength of party identification
– Internal efficacy
– Social participation
– Perceived duty to participate
– Interest in politics
– Woman
– Age
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
+
+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Multivariate regression:
consumerism
• R2= 0.199
• Most important predictors:
– Social participation
– Woman
– Interest in politics
– Education
– Income
– Internal efficacy
– Left-right-scale
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
+
+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Multivariate regression:
protest activities
• R2= 0.034
• Most important predictors:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Social participation
Left-right-scale
Age
Strength of party identification
Income
Internal efficacy
Religious attendance
Perceived duty to participate
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Multivariate regression:
participation index
• R2= 0.289
• Most important predictors:
– Social participation
– Internal efficacy
– Strength of party identification
– Interest in politics
– Left-right-scale
– Education
– Income
FP6 CivicActive
+
+
+
+
+
+
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher
Conclusions non-electoral
participation
• Only minorities participate in non-electoral
participation
• Social participation as important predictor
for all non-electoral forms of participation
• Besides social participation: very
heterogeneous explanations
FP6 CivicActive
Prof. Dr. Hans Rattinger
Dipl.-Pol. Markus Steinbrecher