Not happy with the election result? Don't worry. Election day is not the only opportunity to influence politics. A new study based on data from 270,000 people in 40 countries shows that people who get involved in politics between elections - through activities such as petitions, demonstrations, boycotts and contacting politicians - are more likely to have their views represented in politics than those who do not.
Political scientists from Lund University and the University of Gothenburg, among others, have investigated whether certain forms of political participation are more effective than others. This was achieved by cross-referencing various survey databases on political participation with data about people's views on policy proposals, as well as whether these were implemented within five years. The study is based on a very large dataset comprising 270,000 people in 40 countries who took part in various surveys between 1996 and 2016.
Minor differences between voters and non-voters
One much-discussed finding concerns the impact of voting. In the data, 74 per cent had voted and 26 per cent had not. When the researchers compared the groups, they found that voters' views were no more reflected in the policies pursued than those of non-voters.
Voting does not, therefore, correlate with better political representation. However, other forms of political activity did have an association with policy outcomes, such as demonstrating, organising petitions, boycotts and contacting politicians. The more political activities a person takes part in between elections, the greater the chance that they will get the policies they prefer five years later.
"This supports the hypothesis that it is in fact activism that brings about outcomes, but we cannot say for certain that this is the case," says Jesper Lindqvist, a political scientist at Lund University.
The researchers can therefore demonstrate that activism is linked to better representation, but not that it is activism itself that causes it. The researchers therefore excluded factors that might also contribute to a person being better represented in politics, such as education, income, age, gender or geographical location.
"These socio-economic factors played a certain role, but even when they were taken into account, the link between political activism and better representation remained," says Jesper Lindqvist.
Several possible explanations
Another possible explanation highlighted by the researchers is that politically active individuals have a better understanding of how politics works and that their views are more often in line with those of decision-makers. Consequently, they may also feel that they have greater scope to influence policy.
"Political activism can be a sign of broader social change. When people start holding demonstrations and organising petitions, it serves as a signal to politicians that public opinion is shifting."
"Our study provides a good basis for further research," continues Jesper Lindqvist, "We have identified some fundamental correlations, but you cannot take them too far. Many people wonder whether it is worth, for example, taking part in demonstrations, and some evidence suggests that, yes, it is."
But what conclusions can be drawn from your study? That there is no point in voting?
"No, absolutely not. Elections remain the foundation of representative democracy and determine which parties come to power. Our study, on the other hand, shows that the views of people who are also politically active between elections tend to be better represented in policy This lends support to the theory that political activism influences policy-making, but there are still other explanations that could account for the correlation we have found. But for anyone who wants to influence politics and play it safe, a useful tip is not just to vote, but also to make use of the other democratic opportunities available," concludes Jesper Lindqvist.
