The Generational Basis of Turnout Decline in (original) (raw)
Related papers
Generational basis of turnout decline in established democracies
2004
Abstract: Voting is a habit. People learn the habit of voting, or not, based on experience in their first few elections. Recent research has shown that elections that do not stimulate high turnout among young adults leave a 'footprint'of low turnout in the age structure of the electorate as many individuals who were new at those elections fail to vote at subsequent elections. Elections that stimulate high turnout leave a high turnout footprint.
Learning (Not) to Vote: the Generational Basis of Turnout Decline in Established Democracies
Using survey data from all six countries where elections have been studied continuously since the 1960s, we examine the role of generational replacement in turnout change. Early electoral experiences leave an imprint on citizens who generally continue to vote or not vote just as they generally continue to support the same political party (or no party). Based on this insight we propose a partial explanation for declining turnout in countries which, in the 1960s and 70s, lowered the age at which citizens could vote. The lower voting age allowed unmotivated individuals to become socialized into non-voting behavior with unfortunate consequences for turnout in many countries. Continuing turnout decline since the early 1970s reflects at least in part the normal mechanism of generational replacement as voters leave the electorate whose early electoral experiences were more positive. The findings have far-reaching implications for our understanding of the mainsprings of electoral change.
The Source of Turnout Decline: New Values or New Contexts?
Voter turnout has consistently declined since the 1980s across a wide range of advanced democracies. Much of this decline appears to due to young people abstaining. In this paper we test two arguments for this trend. The first rests on the claim that the character of elections has changed; specifically that elections have become less competitive and that young people's propensities for voting are particularly negatively affected by this. The second maintains that recent generations have different and that these value differences explain turnout declines. We test these two explanations using three different data sets: 1) individual level and election specific data from 83 elections in eight countries since the 1950s; 2) longitudinal individual level and district level data from British elections for the period 1974-2005; 3) panel data from American presidential elections. Our findings provide strong evidence for the generational value change argument while we find scant support for the competition argument.
The Generational and Institutional Sources of the Global Decline in Voter Turnout
World Politcs, 2021
Why has voter turnout been declining in democracies all over the world? This article draws on findings from micro-level studies and theorizes two explanations: generational change and a rise in the number of elective institutions. The empirical section tests these hypotheses along with other explanations proposed in the literature (shifts in party/candidate competition, voting age reforms, weakening group mobilization, income inequality, and economic globalization). We conduct two analyses. The first analysis employs an original data set covering all post-1945 democratic national elections. The second studies individual-level data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and American, British, and Canadian national election studies. The results strongly support the generational change and elective institutions hypotheses, which account for most of the decline. These findings have important implications for a better understanding of the current transformations of representative democracy and the challenges it faces. This paper can be cited as follows: Kostelka, Filip, and André Blais. forthcoming. "The Generational and Institutional Sources of the Global Decline in Voter Turnout". World Politics.
Scandinavian Political Studies, 2009
Recent research has found that voter turnout is declining in most advanced industrial countries. The trend is driven by generational replacement because the age cohorts that entered the electorate at the end of the 20th century are voting at lower than expected rates. In North American countries the decline is also concentrated among the poorly educated. This paper examines the relative contribution of period, life-cycle, generational, and educational effects on changes in electoral participation over the last four decades in Sweden, Norway and Germany with individual-level data. Turnout decline is partly driven by generational change in the countries observed as the literature suggests. Additionally, there is also a clear socio-economic correlate. Most strikingly, poorly-educated persons of all age groups are increasingly failing to vote in Germany. The results suggest that the causes of the long-term evolution are multidimensional and its relative consequences vary across countries. The debate about turnout decline and its possible remedies has to take into account the fact that both members of new generations and citizens with low education attainment are the main targets of measures aimed at increasing turnout rates, but that different actions might be required to attract each specific demographic group to the polls.
Where does turnout decline come from?
European Journal of Political Research, 2004
This article looks at the socio-demographic sources of turnout decline in Canada. The analysis is based on the Canadian Election Studies that have been conducted between 1968 and 2000. There is a small period effect which suggests that the propensity to vote has declined marginally (by about three percentage points) in all demographic groups. There are substantial life cycle effects -that is, turnout shifts within a given cohort as members of that cohort grow older. There are powerful generation effects: turnout differs among the various cohorts even when we compare them at the same stage of their life cycle. The much lower turnout among the post-baby-boomers is the main reason why turnout has declined overall in Canada. The most recent generations are less prone to vote in good part because they pay less attention to politics and because they are less likely to adhere to the norm that voting is not only a right, but also a moral duty. The decline in turnout thus reflects a larger cultural change. Education remains an important correlate of voting. The increase in educational attainment has contributed to dampening the decline in turnout. There is no evidence that the decline in turnout has been more acute among certain sub-groups of the electorate (leaving aside age and education).
Accounting for the Age Gap in Turnout
We explore a number of explanations for the sharp difference in voter turnout between the post-generation X cohort and older citizens, using data from the 2000 Canadian Election Study. The gap in turnout between these groups is more than 27 percentage points. Controlling for socio-demographic factors reduces the age gap by almost a third. If we control for respondents' perception of the closeness of the race in their riding, whether they were contacted during the campaign and whether they identify with a political party, the age gap decreases by a further three points -a reduction of 43% in the original gap. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find that cynicism and negative attitudes toward politics and politicians are poor explanations for the discrepancy in turnout between young and old. Finally, if we include political information and interest in the model, there is no statistically significant difference in turnout between young and old citizens.
The effects of age, generation and period on turnout in Finland 1975–2003
Electoral Studies, 2007
The study examines simultaneously the effects of age, generation and period in the Finnish parliamentary elections of 1975e 2003 based on pooled data from Finnish Voter Barometers (N ¼ 8634). The probability of voting rises with age among three younger generations eligible to vote, and both during the period of increasing and stable turnout (1975e1983), and the period of declining turnout (1987e2003). The largest average difference between generations is 11.2 percentage points. The probability of voting is 8.4. points lower during the latter period. Finally, turnout would have been 2.1 points higher in the 1999 elections than in 1987 elections, if there had not been generational replacement. Consequently, the results of study in Canadian elections [Blais, A., Gidengil, E., Nevitte, N., Nadeau, R., 2004. Where does turnout decline come from? European Journal of Political Research 43 , 221e236] apply also in the Finnish context. 1 Also the terms cohort, and cohort effect, respectively, are widely used when referring to the same thing (see Glenn, 2005, pp. 2e3). 0261-3794/$ -see front matter Ó
Increasing Turnout: A Compelling Case?
Politics, 2010
Recently several thinkers have endorsed compulsion or other measures to increase turnout and revitalise democracy. This article argues that such measures are misguided, because lower turnout (even if unequal across social groups) is not necessarily undemocratic-indeed, it may serve democratic values by, for example, making it more likely that decisions really are made by the relevant constituency, with those most affected getting more say. Encouraging others to vote, or even to turn out, runs the risk of distorting electoral outcomes. If there is no clear democratic case for compulsion, then we should not risk even small limits on individual liberty. Recent articles in this journal have defended compulsory voting or, at least, compulsory turnout (Engelen, 2009; Lacroix, 2007). It has also been suggested that, if we want to increase turnout, incentives may be preferable to compulsion (Saunders, 2009a). Those opposed to such measures have questioned firstly whether we have a general duty to vote and secondly whether any such duty should be legally enforced (Lever, 2008 and 2009). This article re-evaluates the premise that lowand even disproportionate-turnout is necessarily a bad thing. It proceeds not from questions about the individual's duty or what a liberal state may permissibly force its citizens to do, but from an examination of democratic principles. While accepting that all should have a genuine opportunity to vote, I argue that we need not, from a democratic point of view, take further measures-coercive or otherwise-actively to encourage voting. Indeed, democratic values may actually be served by allowing individuals the freedom not to vote. Thus, it is harder to adduce reasons for any attempts to increase turnout, especially when they violate individual liberty. Disproportionality Arend Lijphart sparked interest in compulsory voting by describing unequal turnout as 'democracy's unresolved dilemma' (Lijphart, 1997). For Lijphart, the problem is not simply that electoral turnout is low and falling; rather, he is particularly concerned that turnout is unrepresentative of society as a whole. If we allow individuals the choice of whether or not to vote, then we are likely to observe differential rates of participation not only between individuals but also between ascriptive social groups, which may lead to differential levels of political concern. If voting rates are higher among the old than the young, for example, then it becomes
'Intimidation not Frustration': explaining why young voters go missing on polling day
The problem of low youth voter turnout across many Western democracies poses a significant threat to the health of the democratic system. Levels of turnout are often used as the most effective measurement of the health of a democracy, as they not only represent a contact point for voters to elect officials and hold those in power to account, but also foster legitimacy, strengthening democratic institutions and giving political stability. Many different studies have attempted to identify why voter turnout amongst younger voters is that much lower than that of their older counterparts. The 'habit forming' nature of participating in the electoral process for voters makes this disparity especially concerning if our democracies are to be strengthened or even maintained in the future. This paper will assess the barriers young people believe prevent them from voting or discourage their participation. In addition to those factors already widely scrutinised in the literature, such as political socialisation in the family, one's social context, issues concerning registration and disinterest in politics more generally, this paper will also investigate to what extent a lack of knowledge around how to vote plays a role in dampening turnout.