DEMOCRACY: A CITIZEN PERSPECTIVE An Interdisciplinary Centre of Excellence I Abstract Title: Democracy: a Citizen Perspective Research leader in charge: Professor Lauri Karvonen Period of Operation: 1.1.2006-31.12.2009 Sites of research: Åbo Akademi in Åbo and Vasa The research described in this proposal examines the development of modern democracy from the point of view of the citizen. It probes the notion that modern democracy has, as a result a fundamental social transformation during recent decades, left its earlier class- and party-based forms and developed into an Audience Democracy. By combining an interdisciplinary approach with the possibilities offered by information technology and new methods, it aims at an analysis which is both comprehensive and innovative. As it brings together scholars from five different disciplines in Åbo and Vasa the Centre bridges both disciplinary and geographical boundaries.

The objectives of the project can be summarized in the form of two broad research questions:

1. To what extent has a transition to Audience Democracy taken place? 2. What are its consequences from the point of view of the citizen, and what action

do they call for? The first research question will be addressed along four thematic dimensions: Political Participation, Public Institutions, Media, and Individual, Group and Society. Under each theme, research is structured according to three central aspects: Citizens, Channels and Political System. Both syntheses of earlier research and new studies will be presented. Theoretically formulated hypotheses are consistently examined with the aid of systematic empirical data. The research is comparative throughout and based on quantitative data, systematic content analyses and comparative case studies. In order to answer the second question, a platform for several kinds of experimental studies will be constructed. This Virtual Polity simulates a real-life society and will supply tools for deliberation among citizens, between the people and their representatives and within the political elite. It will also allow for testing of various mechanisms for electronic governance. II Table of contents Democracy: a Citizen Perspective…………………………………………………..1 I Abstract…………………………………………………………………………….1 II Table of contents………………………………………………………………….1 III Background………………………………………………………………………2 IV Objectives and Methods…………………………………………………………4 V Research personnel and resources……………………………………………….15 VI Results…………………………………………………………………………..19 VII References……………………………………………………………………...20

2

III Background Throughout the Western world, social scientists seek to assess the consequences of the changes that have pervaded advanced societies during recent decades. The consensus seems to be that these transformations have rendered many of the forms of organization and representation based on collective loyalties from the heyday of industrialism outmoded. Meanwhile, the opportunities inherent in the new channels of citizen influence offered by advances in communications technology have not yet been fully realized (Budge 1996, Norris 1999, Norris 2002). The research proposed here shares the concern as to the viability of traditional forms of democratic organization. It contributes to international research by introducing a broad and genuinely interdisciplinary perspective on these questions. Much of the research hitherto has dealt with changes in social structure, institutions and organizations, the public sector, civil society, media, and communications technology separately. The present research brings together social and political scientists, researchers in public administration, media experts as well as social psychologists to provide a multidimensional approach to vital questions about citizen influence in modern democracy. A broad approach can not only produce new scientific syntheses. It may also help pinpoint fields of political and social life where changes have been most dramatic while paying attention to areas where continuity prevails. In order to assess the needs to strengthen citizen influence correctly one must also acknowledge the possibility that certain areas of democratic life may continue to function well or have found adequate responses to pressures of change. A citizen perspective informs all studies undertaken within the framework of this research. In fact, the fundamental idea codified in most Western constitutions forms an appropriate point of departure: The powers of the State are vested in the people… Democracy entails the right of the individual to participate in and influence the development of society and his or her living conditions (Section 2 of the Finnish constitution). A host of factors and mechanisms conditions the citizen’s means to political power and social influence. These pertain to individual and collective identities, the characteristics of civil society, the process of opinion formation, political representation and leadership as well as to government institutions. The framework in figure 1 is inspired by Bernard Manin’s insightful work (1997) on the evolution of representative democracy; it guides the proposed research by suggesting empirical foci and hypotheses about change over time.

3

Figure 1. Three phases of democratic development. An analytical framework Early representative

democracy Party democracy

Audience Democracy

Identities and loyalties -local -hierarchical

-national -class-based

-transnational -multiple -alternative

Civil society -local -comprehensive

-national -functionally defined

-single-issue -ad hoc-based -commercializing

Opinion formation -local opinion leaders -parliamentary debate

-party-based media -government vs. opposition

-opinion polls -media as arena -media as actor

Political representation -individual trustees -local notables

-class-based parties -party platforms

-issue experts -media talent

Political leadership -patriarchal -ideological -image-based State and local government

-minimalist -elitist

-expansive -politically controlled

-challenged by market -blurred public authority

Manin suggests that democracy in advanced nations has entered the third phase of this development. According to this view, the political process increasingly displays features typical of Audience Democracy. If this is the case, individual citizens no longer have a predominant collectively defined identity but a set of different identities suggesting varying loyalties. Throughout the Western world, for instance, the importance of social class as a determinant for party choice has declined during the past two-three decades (Dalton 2002). Voluntary organization and political representation increasingly centre on single issues dependent on media coverage rather than permanent class-based interests and platforms. “Protest businesses” is one apposite expression used about this new phenomenon (Jordan and Maloney 1997). The fate of political leaders and campaigns is decided by their capacity to cultivate images that are feasible given the conditions determined by media. Television has become the main target of politicians’ campaigning activities. The focus is increasingly on individual party leaders rather than on collective political movements (Semetko 1997). State and local government operates in an environment where a strict definition of public authority has been replaced by a form of governance based on a mix of public, semi-private and private actors. It has been suggested that the centrally directed “welfare state” is giving way to a less directly involved “regulatory state” (Hague and Harrop 2001).

The framework depicts ideal models, and “models are to be used, not believed”. The Centre takes an open-ended view of the extent of change in the various areas of democratic society. Some major transformations are nevertheless apparent and they must form a necessary starting point for all studies within the program. The “educational revolution” of the past half-century has fundamentally altered the class structure which forms the historical base of collective loyalties and party systems throughout the West (Mair 2001). The predominance of mass media in social and political life is another change that citizens and collective actors must face today. Party-controlled press and government-owned broadcasting no longer dominate the stage. The predominance media may be challenged if new technology can offer the citizen effective alternative channels. Newly available information and communication channels offer, unlike traditional vertically oriented processes, an opportunity to communicate and acquire information on a horizontal basis. A third vital change

4

concerns the capacity of state and local governments to control their environment. Economic internationalization and deregulation have decisively restricted the room to manoeuvre of the state as an economic actor.

The research proposed here goes to answer two overarching questions:

1. To what extent has a transition to Audience Democracy taken place? 2. What are its consequences from the point of view of the citizen, and what action

do they call for?

IV Objectives and methods The relationship between citizens and democracy is multidimensional. Those mechanisms and instruments through which the citizen participates in the democratic process form one self-evidently important dimension. The set of institutions where political decisions are taken and through which they are implemented are similarly important: the role of the citizen is both to articulate the needs that democratic decisions should reflect and to be the recipient of the rights, benefits and service provided by public institutions. The official sphere is, however, but one important part of a democratic society. Equally self-evident, the free exchange of ideas and views is of crucial importance. The agora of modern democracy is increasingly dominated by mass media. Finally, there is a sphere of individual and collective existence which is not primarily political but nevertheless vitally important from the point of view of a functioning democracy. This free civil society comprises both the private sphere of life, such as the family, and the voluntary association between groups and individuals.

The research of the proposed Centre will be organized around four themes: Political Participation, Public Institutions, Media, and Individual, Group and Society. These do not, however, constitute separate research undertakings where scholars merely collaborate with colleagues representing the same field of specialization. By contrast, the work under each theme is structured according to three aspects inherent in the citizen perspective. In this way, there is a mechanism of vertical as well as horizontal contact and cooperation throughout the program. Under the Citizens, the changing demands brought about by the transformation of identities and loyalties are examined. The Channels entails studies of the means of influence and activity at the disposal of the citizen; both existing channels and potential new means are scrutinized. Under the Political System, finally, the performance of political organizations and institutions is evaluated with the aim of presenting suggestions for new or improved forms of citizen influence and activity. Scholars from five disciplinary fields collaborate to carry out the program: political science, public administration, political communication, developmental psychology and sociology. The field of research according to main themes and analytical aspects is presented in figure 2.

5

Figure 2. The research agenda Demands

Existing (and potential)

Performance

Citizens Channels Political system Political participation

Dealignment from class-based to multiple identities Citizen competence

Voting: turnout and volatility Party activism Unconventional participation New channels (ICTs) Direct democracy

Parties Representatives Political institutions

Public institutions Local Citizenship Weakened belief in authority

Media coverage of bureaucracy Citizen hearings User democracy

Implementation of democratic decisions Competing government agencies Privatization

Media Differences in media reception and consumption

Media as arena and actor Commercialization Infotainment

Image-based political leadership

Individual, group and society

Socialization, family loyalties Individualization Social capital and trust

Intermediate organizations Digital divide

Ability to accommodate citizen concerns

A research enterprise with the following characteristics is called for:

• An interdisciplinary orientation. In each of the subfields, scholars from different disciplines collaborate.

• An empirical orientation. While culled from the theoretical literature, research questions are examined in the light of systematic empirical and experimental evidence.

• A comparative orientation. Detailed analyses of the Finnish case are placed in a systematic comparative perspective where the Nordic countries and the family of established democracies function as comparative frameworks.

• A collaborative orientation. The program is linked to existing and new research networks home and abroad.

In terms of methods and data this research calls for a combination of established empirical techniques and innovative forms of analysis. In order to highlight the first main question statistical analyses of survey and register data, case studies and systematic content analyses will be carried out. The aim of this Part I of the program is to provide a comprehensive answer to questions concerning change and continuity in areas relevant to contemporary democracy; has a transition to Audience Democracy indeed taken place? These results form a necessary basis for Part II of the program dealing with the consequences of democratic transformation and with proposed lines of action for the refinement of democracy from a citizen perspective. To this end, a platform for several kinds of experimental studies will be constructed. This Virtual Polity simulates a real-life society, including political systems, civil societies and

6

individual citizens. The platform will supply tools for deliberation among citizens, between the people and their representatives and within the political elite. It will also allow for testing of various mechanisms for electronic governance. The ambition is to provide empirically well-substantiated answers to both main questions. The transformation described in much of contemporary literature is subjected to a systematic scrutiny. The promise of electronic democracy as well as other new channels of citizen participation is no longer appraised in the light of future optimism but against results from comprehensive scientific tests. Whether e-democracy can lead to strengthened citizen participation, indeed to a new form direct democracy, or in fact raise new obstacles between different groups of citizens, is open to test. In sum, the research agenda of the Centre is constructed so as to guarantee maximal cohesion at each stage of the work:

a. the choice of individual studies is a consequence of a collective commitment to a common theoretical framework;

b. the work under the four main themes is interconnected via a focus on three central aspects throughout the program;

c. the program is interdisciplinary throughout; d. the two phases of the research work constitute a unified scholarly

process, where Part I forms a necessary prerequisite of Part II. Part I: Audience Democracy? Empirical Analyses The first part of the research to be conducted within the framework of the Centre is characterized by two separate but closely related tasks. For each of the fields in the theoretical matrix, a synthesis of existing research will be provided. These secondary analyses provide an assessment of the state of the art in relevant areas of international research. Secondly, for each main area there will be a need to undertake new research wherever research hitherto has not provided sufficient clarity. Thus, the work to be done will have strong elements of both broadly synthesizing overviews and clearly focused special studies. While an exhaustive list of individual studies would require too much space – and indeed be practically impossible to give, as the synthesizing work will surely point to a need of novel research – the following account offers a brief description of the principal outlines of research under each main theme. Political Participation. Representative democracy is based on the delegation of powers from citizens to elected representatives. Allegedly, the transformation toward Audience Democracy has altered citizens’ relation to political parties and political participation. Empirical analyses suggest that there are several parallel trends in political participation in Western democracies. Typically, these old democracies witness a decrease in three central participatory respects; electoral turnout, engagement in political parties and trade union membership are all in decline (Putnam 2002).1 Moreover, there seems to be a simultaneous decrease in overall associational activism and church attendance (Putnam 2000, Putnam 2002) It has, however, been suggested that these traditional participatory forms are being replaced by alternative, “unconventional” forms of political engagement (Norris 2002). 1 The Scandinavian countries seem to be, however, an exception when it comes to trade union membership (Ibid.)

7

What do these changes imply? Post-industrial societies share a simultaneous common trend with higher levels of education and an overall individualization of society. Still, democratic decision-making continues to be a collective action. The research within the theme of political participation is organized as follows.

Citizens. The research questions of the first aspect pertain to the shift from collective identities to individual citizen as a base for political action. The dealignment from class-based voting is mapped, as well as its consequences, such as an increased electoral volatility. How the processes of individualization have influenced citizens’ values and political opinions is also analyzed. Has there been a shift of emphasis from collective manifestations of group interests – where a criterion of successful political action was high attendance – towards a stronger focus on the effectiveness and actual outcome of political engagement? Also, studies of citizen competence, measured through political knowledge are carried out in order to establish how well informed citizens are politically. Variations in citizen competence are studied both within and between nations.

Channels. The second focus is participation via channels, namely studies of voting, referenda and party activism, but also forms of unconventional participation and the use of new ICT-based channels. The era of class-based voting was characterized by electoral stability. Moreover, many citizens considered voting as a civic duty, which contributed to a stable turnout from election to election. In Audience Democracy, however, accountability and the incumbents’ personal responsibility for his or her actions are believed to have become central aspects. In addition to a retrospective evaluation, citizens also compare parties’ commitments and manifestos in a prospective manner against their own political preferences (Manin et al. 1999). Whether the dealignment process has led to a volatile electorate is studied in a comparative manner. The role of the new ICTs as a source for political information and a channel for political influence is also surveyed.

Political System. Even though it is anticipated that the role of the individual representatives rises anew in Audience Democracy, political parties continue to be the central actors of modern representative democracy. In fact, it has been claimed that the parties have formed a cartel in order to remain in power (Katz and Mair 1998). At the same time, it seems probable that political parties are failing in their ability to aggregate citizen preferences (Schmitter 2001). Our interest is in the conflict between the expectations of citizens toward their representatives in political institutions, and the persisting dominant role of the political parties. Is this merely a survival game for the parties in order to stay in power or are they in fact adjusting to the new situation and shifting from party-controlled action to a more diverse decision-making allowing for individual representatives to act on their own? The question how new political groupings and parties are treated by the “cartel” which they challenge will also be highlighted.

The individual studies within the theme are embedded in the rich contemporary literature pertaining to political participation. Empirically, the data exploited are mainly secondary comparative survey data, such as World Values Study, European Social Survey, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and International Social Survey Programme. We also make use of hard data, such as electoral records and register data. The analyses are carried out using statistical methods supplemented with comparative case studies.

8

Public institutions. Under this theme, we address the changing relationship between the citizen and the public institutions from a process perspective. From the point of view of the citizen, the development of the structure and functions of public institutions in Western democracies during the last two decades includes partly contradictory ingredients (Denters & Rose 2005, Pierre & Peters 2000). On the one hand, there has been a tremendous shift towards a larger degree of recognition of the individual rights of the citizen in his relationship with the public institutions. This trend comprises comprehensive changes of the legislation as well as the adaptation of various mechanisms of customer orientation (customer hearings, surveys, one-stop shops, participation through the internet).

On the other hand, simultaneous changes in the basic organization and operative procedures of public institutions have challenged the traditional concepts of transparency, accountability and democratic control. There has been a gradual transfer of decision-making authority from democratically elected bodies to the administration as well as to quasi-public bodies, such as various partnership organizations. The production of public services is to a larger degree contracted out to private agents. (Pierre & Peters 2000, Kickert, Klijn & Koppenjaan 1997) These changes are partial rather than total, meaning that “old” and “new” mechanisms co-exist within the same public institution.

Although to some extent universal, there are national, local and institutional variations in the adaptation of the trends described above. We need to map this variation and we especially need to assess the overall effects of the various and partly contradictory changes on the individual public institution. This is a basic task within the research theme.

The more specific research projects are formulated on the basis of an analysis of the main shortcomings of the present literature on the changing relationship between the citizen and the public institutions. There is a lack of knowledge about the procedural effects of the changes described above; that is, how are the decision-making and implementation procedures of the public institutions affected by the new mechanisms of citizen participation or by the partial transfer of decision-making authority to quasi-public bodies? Institutional changes, for example privatization of public services, highlight the importance of procedural knowledge. In the literature, there is a tendency to exaggerate the contrast between the “known” procedures of traditional public organizations and the “unknown” procedures of new network and public-private organizations (Kickert, Klijn & Koppenjaan 1997). There is a need to move beyond this ideal typical reasoning in order to expand our knowledge about decision-making procedures in actual empirical settings. We will do this by posing the classical questions about the anatomy of decision-making: of how to get things done and about the choices proceeding action, in a new setting (Simon 1945/1976).

The first project examines how citizen participation affects the decision-making of public authorities. Firstly, we will examine the importance of contacts with public institutions as a channel of citizen participation on different levels of government. Numerous empirical studies on the local level show that citizens tend to find their role as customers and consumers of public services more important than their role as voters and political citizens (Pettersen & Rose 2000). Secondly, we will analyze how citizen participation affects decision-making in specific cases. We will compare public authorities with a conscious policy of citizen orientation with public authorities without a pronounced policy on this matter. While increased citizen participation is largely

9

conceived as a virtue, critics maintain that uncontrolled citizen involvement in decision-making procedures may hollow out other democratic and administrative virtues, such as objectivity and professionalism (Du Gay 2000). To address this question, we will specifically examine the importance of citizen participation in decisions made by individual civil servants. The questions of how citizen participation affects the decision-making procedures will be approached both by conventional methods, such as analyses of survey data and stakeholder interviews, and by experimental methods, allowing for simulations of processes problematic to cover by traditional methods. The aim of the project media coverage of public institutions is to investigate to what extent changes in the structures and operating procedures of public authorities in practice are reflected in the media coverage of the activities of the public institutions. Changes of special interest include the transfer of decision-making authority from democratically elected bodies to the administration, to quasi-public partnerships and to private actors. There is only limited knowledge about how institutional changes are reflected in changes in the focus of the mass media coverage. The few existing studies of the topic suggest that there is a considerable time-lag between the actual institutional changes and the reactions of the mass media to these changes, meaning that important decision-making forums are left outside the scope of media coverage, thus weakening transparency and citizen control (e.g. Hynninen 2000). We will address this topic by identifying a number of key issues where substantial institutional change has actually taken place and systematically analyzing the media coverage of these issues before and after the institutional change. Media. “Tabloidization” of political news – Journalistic trends and impact on citizens. During recent years, scholars have expressed concern about the public sphere. An increased market-orientation by the news media is suggested to have altered the standards of news (McManus 1994). Thus, contemporary political journalism – and ultimately democracy itself – is said to be negatively affected by “tabloidization”, “Americanization” and “infotainment” (e.g. Blumler and Gurevitch 1995; Patterson 1993). Among other things, the news media has been held responsible for growing public mistrust of government (Capella and Jamieson 1997). Generally, the academic lament has been expressed in the US context. In a European perspective, empirical research is still limited. This part of the research project will focus on two interrelated aspects in a European perspective. First, the question whether a “dumbing down” trend can be empirically detected in political journalism will be addressed. In particular, this question will be examined through longitudinal and comparative content analyses (cf. Djupsund and Carlson 1997). Second, the impact of today’s journalistic standards and formats on the citizens’ political knowledge and attitudes will be examined. In a European comparative study, Norris (2000) has indeed showed that citizens attentive to news are more likely than the inattentive to participate in politics and to trust political institutions. However, her findings are based on macro-level survey data. In this project, experimental designs that are better suited for nailing down causal effects will be utilized.

The Internet is a technology that directs attention to a new, potentially interactive and participatory (Bimber and Davis 2003), communication channel that may alter the ways in which communication between political actors and the citizens takes place However, the evidence concerning the internet as to its political use is still inconclusive. Consequently, our study entitled Internet and political society - A “cyber

10

dawn” or “politics as usual?” will mainly focus on the development of the ways in which the internet is used by different political actors. Are the political actors still “learning the ropes” or is the web gradually evolving into the communication channel it was perceived to become? Are there any differences in how different political actors use the internet? Is the web a channel for the marginalized, or is it dominated by traditional mainstream actors (c.f. Margolis et al. 2003)? Building on our previous research (e.g. Carlson 2006; Carlson and Djupsund 2001; Carlson and Strandberg 2005), content analyses of the websites of different types of political actors will be conducted in order to bring the research up-to-date and to gain more knowledge of the development of the political internet. Additionally, survey data on the citizens’ use of the internet during elections will be brought in. The studies apply internationally adapted techniques for content analysis of political websites (Gibson and Ward 2000) and draw on central theoretical arguments from the literature in order to make the results internationally comparable.

Personalization of politics – myth or reality? It is commonly assumed that politics increasingly focuses on individual politicians and candidates. Campaigns centre on the personal qualities of candidates and leaders rather than long standing ideological issues. Leadership qualities have gained in importance; there is talk about the “presidentialization” of parliamentary systems (Poguntke and Webb 2005). Several stable democracies have recently opted for electoral systems that stress the role of individual candidates (Karvonen 2004). Do longitudinal comparative survey data point to a personification of politics in the minds of individual citizens as well? How important are the “media qualities” of leaders to the citizens? Results from comparative research on elections and campaigns thus far are mixed at best from the point of view of the personalization hypothesis (Holmberg and Oscarsson 2004; Wattenberg 1998; Kaase 1994). To what extent the voters actually perceive of politics in terms of personalities is still largely uncharted territory. Rahat and Sheafer (2005) stress the importance of distinguishing between different types of political personalization. Their hypothesis is that institutional personalization (reforms of nomination and electoral systems) lead to an increased media focus on individuals (media personalization), which in turn influences the behaviour of politicians and voters (behavioural personalization). Following their work, this study will undertake a broad comparison of countries where institutional reforms have taken place with others that display no increase in institutional personalization. Individual, group and society. Under this theme questions are treated that pertain to how changes in democracy affect individuals, not only social institutions. Individuals are seen as belonging to different groups, first and foremost to the family which plays an important role in shaping citizen views concerning involvement in various activities, ranging from religious commitment to political participation. The family also transmits values to the next generation. Similarly, the role of voluntary organizations and other collectivities as well as some central institutions such as schools will be examined.

The different sub-projects under the heading “Individual, group, and society” can be grouped around a number of central concepts derived from the common theoretical framework of the Centre. One such common denominator is the concept of multiple identities. The assumption is that a change has taken place from an allegiance to the family towards a greater independence and individualization. These processes can be expected to result in multiple identities rather than in one given identity for the

11

individual. This hypothesis will be examined in a study entitled Democracy, socialization and party attachment. The empirical evidence will consist of data from the European Value Study as well as relevant parts of the European Social Survey from 2002 and 2004. The central focus will be on the dynamic interplay between individual identities, various forms of group affiliation and political preferences including party identification (cf. Holmberg and Oscarsson 2004). A second test of the assumption is a study called Religious identity formation through new media participation. Here, content analyses of Internet chats will be combined with laboratory experiments using masked identities. This work will be done in close cooperation with the thematic group on Political Participation.

Another central area of this theme is concerned with the use of new media both as an obstacle and as a facilitator of Audience Democracy. Several parts of the proposed research touch upon this theme. Here, a study entitled Democracy and new media use lies at the very core of this research theme. The work will also partly be based on laboratory experiments with camouflaged identities in order to reveal, for instance, a possible marginalization of the old or the disabled. This research naturally ties in with the work done within the thematic group focusing on Media.

A third common area for this theme is concerned with a change in values and the role of socialization in this process. These concepts tie together several of the topics of this theme. One aspect will be studied under the heading Democracy, economic well-being and happiness. A major study of value change in Europe between 1980 and 1990 (Ester et alia 1993) pointed to loosening ties between individuals and several forms of collectivities. These alleged changes will be followed up here. Moreover, a study entitled Democracy and child-rearing values will be included; this research will to a large extent utilize the data provided by the European Value Study. The above mentioned studies are also concerned with the transmission of religious and political values from parents to their children.

Citizen rights to expression and association are fundamental to democracy. Following Putnam (1993) in particular, social science literature views social capital and grassroots democracy as a positive effect of involvement in voluntary organizations. The term “intermediate organizations” describes the same phenomenon from the perspective of civil society interests/opinions organized to influence the public authorities as well as the political system locally and/or nationally. The role of intermediate groups varies considerably between countries along an axis between “voice” for citizen opinions and “service” production for the public good. The voice function has been predominant e.g. in the Nordic countries (Salamon et al.1999). In this project case studies are conducted especially to analyze the work of organizations which focus on the Integration of the young, the old and the new citizens.

Finally, a time perspective will be paid special attention. Today, the political system is tuned towards the electoral cycle while at the same time trying to respond to rapidly emerging media-driven “top stories” (“push-button democracy”). What about the long-term concerns of the citizens, those that perhaps span several coming generations? To what extent have such questions been organized into the political system? Is the political system out of step with citizen concerns?

12

Part II: Consequences and Remedies. A Virtual Polity While Manin’s analysis of the metamorphoses of representative government serves as a retrospective and contemporary framework, the second part of our research pertains to the possibilities of developing the responsive capabilities of the democratic system. The concerns and needs expressed by the citizen in the wake of social transformation form the point of departure. Methodologically, the project combines “traditional” empirical evidence with data that have been gathered with the help of experimental research methods. Theoretically, the research is informed by leading students of democracy.

Modern political theory raises questions about the exclusive nature of representative democracy. This normative debate on the possibilities of both participatory and deliberative democracy has a prospective orientation. Scholars like Benjamin Barber (1984) and Robert A. Dahl (1989, 1998) accuse liberal democracy of being “thin”, and for fulfilling only minimum requirements on democratic government. According to this view, democracy should be inclusive and based on active popular participation and deliberation between citizens. This “strong” democracy is seen as a normative ideal. At the same time, contemporary political science has shown a growing interest in seeking practical solutions to achieving this communal and consensual form of democratic government (Budge 1996, Norris 1999).

Typically, the concept of participatory democracy is based on the idea of strong political talk between free and equal citizens. Ideally, this deliberation is expected to lead to unanimous collective decisions.2 Consensual decision-making, instead of the traditional form of majority rule is the normative ideal. The deliberative process is believed to arrive at “a rationally motivated consensus”, even though the possibility of having to vote in case of different views is normally acknowledged (Cohen 1989, 32-33). The idea of deliberation is by no means new. Contemporary scholars like Jürgen Habermas (1996) and John Rawls (1993) have clarified the notion of deliberative democracy but the idea is as old as democracy itself (Elster 1998). According to Pericles, citizens who did not take part in public matters were regarded as useless in Athens of the fifth century B.C. In this early form of direct democracy, “discussion was an indispensable preliminary to any wise action at all” (Thucydides II.40).

In a minimalist form of liberal democracy the role of the citizen is limited to voting at elections, whereas the idea of participatory democracy emphasizes other elements, such as a full inclusion of citizens and the possibility for citizens to control the political agenda (Dahl 1989). In a deliberative framework, the norms of reciprocity are also frequently referred to. This means that deliberative conversations rely on an elementary form of cooperation where the participants have the freedom of speech and they are all prepared to listen to each other (Gambetta 1998, 20).

The cleavage between empirical political science and normative theory has long been an obstacle to the development of the field. Therefore, there is growing need for a synthesis where empirical research methods are used in order to respond to normative questions about how democratic ideals could be achieved in practice (Barry 2000, Rothstein 2003).

The proposed experimental research combines all the involved disciplines into an analytical synthesis. The purpose of the experiments is to simulate different decision- 2 According to Gambetta (1998, 19) deliberative conversation falls between two extremes: bargaining, which involves exchanging threats and promises, and arguing, which concerns either matters of principle or matters of fact and causality.

13

making situations, both individual and collective, in order to gather necessary data on the mechanisms of such essential components as deliberation, trust and reciprocity. Moreover, an electronic platform will be designed in order to facilitate the experiments. This virtual reality simulates a society and allows for a variety of tests in accordance with the research interests of each theme. In this Virtual Polity, individuals can interact and deliberate, as well as solve collective and individual problems. Selected virtual experiments are compared with identical experiments in a face-to-face setting in order to trace the possible differences in behaviour, talk, the decision-making itself and its outcome caused by the ICT-facilitated interaction.

Typically, the experiments will be conducted as a two-stage process. First, each situation will be studied independently from the point of view of the individual disciplines involved in the project. Second, there will be an effort to analyze the simulated decision-making situation holistically. This effort is vitally important to the proposed research; the synthesis enhances the possibilities to create tools for participatory democracy to be used by institutions at all levels of governance.

The most central research questions to be answered through the experiments include:

I. The evolution of reciprocity in small groups. We test how norms of reciprocity emerge and develop in experimental groups and how the existence of these norms (or the lack of them) influences the development of trust. The experiment focuses on the traditional notion of individual rationality and how it is influenced and altered by such socially defined aspects of interaction as trust, reciprocity and social capital. In the experiment, we investigate the connections between norms of reciprocity and trust. Experimental subjects will play the so-called centipede where they will earn more money if they trust each other and are able to create norms of reciprocity (repeated ultimatum or dictator games can also be used). We investigate whether there is a difference in the emergence of norms of reciprocity when only two individuals interact and when they number three. In particular, we ask whether experience of cooperation in a certain interaction influences individual behaviour in another interaction situation. For example, will x’s experience of reciprocal relationship with y make x think that a third person z will also reciprocate? Likewise, we examine whether norms of reciprocity can emerge between x and y when they interact only via a third person z, i.e. there is no direct interaction between x and y. Our aim is to find out whether trust created in a certain societal context extends to an individual’s relations elsewhere, e.g. whether membership in a certain organization influences individual decision to turn out. In decision making experiments independent variables are controlled and subjects are given real monetary incentives. The experiments provide an adequate method to test different cause-effect relationships at the micro-level.

II. The role of interpersonal trust in solving collective action problems. Experiments have shown that subjects tend to cooperate more than the standard rationality assumption expects them to do (e.g. Schram 2000). The central explanation for cooperation seems to be the fact that people trust others to cooperate as well. However, it is not clear what explains the emergence and degree of trust. For example, is it an individual property or is it created in groups? We would like to distinguish between a general propensity to trust other people in all interactions and trust that emerges in a certain interaction context. We compare three groups of subjects with respect to their ability to solve collective action problems: randomly selected subjects participating in a one-shot social dilemma; randomly selected subjects participating in a

14

series of social dilemmas and friendship groups participating in a one-shot and series of social dilemmas. We explore whether trust created in an experimental setting deviates from trust that exists in real life. The role of communication is also investigated by letting each group to play the social dilemma game with and without the possibility to communicate. Our hypothesis is that friendship groups are best in solving collective action problems, especially in the no communication treatment. We will also investigate differences in female and male as well as Swedish-speaking and Finnish-speaking (dominated) groups in terms of social trust and ability to solve collective action problems.

III. The role of institutions and individuals in public deliberation. A number of deliberative experiments have been conducted in various countries, but so far not in Finland. These experiments include, among others, citizens’ juries, consensus conferences and deliberative polls. The aim of the deliberative experiments is to provide a representation of an “enlightened” or “reasoned” public opinion. Especially the consensus conference model developed by the Danish Board of Technology has been designed to integrate citizens in policy-making on complex issues and to consult policy-makers. In deliberative polls, the number of participants has been 200-400, whereas the number of participants in consensus conferences and citizens juries has been considerably lower. In all deliberative experiments, a sample of individual is brought together to discuss a certain issue in a well-structured speech situation. The participants are given information on the topic in advance, they will hear experts presenting different points of view, and they will participate in moderated discussions in which all participants are expected to have their say. In the consensus conference and citizens’ jury models, the deliberators are expected to come up with a policy recommendation, whereas in the deliberative poll design, only individual participants’ opinions on the issue are measured both before and after the deliberation.

Our aim is to study various aspects of the deliberative process and, for this purpose, we will experiment a citizens’ jury design and use proper control groups in order to test various research questions. Possible variation between Swedish- and Finnish-speaking persons will also be tested; previous studies point to differences in the level of social trust and life satisfaction between Swedish-speakers and Finnish-speakers (Hyyppä 2002). We will measure the opinion changes at the individual level, the quality of deliberation, and the “path-dependence of conversational dynamics” (Goodin 2000, Steenbergen et al. 2003), that is, how the composition of the group of individuals affect the quality and the results of the deliberation. Moreover, we will study whether deliberation renders individual preferences more homogenous or whether it increases “meta-level” consensus on the criteria used in the evaluation of alternatives (Dryzek and List 2003). The increase of actual or meta-level consensus is due to that certain kinds of preferences, e.g. those based on pure self-interest, cannot be expressed in public debate. Moreover, the structured speech situation enhances subjects’ commitment to democratic values such as mutual respect, impartiality and rationality. Dryzek and List have also argued that by increasing consensus public deliberation offers a potential remedy to the problems of social choice.

IV. The impact and possibilities of ICTs. In the fourth group of experiments, there is a twofold orientation. First, we are interested in the impact that media and ICTs have on citizens. Sketchily, patterns of news coverage, found in the content analyses and in earlier research, will be recreated and used in controlled experiments in order to examine in what ways different levels of tabloidization formats in the constructed news

15

stories influence peoples learning and attitudes. In recreating the prototype news stories, the idea is to experimentally vary the tabloidization format levels while holding the substantial content constant.

Second, we expect to find new ways in which the ICTs could be applied in enhancing participatory democracy. We also aim to develop an application for electronic deliberation and voting. In this sense we see the Internet as different from television that has been connected to the decline of political activity (Putnam 2000). The Internet already provides various devices to support democratic participation, e.g. polling machines, parties’ and interest groups’ on-line services, voting decision support systems. Electronic deliberation offers a new facility to the above mentioned examples. We also investigate how the medium of deliberation and communication, electronic vs. direct face-to-face interaction, affects the outcome. For instance Barber (1984) and Dahl (1989) have suggested that deliberation could take place effectively via electronic channels. Some experiments have already been carried out, mainly in the US (Macoubrie 2003, Iyengar et al. 2004) but there is a clear need for further studies. Field experiments will be used to compare differences between face-to-face deliberation and virtual deliberation. This means that the provision of information, hearing the experts, moderated discussions and the measurement of opinions will take place electronically (probably on the Internet and in “real” life). The comparison between face-to-face and electronic deliberation gives us information on the functioning of deliberative e-democracy. We expect to find new ways in which the Internet could be applied in enhancing public deliberation.

According to some views, the use of digital technologies to support political judgment among politicians and their staff is the most promising electronic political application (Perri 6, 2004). The feasibility and possibilities of this “e-governance” will also be examined.

This list is by no means intended to be exhaustive. In the course of the research described above, additional relevant questions calling for experimental techniques are likely to arise. In such cases corresponding experimental designs will be constructed.

Besides the aim of answering the questions specific to each individual experiment, these studies share important general objectives. One of them is to contribute to the development of methodological tools for the experimental study of politics and society. Moreover, this research may help place the debate on participatory democracy on a firmer cognitive base. In the normative theoretical literature there is a certain trend towards an idealization of the interest and capacity of citizens to participate in deliberative processes. The proposed research may be instrumental to creating a more realistic assessment of the conditions and possibilities of participatory democracy. V Research personnel and resources Research personnel The Centre is led by a Steering Group under the chairmanship of Lauri Karvonen, Professor of Political Science. Other group members are Göran Djupsund, Professor of Political Communication, Dr. Kimmo Grönlund, Director of Research, Helena Hurme,

16

Professor of Pedagogical Psychology and Dr. Marko Joas, Director of Research. Each of the steering group members has a strong record in managing large research projects. Karvonen shoulders overall supervising duties for the program; he will, moreover, contribute research of his own under Public Institutions as well as Media. Djupsund is Thematic Group Leader for Media; his research concerns both Media and Virtual Polity. Grönlund heads the group on Political Participation and will be responsible for Virtual Polity. Hurme leads the thematic group on Individual, Group and Society; her own research will concern this theme as well as Media. Joas is Group Leader for Public Institutions. Other senior researchers include Professor Carsten Anckar (Public Institutions), Dr. Åsa Bengtsson (Political Participation; Individual, Group and Society), Dr. Tom Carlson (Media), Dr. Kaisa Herne (Virtual Polity), Professor Guy-Erik Isaksson (Political Participation), Dr. Maija Setälä (Virtual Polity) and Professor Susan Sundback (Individual, Group and Society; Public Institutions). The role of post-doctoral researchers is vital. On the one hand, the Centre will provide these scholars a valuable opportunity to advance their careers. On the other hand, they will shoulder responsibilities beyond their individual research undertakings. Each of them will contribute to the overall profile of the Centre by participating broadly in research and researcher training.

In addition, some twenty doctoral students and junior researchers will be part of the Centre. Research training The participating institutions have a solid record of postgraduate training both locally and in cooperation with other institutions. They are part of national postgraduate schools in their respective areas. Moreover, efforts such as the Swedish Postgraduate School of Political Science in Finland and the Postgraduate Program on Media Studies must be mentioned. In these contexts, the role of those institutions that form the proposed Centre is absolutely central.

The establishment of the Centre of Excellence will allow for these efforts to be extended across disciplinary boundaries. The program involves a joint interdisciplinary undertaking in order to enhance recruitment as well as training in democratic theory and the empirical and experimental study of democracy. The main components of this effort are: - a postgraduate programme in democratic theory - a postgraduate programme in relevant methods, including experimental

techniques - scholarships for doctoral students for study at international partner universities

and institutions - enhanced possibilities for contacts with the leading centres of international

research through visiting research fellows and scholarships for visits from abroad

- international visiting professors throughout the program - joint Nordic training oriented towards the dissemination of research results

internationally.

17

Promotion of research careers The Centre takes pride in promoting careers of young gifted researchers and employs personnel, women and men, on an equal opportunities basis. It adheres strictly to the gender equality policy of Åbo Akademi. Of the total of twelve senior researchers, five are women. Among the post-doctoral researchers and doctoral students, women are in a majority. Moreover, the Centre strives for an equitable division of resources between the two locations of research. International and national cooperation The Centre has an International Advisory Board with the following members: Sören Holmberg, Professor, University of Göteborg, Detlef Jahn, Professor, Universität Greifswald, Kay Lawson, Professor Emerita, San Francisco State University, Henry Milner, Professor, Université Laval, Quebec, and Poul Erik Mouritzen, University of Southern Denmark, Odense. Other key international collaborators include Bernt Aardal, Director, Institute for Social Research, Oslo, Lise Togeby, Professor, Aarhus University, Riley Dunlap, Professor, Orlando State University, Peter K. Smith, University of London, Anne-Lise Fimreite, Associate Professor, University of Bergen, Kristine Kern, Research Fellow, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin.

As for organized networks, the activities of the Centre will be pursued in close cooperation with a host of institutional partners home and abroad. The most important networks are listed below.

Political Participation: Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES), Nordic Electoral Studies Network, Finnish Consortium in Electoral Research, International and Inter-disciplinary Network on Political Action, International Network in Political Knowledge Research

Public Institutions: Swedish Centre for Business and Policy Studies (SNS), EUROLOC (European Network for Local Government Research), Nordic Network for Local Government Research, Stein Rokkan Centre (University of Bergen), COS (University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School), SCORE (Swedish Centre of Organizational Research, Stockholm), Sustainable Cities Research Institute (Northumbria University, UK)

Media: Institute for Democratic Communication (Mid-Sweden University), the Internet and Elections Project, WebArchivist.org at the University of Washington and the SUNY Institute of Technology

Individual, Group and Society: CEFOS (Göteborg University), School of Public Administration, Göteborg University, Research Network for Solidarity and Distributive Justice, Nordic Centre for Research in Social Capital, Centre of Excellence in Human Development and its Risk Factors (Jyväskylä University), Finnish Graduate School for Family Research.

Of a specific importance to the whole Centre is the national cooperation with the Department of Political Science at the University of Turku, and their public choice research group headed by Academy Professor Hannu Nurmi.

18

Critical infrastructure Over the years, the participating institutions have created a research infrastructure that provides a basis for the Centre’s work. The institutions have had and continue to have a central role in establishing national and comparative databases of immediate relevance to the proposed research. A comparative panel dataset on political institutions covering the world’s states year by year since 1960 was completed a few years ago. These data are updated continuously. The Finnish membership in CSES – Lauri Karvonen is Finnish Country Representative – provides the Centre a say in developing this survey programme on elections and electoral systems in more than fifty states. Participation in the Johns Hopkins Comparative Non-Profit Sector Project gives similar access to a unique cross-national dataset on voluntary organizations. As to the local level, the Centre’s previous research and infrastructure are sui generis in a Finnish context. “Finnish Local Government 2004” is the largest data-gathering effort concerning local government and local democracy ever conducted in Finland; the role of Åbo Akademi in this enterprise is absolutely central. In a unique way, this work presents time-series data on decision-makers, local organizations and citizens while at the same time allowing for controls for relevant factors describing local context. Moreover, Åbo Akademi has gathered and systematized basic data on municipal elections at the level of individual candidates; corresponding datasets are not available anywhere else.

For the experimental work on media, the Centre has full access to MediaCity’s Interactive Digital Television Laboratory (iDTV Lab) at Åbo Akademi, Vasa. iDTV Lab is one of the most advanced audience research laboratories in Europe. There are five living rooms in the test laboratory that are used for group research as well as for testing of individual users. This provides optimal conditions for detailed studies of the interaction between media and individual citizens. The laboratory offers tailor-made solutions for testing of media content, functionality and user-friendliness with the help of audience research. Senior scholars belonging to the Centre have been and continue to be highly involved in the development of iDTV Lab. This guarantees a close relationship between the technical development of the laboratory and the requirements of academic research in the area.

From the point of view of the proposed research, two further infrastructural concerns are particularly pressing. For one, there is a need to coordinate existing databases so as to bring them to systematic and theoretically guided use. Much of the basic data is already there; it is time to provide competent researchers time and opportunity to use them in a concerted manner. Secondly, the experimental work to be done under Virtual Polity calls for a further development of infrastructure. The development of Virtual Polity is vitally dependent on the funding provided by the Åbo Akademi programme for Centres of Excellence. Management of the Centre The responsible leader Lauri Karvonen and the Steering Group are in charge of the Centre. They will bear the overall responsibility for the activity of the Centre and make economic decisions, including decisions on the recruitment of personnel. On research-related issues they interact with the International Advisory Board on a regular basis. The

19

operative administration is placed at the Swedish Institute for Social Research in Finland (IFS, Vasa) and at the Institute for Comparative Nordic Politics and Administration (NPF, Åbo). Researchers from five different disciplines –Developmental Psychology, Political Communication, Political Science, Public Administration and Sociology – will be responsible for research and research training. The organisation is shown in figure 3. Figure 3. The organization of the Centre. VI Results The expected results of this research undertaking can be grouped under three general headings: broad syntheses concerning the state of democracy in Finland and in comparable advanced nations; focused special studies in new empirical and theoretical areas; methodological advances. Overall, the research has the character of advanced academic research. In most cases results will be communicated through established scientific channels. However, the Centre also views it as an important task to contribute to the public debate on democracy and its refinement. Therefore, policy-makers and concerned citizens will be provided with research results and conclusions in a popularized form. The Centre has a deliberate policy on the dissemination of research results. Unlike many major collective research enterprises, there will not be a large number of edited volumes published in the course of the Centre’s operation. In our experience, edited volumes do not work as efficiently in disseminating research results to the scientific community as do articles in internationally renowned scholarly journals. Edited volumes usually do not perform well as academic textbooks, either. Therefore, the Centre places a special emphasis on the publication of journal articles. This is particularly important from the point of view of the young scholars who are affiliated with the program. This is the reason why the Centre intends to join forces with Nordic partner institutions to provide joint training oriented towards the dissemination of research results internationally.

Soci

olog

y

Publ

ic

Adm

inis

trat

ion

Polit

ical

Sci

ence

Polit

ical

C

omm

unic

atio

n

S teering G roup

IFS / V AS A N PF / ÅB O

Dev

elop

men

tal

Psyc

holo

gy

Intl. Advisory Board

20

Broad syntheses. The Centre will publish a number of books and monographs with the objective of presenting overall answers to the main research questions. According to present plans, there will be a final report presenting the main highlights of the project around the year 2009. Similarly, separate monographs will sum up the work under the four main themes. Moreover, a book entitled “Experimental Studies in Democracy” will summarize the main lessons of the work carried out under Virtual Polity. Most of these publications will be in the form of monographs with international publishers. However, in several cases the syntheses will also have a format accessible to a more general readership. Textbooks for undergraduate university use also are planned. Focused studies. This research has the objective of filling apparent lacunae in existing research on democracy. These studies therefore involve detailed work with existing empirical data as well as new primary research. A natural forum for publication of such studies will be provided by established scholarly journals. Monographs will similarly be published along these lines. In addition, a large number of doctoral dissertations will have this character. Methodological advances. Especially the experimental work under Virtual Polity can be expected to produce valuable methodological insights for further efforts in the study of democracy. Apart from the summarizing report mentioned above, this part of the work will be primarily published in the form of journal articles. Taken together, the Centre’s research endeavours to make a contribution to scholarly research in democracy and the public debate on democracy alike. By combining insights from a number of academic disciplines and by allowing established empirical techniques to work in concert with experimental methods the project hopes to break genuinely new ground in a field that is as significant scientifically as it is from a social and political point of view. VII References Bimber, B. and R Davis (2003). Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections. New York: Oxford University Press. Blumler, J. and M. Gurevitch (1995). The Crisis of Public Communication. London: Routledge. Budge, Ian (1996). The New Challenge of Direct Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press. Capella, J. and K. H. Jamieson (1997). Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good. New York: Oxford University Press. Carlson, T. (2006). ”’It’s a Man’s World’ ? Male and Female Election Campaigning on the Internet”, Forthcoming, Journal of Political Marketing. Carlson, T. and G. Djupsund (2001). “Old Wine in New Bottles? The 1999 Finnish Election Campaign on the Internet”. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 6(1), 68-87. Carlson, T. and K. Strandberg (2005). “The European Parliament Election on the Web: Finnish Actor Srategies and Voter Responses”. Forthcoming, Information Polity 10(4). Dalton, Russel J. (2002). “Political Cleavages, Issues, and Electoral Change”, in Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris, eds. Comparing Democracies 2. New Challenges in the Study of Elections and Voting. London: SAGE Publications, 189-209.

21

Denters B. and L.E. Rose (2005): Comparing Local Governance: Trends and Developments. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Djupsund, G. and T. Carlson (1998) “Trivial Stories and Fancy Pictures? Tabloidization Tendencies in Finnish and Swedish Regional and National Newspapers 1982–1997”, Nordicom Review 19(3):101–113. Du Gay Paul (2000): In Praise of Bureaucracy. London: Sage. Dryzek, John S. and Christian List (2003), Social Choice Theory and Deliber- ative Democracy: A Reconciliation. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 1-28. Elster, Jon (1998) ed.. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ester Peter L, Loek Halman and Rud deMoor (1993). The Individualizing Society. Tilburg: Tilburg U.P. Gibson, R. and S. Ward (2000). “A Proposed Methodology for Studying the Function and Effectiveness of Party and Candidate Web Sites”, Social Science computer Review 18(3), 310-319. Goodin, Robert E. (2000). "Democratic Deliberation Within." Philosophy and Public Affairs 29: 79-107. Habermas, Jürgen (1996). Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge: MIT Press. Hague, Rod and Martin Harrop (2001). Comparative Government and Politics. An Introduction. Houndmills, Basingstone: Palgrave. Holmberg, Sören and Henrik Oscarsson 2004. Väljare. Svenskt väljarbeteende under 50 år. Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik. Hynninen, Asko (2000), Periaatteessa julkista. Julkisuusperiaatteen käytäntö EU-Suomen päätöksenteossa ja journalismissa. Jyväskylä, Jyväskylän Yliopisto. Hyppä, Markku T. (2002), Elinvoimaa yhteisöstä- sosiaalinen pääoma ja terveys. Jyväskylä: PS-kustannus. Iyengar, Shanto, Robert C. Luskin and James Fishkin. 2004. “Deliberative Democracy in the Primaries: An Online Experiment”. Paper presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 2 - 5, Chicago. Jordan, Grant and William Maloney (1997). The Protest Business? Mobilizing Campaign Groups. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Kaase, Max 1994. “Is There a Personalization of Politics? Candidates and Voting Behavior in Germany”, International Political Science Review Vol. 15, No. 3, 211-230. Karvonen, Lauri 2004. “Preferential Voting: Incidence and Effects”, International Political Science Review Vol.25, Number 2, April 2004, 203-226. Katz, Richard S. and Peter Mair (1998). “The Cartel Party”, in Steven B. Wolinetz, ed., Political Parties. Aldershot: Dartmouth. Kickert Walter J M, Erik-Hans Klijn & Joop F.M. Koppenjaan (1997): Managing Complex Networks. Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage. McManus, J. H. (1994). Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware? London: Sage. Macoubrie, Jane (2003). Conditions for Citizen Deliberation. Unpublished conference paper.

22

Mair, Peter (2001). “The Freezing Hypothesis. An Evaluation”, in Lauri Karvonen and Stein Kuhnle, eds., Party Systems and Voter Alignments Revisited. London: Routledge, 27-44. Manin, Bernard (1997). The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Manin, Bernard, Adam Przeworski and Susan C.Stokes (1999). “Elections and Representation”. In Adam Przeworski, Susan C. Stokes and Bernad Manin, eds., Democracy, Accountability and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 29-54. Margolis, M., D. Resnick, and J. Levy (2003). ”Major parties dominate, minor parties struggle US elections and the Internet”, in Gibson, R., P. Nixon, and S. Ward, eds., Political Parties and the Internet: Net Gain?. London: Routledge. Norris, Pippa (1999), ed. Critical Citizens. Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford: oxford University Press. Norris, Pippa (2002). Democratic Phoenix. Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Norris, P. (2000). A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Patterson, T. E (1993). Out of Order. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Perri 6. (2004). E-governance: Styles of Political Judgement in the Information Age Polity. Houndmills: Palgrave. Petterson Per Arnt & Lawrence Rose (2000): “The Legitimacy of Local Government: What Makes a Difference? Evidence from Norway” In K. Hoggart & T.N. Clark (eds) Citizen Responsive Government. Amsterdam: JAI/Elsevier. Research in Urban Policy vol. 8. Peters B. Guy & Jon Pierre (2000): Governance, Politics and the State. London: Macmillan. Poguntke, Thomas and Paul Webb, eds., 2005. The Presidentialization of Politics. A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Putnam, Robert D. (2002). “Conclusion”, in Robert D. Putnam, ed., Democracies in Flux. The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 393-416. Putnam, Robert. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton U.P. Rahat, Gideon and Tamir Sheafer 2005. The Personalization(s) of Politics: Israel 1949-2003. Unpublished manuscript. Rawls, John (1993). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press. Salamon, Lester et al. (1999), eds. Global Civil Society. Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector. The Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project Baltimore: Center for Civil Society Studies. Schram, Arthur (2000): Sorting out the Seeking: The Economics of Individual Motivations. Public Choice 103, 231-58. Schmitter, Philippe C. (2001). “Parties Are Not What They Once Were”, in Larry Diamond & Richard Gunther, eds., Political Parties and Democracy. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 67-89.

23

Semetko, Holli A. (1997). “The Media”. In Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris, eds. Comparing Democracies. Elections and Voting in Global Perspective. London: SAGE Publications, 254-79. Simon, Herbert A (1945/1976): Administrative Behavior. A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. Third Edition. New York: The Free Press. Steenbergen, Marco R, André Bächtiger, Markus Spörndli and Jürg Steiner (2003). Measuring Political Deliberation: A Discourse Quality Index. Comparative European Politics, 2003/1, 21-48. Wattenberg, Martin 1998. The Rise of Candidate-Centered Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.