IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v12y2024a8590.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Affective Polarization and Populism Affect the Support for Holding Referendums?

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Fölsch

    (Department of Political Science, University of Salzburg, Austria)

Abstract

What populism and polarization have in common is that their relationship with democracy is an ambiguous one. Studies have found that certain degrees of polarization can be helpful for citizens to make up their minds about their choices and because of that encourage them to democratic participation. Similarly, populism can help increase participation by, for example, presenting policies in a simpler language. Citizens with less political interest and political knowledge might be incited to participate in elections and democratic politics in general. However, high levels of polarization lead to the irreconcilability of factions and thereby to gridlock. Democracy can be regarded as incapable of solving citizens’ problems. Likewise, populism can be destructive to democracy when occurring in certain forms and degrees. While populism is not per se antidemocratic, populist parties and leaders, when in power, repeatedly challenge democratic elements. To disentangle how polarization and populism affect democracy, I focus on certain specifics of these three concepts (democracy, populism, and polarization). Namely, I analyze how affective polarization and individual-level populism affect the support for the direct democratic instrument of holding referendums. Drawing on survey data from Austria and Germany, I find that being affectively polarized has a positive effect on the support for holding referendums. However, this effect is moderated by citizens’ individual-level populism. Thus, this study provides insights into citizens’ preferences for democratic decision-making, dependent on their levels of affective polarization and populism.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Fölsch, 2024. "Do Affective Polarization and Populism Affect the Support for Holding Referendums?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 12.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:8590
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.8590
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/8590
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.8590?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    2. Reinhard Heinisch & Carsten Wegscheider, 2020. "Disentangling How Populism and Radical Host Ideologies Shape Citizens’ Conceptions of Democratic Decision-Making," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 32-44.
    3. Weßels, Bernhard & Rose, Richard, 2021. "Do populist values or civic values drive support for referendums in Europe?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 60(2), pages 359-375.
    4. Hibbing, John R., 2001. "Process Preferences and American Politics: What the People Want Government to Be," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 145-153, March.
    5. Shaun Bowler & Todd Donovan, 2019. "Perceptions of Referendums and Democracy: The Referendum Disappointment Gap," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 227-241.
    6. Taylor, Michael & Herman, V. M., 1971. "Party Systems and Government Stability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(1), pages 28-37, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Borge, Lars-Erik, 2005. "Strong politicians, small deficits: evidence from Norwegian local governments," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 325-344, June.
    2. Ali Abdelzadeh, 2014. "The Impact of Political Conviction on the Relation Between Winning or Losing and Political Dissatisfaction," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(2), pages 21582440145, May.
    3. Reuven Y. Hazan, 1995. "Center Parties and Systemic Polarization," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(4), pages 421-445, October.
    4. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    5. Braun, Daniela & Grande, Edgar, 2021. "Politicizing Europe in Elections to the European Parliament (1994–2019): The Crucial Role of Mainstream Parties," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(5), pages 1124-1141.
    6. Bellani, Luna & Berriochoa, Kattalina & Kapteina, Mark & Schwerdt, Guido, 2024. "Information Provision and Support for Inheritance Taxation: Evidence from a Representative Survey Experiment in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 17099, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Schläpfer, Felix, 2016. "Democratic valuation (DV): Using majority voting principles to value public services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 36-42.
    8. Stutzer, Alois & Baltensperger, Michael & Meier, Armando N., 2018. "Overstrained Citizens?," Working papers 2018/25, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    9. Bloemraad, Irene & Voss, Kim & Silva, Fabiana, 2014. "Framing the Immigrant Movement as about Rights, Family, or Economics: Which Appeals Resonate and for Whom?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3b32w33p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    10. Arora, Swapan Deep & Singh, Guninder Pal & Chakraborty, Anirban & Maity, Moutusy, 2022. "Polarization and social media: A systematic review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    11. Onur Altındağ & Neeraj Kaushal, 2021. "Do refugees impact voting behavior in the host country? Evidence from Syrian refugee inflows to Turkey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 149-178, January.
    12. Joshua Alley, 2023. "Elite Cues and Public Attitudes Towards Military Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(7-8), pages 1537-1563, August.
    13. Cohle, Zachary & Ortega, Alberto, 2022. "Life of the party: The polarizing effect of foreign direct investment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    14. Wanyun Shao & Feng Hao, 2020. "Approval of political leaders can slant evaluation of political issues: evidence from public concern for climate change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 201-212, January.
    15. Elizabeth Suhay & James N. Druckman, 2015. "The Politics of Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 6-15, March.
    16. Louis Fucilla, 2021. "Does the Bureaucracy Affect Trust in Government? Evidence from Aggregate Public Opinion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 69-82, January.
    17. Riccardo Pelizzo & Zim Nwokora, 2016. "Bridging the Divide: Measuring Party System Change and Classifying Party Systems," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 16/042, African Governance and Development Institute..
    18. Stefan Voigt & Lorenz Blume, 2015. "Does direct democracy make for better citizens? A cautionary warning based on cross-country evidence," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 391-420, December.
    19. Monika Pompeo & Nina Serdarevic, 2021. "Is information enough? The case of Republicans and climate change," Discussion Papers 2021-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    20. Anna Kern, 2017. "The Effect of Direct Democratic Participation on Citizens’ Political Attitudes in Switzerland: The Difference between Availability and Use," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 16-26.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:8590. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.