IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v8y2020i4p520-532.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experts in Government: What for? Ambiguities in Public Opinion Towards Technocracy

Author

Listed:
  • Ernesto Ganuza

    (Institute of Public Goods and Policies, Spanish National Research Council, Spain)

  • Joan Font

    (Institute of Advanced Social Studies, Spanish National Research Council, Spain)

Abstract

Technocratic governments and similar systems that give more voice to experts in the decision-making process are one of the potential alternatives to traditional representative party government. These alternatives have become increasingly popular, especially in countries where strong political disaffection and previous favourable pro-expert attitudes exist simultaneously. The Spanish case is one of these settings, with the emergence of a political party, Ciudadanos (Citizens), that represents these ideas. This article contributes to the understanding of public opinion support for an expert government, its main motives, and social supports. We claim that experts are not so much a decision-making alternative as they are a desired piece of the decision-making process. Support for a more significant role for experts comes especially from those that credit them with ample technical capacities, but most citizens want them to work as a piece of representative government, not as an alternative to it. The article combines two types of evidence: A survey of a representative sample of the population, including innovative questions about support to expert governments, and 10 focus groups that allow a more in-depth comprehension of the support (and criticism) of an increased role for experts. The results provide a nuanced picture of the types of expert involvement sought and their respective social support.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernesto Ganuza & Joan Font, 2020. "Experts in Government: What for? Ambiguities in Public Opinion Towards Technocracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 520-532.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:520-532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3206
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caramani, Daniele, 2017. "Will vs. Reason: The Populist and Technocratic Forms of Political Representation and Their Critique to Party Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(1), pages 54-67, February.
    2. Joan Font & Magdalena Wojcieszak & Clemente J. Navarro, 2015. "Participation, Representation and Expertise: Citizen Preferences for Political Decision-Making Processes," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63, pages 153-172, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Petra Guasti & Lenka Buštíková, 2020. "A Marriage of Convenience: Responsive Populists and Responsible Experts," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 468-472.

    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. Fernando Filgueiras & Pedro Palotti & Graziella G. Testa, 2023. "Complexing Governance Styles: Connecting Politics and Policy in Governance Theories," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    2. Elena Semenova, 2020. "Expert Ministers in New Democracies: Delegation, Communist Legacies, or Technocratic Populism?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 590-602.
    3. Petra Guasti, 2020. "Populism in Power and Democracy: Democratic Decay and Resilience in the Czech Republic (2013–2020)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 473-484.
    4. Geschwind, Stephan & Roesel, Felix, 2022. "Taxation under direct democracy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 536-554.
    5. Carlos Rico Motos, 2019. "‘Let the Citizens Fix This Mess!’ Podemos’ Claim for Participatory Democracy in Spain," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 187-197.
    6. José Joaquín Brunner, 2018. "Sobre las contradicciones culturales del liberalismo y sus malestares," Estudios Públicos, Centro de Estudios Públicos, vol. 0(150), pages 161-233.
    7. Marion Reiser & Jörg Hebenstreit, 2020. "Populism versus Technocracy? Populist Responses to the Technocratic Nature of the EU," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 568-579.
    8. Kovanic, Martin & Steuer, Max, 2023. "Fighting against COVID-19: With or without politics?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 337(C).
    9. Christensen, Henrik Serup, 2019. "How citizens evaluate participatory processes: A conjoint analysis," SocArXiv 5t72a, Center for Open Science.
    10. Rodrigo Barrenechea & Eduardo Dargent, 2020. "Populists and Technocrats in Latin America: Conflict, Cohabitation, and Cooperation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 509-519.
    11. Thomas König & Bernd Luig, 2017. "The impact of EU decision-making on national parties’ attitudes towards European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 362-381, September.
    12. Federico M. Ferrara & Donato Masciandaro & Manuela Moschella & Davide Romelli, 2023. "What do politicians think of technocratic institutions? Experimental Evidence on the European Central Bank," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 23201, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    13. Hyunwoo Kim, 2023. "Monetary technocracy and democratic accountability: how central bank independence conditions economic voting," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 939-964, May.
    14. Emiliana De Blasio & Lorenzo Viviani, 2020. "Platform Party between Digital Activism and Hyper-Leadership: The Reshaping of the Public Sphere," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 16-27.
    15. Philipp Harms & Claudia Landwehr, 2017. "Preferences for direct democracy: intrinsic or instrumental? Evidence from a survey experiment," Working Papers 1719, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    16. Grieco, Daniela & Bripi, Francesco, 2022. "Participation of charity beneficiaries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1-17.
    17. Petra Guasti & Lenka Buštíková, 2020. "A Marriage of Convenience: Responsive Populists and Responsible Experts," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 468-472.
    18. Claudia Landwehr & Thorsten Faas, 2017. "Who Wants Democratic Innovations, and Why?," Working Papers 1705, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    19. Soliño, Mario & Raposo, Rosa, 2022. "Contributing to healthy forests: Social preferences for pest and disease mitigation programs in Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    20. Yunyi Qin, 2023. "Grassroots governance and social development: theoretical and comparative legal aspects," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.

    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:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:520-532. 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 (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.