Political participation in Japan
| DOI | 10.1177/2057891116677349 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Research articles |
Research article
Political participation in Japan:
A longitudinal analysis
Willy Jou
Waseda University, Japan
Masahisa Endo
Kochi University, Kochi, Japan
Abstract
There is a large volume of studies on political participation, including motivations for citizens to
become involved in various channels of engagement. Building on this extensive literature, the
present study examines factors that affect participation, with particular attention on the linear
(conservative vs. progressive) and curvilinear (moderate vs. radical) impact of ideological orien-
tations, and also considers the influence exerted by political interest and partisanship. Utilizing data
from Japan spanning nearly three decades, we analyze changes and continuities in patterns of
participation in four categories of activities: election turnout; campaigning; system-affirming; and
elite-challenging. Empirical analysis reveals that radicals take a more active part in campaigning than
moderates, and progressives are more inclined toward elite-challenging activities than conserva-
tives, while no consistent results are found for turnout. The study also discusses possible causes
and consequences of a long-term decline in participation in Japan.
Keywords
ideology, Japan, partisanship, political participation
Introduction
The participation of ordinary citizens in the political decision-making process has long been lauded
for underpinning and enhancing democracy. Scholars have made the normative case linking the
quality of democracy with the extent of citizen engagement, positing that mass participation in
political activities help s to raise citizens’ sense of po litical efficacy and trust ( Barber, 1984;
Pateman, 1976). While turnout in elections, a traditional marker of participation, has decreased
Corresponding author:
Willy Jou, Waseda University, 1-6-1 Nishi-waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 169-8050, Japan.
Email: jouw2015@yahoo.com
Asian Journal of Comparative Politics
2017, Vol. 2(2) 196–212
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2057891116677349
journals.sagepub.com/home/acp
in many democracies (Blais et al., 2004; Franklin, 2003), this does not necessarily indicate wide-
spread disillusionment with democracy. Instead, many citizens have turned to less conventional
and often more direct channels of interest articulation (e.g. Barnes and Kaase, 1979; Dalton, 2004;
Norris, 2002).
A long-standing strand in the voluminous literature on participation focuses on factors that
affect individual willingness and ability to become politically involved.
1
This article focuses in
particular on the role of ideology as a stimulus for political action. Several studies have identified a
relationship between individual ideological orientations and propensity to take part in political
activities, particularly protests, and observed that leftists are more likely to be engaged than those
on the right (Barnes and Kaase, 1979; Finkel and Opp, 1991; Gundelach, 199 5). However, a
number of recent works point to rising participation by citizens espousing radical right views
(Grande and Kriesi, 2012; Macklin, 2013), which suggests that the impact of ideology may not
(only) be pitting left versus right, but (also) moderates versus extremists.
Nearly all the works cited above are based on studies of Western democracies, which raises the
question of whether and to what extent their findings are applicable to countries with different
historical trajectories and levels of economic and political development. The present study contri-
butes to the literature on political participation, including the link between ideological orientations
and differentchannels of engagement, by examining the case of Japan, an industrialized nation anda
consolidateddemocracy that nonetheless presentsdifferences from its Western counterparts in terms
of participatory patterns and ideological understanding. Furthermore, by analyzing data spanning a
quarter-century, we are able to trace changes as well as continuities in this relationship against the
background of major institutional and party systems changes during the period covered.
This article is organized as follows: The next two sections present some important literature on
political participation in general and on the impact of ideology in particular, and are followed by a
review of relevant works in Japan. The following section introduces data and variables used in this
study, and empirical results are then shown. The last two sections summarize the findings and
place them in a broader context.
Who participates?
In line with the assumption that the role of citizens in a representative democracy is to choose
between competing elites (Schumpter, 1942), political participation has traditionally been defined
as ‘those activities by private citizens tha t are more or less directly aimed at influ encing the
selection of governmental personnel and/or the decisions they take’ (Verba and Nie, 1972: 2).
Yet this limited role has since been widened to encompass more direct means of interest articula-
tion (e.g. Barber, 1984; Gould, 1988), to include not only ‘conventional’ but also ‘unconventional’
channels of participation (Cain et al., 2003; Clarke et al., 2009). Inglehart and Klingemann (1979:
209) refer to the latter as ‘elite-challenging’ activities, which are ‘likely to take place when one
knows how to cope with elites and wants something different from what the elites want’, for
example joining boycotts or demonstrations. They contra st with activities that, while seeking
changes to certain policies or their implementation, nevertheless implicitly acknowledge the
legitimacy of the extant political institutions and processes. Examples of this ‘system-affirming’
category of participation include most forms of community or neighborhood associations, as well
as contacts with local or national politicians.
Scholars have employed different classification schemes when analyzing forms of political
participation. Verba and Nie (1972) differentiate between voting, campaigning, contacting, and
Jou and Endo 197
To continue reading
Request your trial