What Citizens Want in Terms of Intra-Party Democracy: Popular Attitudes towards Alternative Candidate Selection Procedures
| Date | 01 October 2017 |
| Author | Emilie van Haute,Caroline Close,Camille Kelbel |
| Published date | 01 October 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032321716679424 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Political Studies
2017, Vol. 65(3) 646 –664
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0032321716679424
journals.sagepub.com/home/psx
What Citizens Want in Terms
of Intra-Party Democracy:
Popular Attitudes towards
Alternative Candidate
Selection Procedures
Caroline Close, Camille Kelbel and
Emilie van Haute
Abstract
Reforms of intra-party decision-making processes often rest on the idea that citizens want more
direct say in these processes, but empirical data to support this claim are scarce. Using original data
from the 2014 PartiRep voter survey in Belgium, this article explores the extent to which citizens
support alternative intra-party processes. It shows that voters have heterogeneous preferences in
terms of candidate selection procedures and that these are not random. ‘Disaffected’ citizens tend
to support open procedures, whereas critical citizens tend to prefer closed selectorates, that is,
intra-party actors. It also finds that voters’ preferences for intra-party models of democracy match
their preferences for models of democracy at the system level. Our findings confirm that citizens
do have clear preferences for how parties should organise and that these match their general
views on how democracy should work.
Keywords
democratic innovations, political parties, intra-party democracy, public opinion, Belgium
Accepted: 27 September 2016
An overwhelming majority of European citizens view democracy as the best form of
government (Ferrin and Kriesi, 2016). However, this positive story is undermined by
other indicators that point towards citizens’ dissatisfaction or democratic malaise (Newton
and Geissel, 2012; Norris, 1999; Nye et al., 1997; Putnam and Pharr, 2000). Monica
Ferrin and Hanspeter Kriesi (2016) argue that this paradox is due to the multidimensional
Centre for the Study of Politics (CEVIPOL), Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium
Corresponding author:
Caroline Close, Centre for the Study of Politics (CEVIPOL), Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Avenue
Jeanne 44 – CP 124, 1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Email: cclose@ulb.ac.be
679424PSX0010.1177/0032321716679424Political StudiesClose et al.
research-article2016
Article
Close et al. 647
character of the concept of democracy, and that some dimensions of democracy are more
under pressure than others. Especially, the electoral process dimension, in which parties
play a major role, is under stress. Indicators of growing distrust towards political parties
and institutions of representative democracy tend to support this hypothesis (Armingeon
and Guthmann, 2014; Dalton, 2004).
Political elites and parties try to ‘recast the relationship’ with citizens (Ryan and Smith,
2011: 2) by introducing reforms that aim to enhance possibilities for ordinary citizens to
have a more direct say in political decisions, both at the level of the political system and
within parties (Gauja, 2015; Scarrow, 1999). At the system level, reforms have been intro-
duced in several countries that aim at associating citizens more closely and frequently to
the decision-making process outside election cycles (Fung and Warren, 2011; Scarrow,
2001). At the party level, reforms have also been undertaken in multiple parties that aim
at associating more closely and more inclusively citizens to internal decision-making
processes (Cross and Katz, 2013). While some parties have allowed enlarged participa-
tion in intra-party decision-making processes to all their members (e.g. closed type prima-
ries), others have gone further, by allowing non-members to participate in the selection of
party leader or candidates (e.g. open type primaries) or in policy development, in that way
blurring the boundaries of the party. By introducing alternative forms of (intra-party)
democracy, these reforms challenge the traditional representative model.
The literature is quite abundant on the triggers of these reforms (Bedock et al., 2012;
Scarrow, 2001). Surprisingly though, what remains to be investigated is whether these
reforms are backed by public support (Bengtsson, 2012). So far, the empirical evidence is
scarce (Gauja, 2012) and sometimes contradictory, especially regarding intra-party reforms.
Using original data from the 2014 PartiRep voter survey in Belgium, this article
explores the extent to which citizens have homogeneous preferences and support alterna-
tive models of intra-party democracy. We first define intra-party models of democracy
and put forward our expectations regarding the determinants of support for alternative
models, and then test these on the Belgian case. By analysing the discriminating effect of
resources and attitudes to politics, the article tests two opposing theories: the cognitive
mobilisation theory and the disaffection theory. In addition, the article investigates to
what extent voters’ preferences for alternative models of intra-party democracy match
their preferences for models of democracy at large.
Understanding how citizens view intra-party democracy is crucial. Some may argue
that parties are private organisations and that what matters for democracy is the decision-
making process among parties and not within them (Cross and Katz, 2013; Sartori, 1965).
However, parties themselves increasingly externalise conflicts about internal decision-
making processes by bringing cases to the public courts. Besides, parties still occupy a
central position in the democratic process and face growing pressures to adopt alternative
decision-making processes to traditional representation/delegation. Multiple national or
international agencies have put pressure on parties to adopt reforms in that direction, from
IDEA to the Venice Commission at the European level, to national democracy promotion
agencies (see Cross and Katz, 2013: 1–2) or national party law (Pilet and Van Haute,
2012). These trends highlight that the debate on how parties should organise permeates
into the political system as a whole and becomes a public debate rather than a party issue.
Furthermore, the models pushed forward by these agencies put enhanced inclusive-
ness at the forefront. Yet we do not know whether this is backed by popular support. If
the goal of these reforms is restoring citizens’ trust and increasing their involvement in
politics, popular support would be the first prerequisite for these reforms to be efficient.
To continue reading
Request your trial