When do consultative referendums improve democracy? Evidence from local referendums in Norway
| Published date | 01 March 2021 |
| Date | 01 March 2021 |
| Author | Bjarte Folkestad,Signe Bock Segaard,Jo Saglie,Jan Erling Klausen |
| DOI | 10.1177/0192512119881810 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512119881810
International Political Science Review
2021, Vol. 42(2) 213 –228
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0192512119881810
journals.sagepub.com/home/ips
When do consultative referendums
improve democracy? Evidence from
local referendums in Norway
Bjarte Folkestad
NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bergen, Norway and Volda University College, Norway
Jan Erling Klausen
University of Oslo, Norway
Jo Saglie
Signe Bock Segaard
Institute for Social Research, Oslo, Norway
Abstract
Consultative referendums may provide crucial information about public opinion but have received little
attention in the literature compared with their binding counterparts. In this article, we analyse 221
Norwegian local consultative referendums on municipal amalgamation using the Venice Commission’s
code on referendums. Much of the referendum literature suggests that consultative referendums are in
fact binding. The municipal councils followed the outcomes of the referendums in most cases, but 14%
chose to go against it. While the overall impression is that the outcomes of consultative referendums
are seen as binding, the data indicate that ballot design may affect voters’ choice as well as council
decisions. Although many democratic standards were met, the wording of questions and alternatives
on the ballot paper were problematic in a number of cases – reducing the democratic value of the
citizens’ advice.
Keywords
Referendum, consultative referendum, local government, municipal amalgamation, direct democracy
Corresponding author:
Bjarte Folkestad, Department of Social Science and History, Volda University College, Joplassvegen 11, Volda, 6103,
Norway.
Email: bjarte.folkestad@hivolda.no.
881810IPS0010.1177/0192512119881810International Political Science ReviewFolkestad et al.
research-article2019
Article
214 International Political Science Review 42(2)
Introduction
The purpose of consultative referendums is not self-evident. If the aim were to gauge public opin-
ion, an opinion poll to a representative sample might be more efficient, and if the aim were to let
the people decide, binding referendums would be more appropriate. The fact that consultative
referendums are used nonetheless suggests that the act of ‘consulting’ citizens is intended to pro-
vide added value beyond that of simply measuring public opinion – but the nature of this added
value is not immediately clear. From the perspective of the voter, consultative referendums may
seem puzzling. Why would political bodies consult citizens on a specific issue when they routinely
decide on a host of other issues without doing so? Why invite people to the polls without letting
them decide the matter? How can voters be assured that the outcome of the vote is not misrepre-
sented or taken as support of a position other than that intended? Is voting behaviour affected by
how the question is posed? Lastly, do politicians feel bound by the outcome of consultative votes
or do they feel free to disregard the voters’ advice? Such ambiguities relate primarily to consulta-
tive referendums, but the extant literature is largely silent on how they are actually resolved.
Overall, direct democracy is in ascendance worldwide (see, for example, Butler and Ranney,
1994; Kaufmann et al., 2004; Qvortrup, 2017). Whether in the form of a referendum initiated by a
political body or as an initiative by a citizens’ petition, popular votes on issues are commonly regarded
as the most authoritative expression of the popular will (Leininger, 2015). Extensive literature has
explored direct democracy from a comparative perspective (Altman, 2011, 2017; Butler and Ranney,
1994; LeDuc, 2003) and as a decision-making mechanism in single jurisdictions (Allswang, 2000,
Kriesi, 2008; Trechsel and Sciarini, 1998). The popular vote is not always used for deciding, how-
ever. In many cases, referendums are non-binding and serve instead a consultative function. While all
but identical to binding referendums in terms of practical execution, the democratic status of consul-
tative referendums is arguably quite different and more ambiguous (Kaufmann et al., 2008). They are
not instruments of direct democracy in the sense of direct popular rule, since elected representatives
may disregard the outcome. Consequently, consultative referendums cannot necessarily serve as a
mechanism to keep elected politicians in check (Qvortrup, 2017: 149). Indeed, because political bod-
ies always decide on subject, formulation and timing, consultative referendums are a long shot away
from the unmediated voting that ‘lets the people speak freely’ (Budge, 2008: 4).
The purpose of the present article is to elucidate the democratic role of consultative referen-
dums in light of empirical evidence taken from a unique event – a virtual deluge of popular votes
in the history of an otherwise markedly representative political system. In conjunction with the
ongoing Norwegian local government reform, as many as 221 consultative referendums on local
government amalgamations were conducted in a period of less than three years, as compared to a
normal average of 13 local referendums per year (Adamiak, 2011: 122). The very high compara-
bility of these referendums – in terms of thematic congruence and the identical legal status of the
jurisdictions – means that they represent a rare opportunity for increasing current understanding
about the workings of consultative referendums. The local government reform was both salient
and highly contentious in national politics as well as at the local level. Furthermore, the absence
of national regulation and supervision of local referendums in Norway allowed for great variation
in local practice, providing fertile conditions for research.
Based on qualitative interviews, registry data and surveys in all municipalities that had arranged
an amalgamation referendum, we tracked these referendums through four phases: the decision to
conduct a referendum, the formulation of questions and design of the ballots, the actual vote, and
finally the decision on amalgamation. For each phase, we asked questions to identify the underly-
ing ambiguities that adhere to the institution of consultative referendums. Keeping in mind that
binding referendums are not legally mandated in many countries, the democratic value of allowing
To continue reading
Request your trial