Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Party-constrained Policy Responsiveness: A Survey Experiment on Politicians’ Response to Citizen-initiated Contacts

  • Patrik Öhberg and Elin Naurin
Abstract

How do individual party representatives respond to direct policy requests from citizens when the requests go against the party’s position? In a survey experiment, 2,547 Swedish politicians are randomly assigned to scenarios in which citizens make contact to influence a political decision. Their willingness to respond to citizens’ policy requests is measured using six indicators that capture adaptive as well as communicative responsiveness. The results show a lower willingness to adapt and to communicate when the request disagrees with the party’s position. The effect is mitigated when politicians agree with the proposal and when likely voters make contact, but only for listening and adaptive responses, not for explaining responses (which have the opposite relationship). Important findings for future research are that the party matters for politicians’ responsiveness and that their willingness to give explaining responses follows a different logic than for listening and adaptive responses.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg (emails patrik.ohberg@pol.gu.se, elin.naurin@pol.gu.se). The order of the authors’ names does not describe the contribution made to the article. Both authors have contributed equally to the manuscript. Support for this research was provided by the Swedish Research Council, the COFAS Marie Curie Fellowship Program and Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. We are indebted to the Laboratory of Opinion Research, University of Gothenburg, as well as to the Center for the Study of Democratic Citizenship in Quebec. The authors would like to thank André Blais, Damien Bol, Daniel M. Butler, Delia Dumitrescu, Peter Esaiasson, Stuart Soroka and Dietlind Stolle. Data replication sets and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123415000010.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Aars, Jacob, and Strømsnes, Kristin. 2007. Contacting as a Channel of Political Involvement: Collectively Motivated, Individually Enacted. West European Politics 30 (1):93120.
Adams, James, Clark, Michael, Ezrow, Lawrence, and Glasgow, Garrett. 2004. Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results? British Journal of Political Science 34 (4):589610.
Adams, F. James, Merrill, Samuel III, and Grofman, Bernard. 2005. A Unified Theory of Party Competition. A Cross-National Analysis Integrating Spatial and Behavioral Factors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ashworth, Scott. 2005. Reputational Dynamics and Political Careers. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 21 (2):441466.
Brettschneider, Frank. 1996. Public Opinion and Parliamentary Action: Responsiveness of the German Bundestag in Comparative Perspective. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (3):292311.
Broockman, David E. 2013. Black Politicians are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks’ Interests: A Field Experiment Manipulating Political Incentives. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3):521536.
Budge, Ian, ed. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945-1998, vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Butler, Daniel M., Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Pope, Jeremy C.. 2012. A Field Experiment on Legislators’ Home Styles: Service Versus Policy. Journal of Politics 74 (2):474486.
Butler, Daniel M., and Broockman, David E.. 2011. Do Politicians Racially Discriminate Against Constituents? A Field Experiment on State Legislators. American Journal of Political Science 55 (3):463477.
Butler, Daniel M., and Nickerson, David W.. 2011. Can Learning Constituency Opinion Affect How Legislators Vote? Results from a Field Experiment. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 6 (1):5583.
Cain, Bruce E., Ferejohn, John A., and Fiorina, Morris P.. 1987. The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carey, John M. 2007. Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting. American Journal of Political Science 51 (1):92107.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Entman, Robert M. 1983. The Impact of Ideology on Legislative Behavior and Public Policy in the States. The Journal of Politics 45 (1):163182.
Esaiasson, Peter, Gilljam, Mikael, and Persson, Mikael. 2013. Communicative Responsiveness and Other Central Concepts in Between-Election Democracy. In Between-Election Democracy. The Representative Relationship After Election Day, edited by Peter Esaiasson and Hanne Marthe Narud, 1533. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Esaiasson, Peter, and Holmberg, Sören. 1996. Representation from Above. Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
Esaiasson, Peter, and Narud, Hanne Marthe, eds. 2013. Between-Election Democracy. The Representative Relationship After Election Day. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Fitch, Brad, and Goldschmidt, Kathy. 2005. Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation.
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Shachar, Ron. 2003. Voting May Be Habit-Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment. American Journal of Political Science 47 (3):540550.
Gilljam, Mikael, Karlsson, David, and Sundell, Anders. 2010. Representationsprinciper i Riksdag och kommuner. In Folkets representanter. En bok om riksdagsledamöter och politisk representation i Sverige (Principles of Representation in Parliament and Municipalities. In The Representatives of the People. On Members of the Parliament and Political Representation in Sweden), edited by Martin Brothén and Sören Holmberg, 3564. Gothenburg: Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg.
Goldschmidt, Kathy, and Ochreiter, Leslie. 2008. Communicating with Congress: How the Internet has Changed Citizen Engagement. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation.
Grose, Christian R. 2014. Field Experimental Work on Political Institutions. Annual Review of Political Science 17:355370.
Harden, Jeffrey J. 2013. Multidimensional Responsiveness: The Determinants of Legislators’ Representational Priorities. Legislative Studies Quarterly 38 (2):155184.
Hooghe, Marc, and Marien, Sofie. 2012. How to Reach Members of Parliament? Citizens and Members of Parliament on the Effectiveness of Political Participation Repertoires. Parliamentary Affairs 67 (1):125.
Jones, Bryan D. 1973. Competitiveness, Role Orientations, and Legislative Responsiveness. Journal of Politics 35 (4):924947.
Manin, Bernhard, Przeworski, Adam, and Stokes, Susan C.. 1999. Introduction. In Democracy, Accountability and Representation, edited by Adam Przeworski, Susan Stokes and Bernhard Manin, 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1963. Constituency Influence in Congress. American Political Science Review 57:165177.
Müller, Wolfgang C. 2000. Political Parties in Parliamentary Democracies: Making Delegation and Accountability Work. European Journal of Political Research 37 (3):309333.
Öhberg, Patrik, and Wängnerud, Lena. 2013. Testing the Impact of Political Generations: The Class of 94 and Pro Feminist Ideas in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies 37 (1):6181.
Pitkin, Hanna F. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Powell, G. Bingham. 2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy: Majoritarian and Proportional Visions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Richardson, Liz. 2013. ‘We Need to Decide!’ A Mixed Method Approach to Responsiveness and Equal Treatment. In Between Election Democracy: The Representative Relationship After Election Day, edited by Peter Esaiasson and Hanne Marthe Narud, 171188. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Richardson, Liz, and John, Peter. 2012. Who Listens to the Grass Roots? A Field Experiment on Informational Lobbying in the UK. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations 14 (4):595612.
SCB. 2011. Förtroendevalda i kommuner och landsting. Demokratistatistik rapport 12, (Elected Representatives in Municipalities and Regions. Democratic Statistics Report 12). Stockholm: Statistics Sweden.
Skjaeveland, Asbjørn. 2001. Party Cohesion in the Danish Parliament. Journal of Legislative Studies 7 (2):3556.
Soroka, Stuart N., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2010. Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stimson, James A., MacKuen, Michael B., and Erikson, Robert S.. 1995. Dynamic Representation. American Political Science Review 89 (3):543565.
Tavits, Margit. 2009. The Making of Mavericks Local Loyalties and Party Defection. Comparative Political Studies 42 (6):793815.
Thomas, John Clayton, and Melkers, Julis E.. 2001. Citizen Contacting of Municipal Officials: Choosing Between Appointed Administrators and Elected Leaders. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 11 (1):5172.
Uba, Katrin. 2015. Protest Against the School Closures in Sweden: Accepted by Politicians? In The Consequences of Social Movements, edited by Lorenzo Bosi, Marco Giugni and Katrin Uba, Chapter 7. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Öhberg and Naurin supplementary material S1
Öhberg and Naurin supplementary material S1

 Unknown (177 KB)
177 KB
PDF
Supplementary materials

Öhberg and Naurin supplementary material S2
Appendix

 PDF (180 KB)
180 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 18
Total number of PDF views: 295 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1039 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.