Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-65dc7cd545-wvgct Total loading time: 0.304 Render date: 2021-07-24T03:00:43.019Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Hurricane or fresh breeze? Disentangling the populist effect on the quality of democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2020

Andreas Juon
Affiliation:
University College London, Department of Political Science University of Zurich, Centre for Democracy Studies Aarau
Daniel Bochsler
Affiliation:
Central European University (CEU), Nationalism Studies and Political Science Department University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Science
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Are populist actors more like a hurricane that risks undermining democracy? Or do they aim for a different type of democracy, which strengthens popular control? This article offers one of the most extensive, systematic analyses on the impact of populism on multiple functions of the Quality of Democracy. Going beyond the view of ‘high-’ or ‘low-quality’ democracies, we emphasize that the Quality of Democracy is related to multiple dimensions or ‘functions of democracy’, characterized by important trade-offs. We argue that populist actors exert differentiated effects across these functions, depending on their degree of government access and host ideology. Our analysis relies on a new disaggregated dataset covering 53 established democracies in diverse world regions over the period between 1990 and 2016. We find that populist actors increase participation and representation, especially if they are confined to the opposition and especially if they belong to the political left-wing. In contrast, we find a negative impact of populists across the spectrum on institutional safeguards, such as the rule of law and state transparency. In sum, our findings indicate that populism has a variable impact on multiple aspects of democratic quality which should be systematically investigated in a disaggregated manner that is sensitive to these differences.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

We are very grateful to Michelle Roos for invaluable coding assistance.

References

Abou-Chadi, T. and Krause, W. (forthcoming), ‘The causal effect of radical right success on mainstream parties’ policy positions: a regression discontinuity approach’, British Journal of Political Science.Google Scholar
Abt, K. and Rummens, S. (2007), ‘Populism versus democracy’, Political Studies 55(2): 405424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armingeon, K. and Guthmann, K. (2014), ‘Democracy in crisis? The declining support for national democracy in European countries, 2007–2011’, European Journal of Political Research 53(3): 423442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A. and Greene, K.F. (2011), ‘The Latin American Left’s mandate. Free-market policies and issue voting in new democracies’, World Politics 63(1): 4377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R., de Vries, C., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Marks, G., et al. (2015), ‘Measuring party positions in Europe: The Chapel Hill expert survey trend file, 1999-2010’, Party Politics 21(1): 143152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batory, A. (2016), ‘Populists in government?Hungary’s “system of national cooperation”. Democratization 33(2): 283303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, T., Clarke, G., Groff, A., Keefer, P. and Walsh, P. (2001), ‘New tools in comparative political economy: the database of political institutions’, The World Bank Economic Review, 15(1): 165176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benoit, K. and Laver, M. (2006), Party Policy in Modern Democracies. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochsler, D. and Juon, A. (2020). ‘Authoritarian footprints in Central and Eastern Europe’, East European Politics 36(2): 167187. doi: 10.1080/21599165.2019.1698420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochsler, D. and Kriesi, H. (2013), ‘Varieties of democracy’, in Kriesi, H., Lavenex, S., Esser, F., Matthes, J., Bühlmann, M. and Bochsler, D. (eds.), Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Hondmills: Palgrave, pp. 69102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börzel, T.A. and Schimmelfennig, F. (2017), ‘Coming together or drifting apart? The EU’s political integration capacity in Eastern Europe’, Journal of European Public Policy 24(2): 278–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canovan, M. (1999), ‘Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy’, Political Studies 47: 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caramani, D. (2017). ‘Will vs. Reason: the populist and technocratic forms of political representation and their critique to party government’, American Political Science Review 111(1): 5467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castles, F.G. and Mair, P. (1984), ‘Left-right political scales: some “expert” judgments’, European Journal of Political Research 12(1): 7388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesterley, N. and Roberti, P. (2018), ‘Populism and institutional capture’, European Journal of Political Economy 53: 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, R.A. (1956), A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, L. and Morlino, L. (2004), ‘The quality of democracy. An overview’, Journal of Democracy 15(4): 2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Döring, H. and Manow, P. (2019), Parliaments and governments database (ParlGov): Information on parties, elections and cabinets in modern democracies. Development version. Retrieved 1 June, 2019, from http://www.parlgov.org/Google Scholar
Ginsburg, T. and Huq, A.Z. (2019), How to Save a Constitutional Democracy. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, S. and Sikk, A. (2016), ‘Economy, corruption or floating voters? Explaining the breakthroughs of anti-establishment reform parties in eastern Europe’, Party Politics 22(4): 522533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, K.A. (2009), ‘Is Chávez populist? Measuring populist discourse in comparative perspective’, Comparative Political Studies 42(8): 10401067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, K.A. (2013), Measuring Populism in Comparative Perspective. Paper presented at the XXXI International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association. Washington (DC).Google Scholar
Hawkins, K.A. and Castanho Silva, B. (2016), A head-to-head comparison of human-based and automated text analysis for measuring populism in 27 countries. Paper presented at the Explaining Populism: Team Populism January Conference. Provo (UT): Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Heston, A., Summers, R. and Aten, B. (2012). Penn World Table Version 7.1.Google Scholar
Houle, C. and Kenny, P.D. (2018), ‘The political and economic consequences of populist rule in Latin America’, Government and Opposition 53(2): 256287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, J.D. and Inglehart, R. (1995), ‘Expert interpretations of party space and party locations in 42 societies’, Party Politics 1(1): 73111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R.A. and Ruth, S.P. (2017), ‘Mind the Gap! Populism, participation and representation in Europe’, Swiss Political Science Review 23(4): 462484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R.A. and Schimpf, C.H. (2016a), ‘A drunken guest in Europe? The influence of populist radical right parties on democratic quality’, Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 10: 103129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R.A. and Schimpf, C.H. (2016b), ‘Friend or foe? Testing the influence of populism on democratic quality in Latin America’, Political Studies 64(4): 872889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R.A. and Schimpf, C.H. (2017). ‘On the distinct effects of left-wing and right-wing populism on democratic quality’, Politics and Governance 5(4): 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Immerzeel, T. and Pickup, M. (2015), ‘Populist radical right parties mobilizing ‘the people’? The role of populist radical right success in voter turnout’, Electoral Studies 40: 347360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, P.D. (2019), ‘“The enemy of the people”: Populists and press freedom’, Political Research Quarterly. doi: 10.1177/1065912918824038Google Scholar
van Kessel, S. (2015). Populist parties in Europe: Agents of discontent? Basingstoke New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriesi, H. (2014), ‘The populist challenge’, West European Politics 37(2): 361378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laclau, E. (2005), On populist reason. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Lehmann, P., Matthieß, T., Merz, N., Regel, S. and Weßels, B. (2018), The Manifesto Data Collection: South America. Berlin: WZB.Google Scholar
Levitsky, S. and Ziblatt, D. (2018), How democracies die. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (2002), ‘Populist democracy vs party democracy’, in Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (eds.), Democracies and the Populist Challenge. Houndmills: Palgrave, pp. 8198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, L. (2011), Radical Left Parties in Europe. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marshall, M.G., Gurr, T.R. and Jaggers, K. (2019), Polity IV Project: Dataset Users’ Manual.Google Scholar
Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (2002a), ‘The constitutive ambiguity of populism’, in Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (eds.) (2002b), Democracies and the populist challenge. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkel, W. (2004), ‘Embedded and defective democracies’, Democratization 11(5): 3358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkel, W., Bochsler, D., Bousbah, K., Buhlmann, M., Giebler, H., Hänni, M., et al. (2018), Democracy Barometer. Methodology. Version 5. from www.democracybarometer.orgGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C. (2004), ‘The populist Zeitgeist’, Government and Opposition 39(4): 542563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C. (2011), Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2012a), ‘Populism and (liberal) democracy’, in Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (eds.), Populism in Europe and the Americas. Threat or Corrective for Democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2012b), ‘Populism: corrective and threat to democracy’, in Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (eds.), Populism in Europe and the Americas. Threat or Corrective for Democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 205222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2013), ‘Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America’, Government and Opposition 48(2): 147174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2018a), Populism. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2018b), ‘Studying populism in comparative perspective: reflections on the contemporary and future research agenda’, Comparative Political Studies 51(13): 16671693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, J.-W. (2016), What Is Populism. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, J.-W. (2017), ‘Populism and constitutionalism’, in Rovira Kaltwasser, C., Taggart, P., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 590606.Google Scholar
Pappas, T.S. (2019a), Populism and Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pappas, T.S. (2019b), ‘Populists in power’, Journal of Democracy 30(2): 7084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plümper, T., Troeger, V.E. and Manow, P. (2005), ‘Panel data analysis in comparative politics: linking method to theory’, European Journal of Political Research 44(2): 327354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remmer, K.L. (2012), ‘The rise of leftist-populist governance in Latin America: the roots of electoral change’, Comparative Political Studies 45(8): 947972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, K.M. (2012), ‘Populism and democracy in Venezuela under Hugo Chavez’, in Mudde, C. and Kaltwasser, C.R. (eds.), Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat Or Corrective for Democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 136159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2012), ‘The ambivalence of populism: threat and corrective for democracy’, Democratization 19(2): 184208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, B. (2017), ‘Populism in Central and Eastern Europe’, in Rovira Kaltwasser, C., Taggart, P., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140160.Google Scholar
Taggart, P. (2002), ‘Populism and the pathology of representative politics’, in Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (eds.), Democracies and the Populist Challenge. Houndmills: Palgrave, pp. 6280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, N. (1998), ‘Democracy and populism’, Constellations 5(1): 110124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, N. (2017), ‘Populism and the principle of majority’, in Rovira Kaltwasser, C., Taggart, P., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 571589.Google Scholar
van Spanje, J. (2010), ‘Contagious parties: anti-immigration parties and their impact on other parties’ immigration stances in contemporary Western Europe’, Party Politics 16(5): 563586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkens, A., Lehmann, P., Matthieß, T., Merz, N., Regel, S. and Weßels, B. (2018), Manifesto Project Dataset. Berlin: WZB.Google Scholar
World Bank (2017), World Bank Development Indicators. World Development Indicators.Google Scholar
Zulianello, M. (2020), ‘Varieties of populist parties and party systems in Europe: from state-of-the-art to the application of a novel classification scheme to 66 parties in 33 countries’, Government and Opposition 55(2): 327347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Juon and Bochsler supplementary material

Juon and Bochsler supplementary material 1

Download Juon and Bochsler supplementary material(File)
File 2 MB
Supplementary material: File

Juon and Bochsler supplementary material

Juon and Bochsler supplementary material 2

Download Juon and Bochsler supplementary material(File)
File 4 MB
1
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Hurricane or fresh breeze? Disentangling the populist effect on the quality of democracy
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Hurricane or fresh breeze? Disentangling the populist effect on the quality of democracy
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Hurricane or fresh breeze? Disentangling the populist effect on the quality of democracy
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *