PhD Summer School on Local Governance Winterthur, 10.7.2019 Prof . Dr. Andreas Ladner, IDHEAP

1. Size and Local Democracy PhD Summer School on Local Governance Winterthur, 10.7.2019 Prof. Dr. Andreas Ladner, IDHEAP

2. 2014: Finally!

3. Size and Democracy: Dahl/Tufte (1973) • Link between « democracy » and « size »? • What’s the ideal size of a political system to have it controlled by its citizens? • Advantages and inconveniences in relation to the size of a political system?

4. 40 yearsago • Population growth, urbanization • Discovery of small and successful European democracies • Grass roots democracy, proximity

5. Nowadays • Amalgamation of municipalities • Regions • Agglomerations • UE

7. Platon (427-347 v. Chr.) The united citizenry should allow people to know each other and they should have friendly feelings for each other. Ideal number: 5040 heads of family. Laws, in The Dialoguesof Plato. Vol. II: V, 738, 742; VI 771

8. Aristoteles (384-322 v. Chr.) Ideal size of the Polis: Big enough to be self-sustainable. People should be familiar with another. Should be able to gather on a square and to listen to a speaker. Politics, p. 292

9. Rousseau (1712-1778) Pour Rousseau, les possibilités du citoyen à participer à la politique varient inversement à la taille Plus il y a de citoyens, moindre est la part des individus à la prise de décisions. Egalité, participation, contrôle sur le gouvernement, rationalité politique, respect etconsensus entre les citoyens reculent lorsque la population et le territoire d’un Etat deviennent plus grands. «Du Contrat social», différents passages

10. Montesquieu (1689-1755) «Si une république est petite, elle est détruite par une force étrangère; si elle est grande, elle se détruit par vice intérieur.» De l’Esprit des lois, Livre IX, Chapitre 1.

11. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873): «But since all cannot, in a community exceeding a single small town, participate personally in any but very minor portions of the public business, it follows, that the ideal type of a government must be representative.» «Representative Government”

12. Critical juncture: the building nation states City states are no longer reflect reality. Democracy in small units is replaced by democracy in nation states.

13. Corrective elementssuch as ... • The principle of representation • Separation of powers • And federalism  make the advent of «large» democracies possible vgl. Federalist Papers/Tocqueville/Montesquieu/Mill

14. However: Theideas of the Greek philosophers, of Rousseau and Montesquieu, about the «real democracy » and the advantages of small political units did not disappear completely. We find them among the opponent of any centralization, those in favor of autonomous local units and participatory democracy.

15. Þingvellir Titre de la présentation

17. Hypotheses and operationalization

18. Taille • Inhabitants • Surface • Density • Gathering (centralized – decentralized)

19. How to measure the quality of democracy? From the perspective of the citizens!

20. Prerequisites of local democracy Social Integration Quality of democracy Interest Knowledge Trust Satisfaction Participation

21. Causal hypotheses Political interest • The larger a municipality is, the lower is political interest. • The larger a municipality is, the higher is political interest. Political knowledge • The larger a municipality is, the less people know about political issues. • The larger a municipality is, the more people know about political issues. ......... Political participation • The larger a municipality is, the less people participate in elections. • The larger a municipality is, the more people participate in elections.

22. Twotheoreticalmodels: • Declineofcommunitymodel • Political mobilisationmodel Verba and Nie (1978: 270 f.)

23. Analyses on aggregate level

24. Turnout at elections (means) and municipal size (2017) 2016; N=1278

25. Attendance at local assemblies

26. Problems 1. Size is related to a number of other important contextual variables 2. Ecological fallacy 3. Population in cities differs from the population small municipalities

27. Municipal size Cultural environnement f Social integration Demographicconflict Characteristics of the municipality Interest Political campaigns Knowledge Institutions Economic situation Quality of local democracy Trust Characterstics of the inhabitants Satisfaction Individualinterest Participation Individualcharacteristics Political behaviour Extended model

28. Multi-level analyses Axe des x: taille de la commune, axe des y: participationpolitique

29. SLD - project • Projet du Fonds national • N, NL, DK, CH • Niveau local, individus, 1680 interviews téléphoniques • Echantillon CH: fédéralisme et autonomie communale (sélection des communes) («études de cas» cantonaux vs échantillon «représentatif» et comparatif). Echantillon stratifié (taille de la commune), contrôle selon la religion, la langue et la conduite de l’élection, 30 personnes par commune (principe du hasard).

30. Results

32. The overallconclusionofthebook • There is some weak empirical support for the validity of the Lovely Lilliput argument. For a number of indicators we find evidence that increased population size has a negative effect on the quality of local democracy. Where we find these effects, however, they are typically weak (both in a relative and an absolute sense) and not robust. The effects are most pronounced in the smallest municipalities. In sum, small may not be beautiful, but it has its attractions. • The Beautiful Brobdingnag argument is disconfirmed: no consistent positive size effects were found. • The Compositional Effect argument is essentially disconfirmed. In only a few instances did we find evidence that an initial size effect could be attributed to the composition of the populace.

34. Ladner/Bühlmann 2007

35. Democracy Mobilization Decline of Community Size