Advertisement

Mayors’ Notions of Local Democracy

  • Angelika Vetter
  • Hubert Heinelt
  • Lawrence E. Rose
Chapter
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)

Abstract

This chapter focuses on European mayors’ notions of ‘participatory’ and ‘representative’ democracy. The authors explore to what extent and why European mayors share the notions of either ‘participatory’ or ‘representative’ democracy. The first result is that mayors support both notions more or less independently from each other and that these two notions are not two poles on one dimension of support for democracy. Second, the aggregated change in support for notions of participatory and representative democracy from 2003–2004 to 2015–2016 is limited. While mayors’ notions of participatory democracy can be explained by their political ideology (left-right), their value orientations, their age, and the size of the municipality in which they serve, support for representative democracy is significantly related to mayors’ value orientations, their gender, and whether or not they are party members. Taking additional macro-variables into account adds only little to the explanatory power of the models: Directly elected mayors show significantly less support for representative democracy than do other mayors. The same holds for mayors from former Soviet countries. However, the more citizens tend to trust political parties, the more their mayors tend to favour representative democracy.

Keywords

Notions of democracy Participatory democracy Representative democracy European mayors Changes in support for notions of democracy Multilevel regression 

References

  1. Aars, J., Folkestad, B., & Rose, L. E. (2016). Representational Styles Among County and Municipal Councilors. In X. Bertrana, B. Egner, & H. Heinelt (Eds.), Policy Making at the Second Tier of Local Government in Europe (pp. 95–110). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Barber, B. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. (2007). Deliberative Democracy. In S. R. Rosenberg (Ed.), Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? (pp. 219–236). Houndsmill/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dahl, R. A. (1994). A Democratic Dilemma. System Effectiveness Versus Citizen Participation. Political Science Quarterly, 109(1), 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and Democracy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Denters, S. A. H., Goldsmith, M. J. F., Ladner, A., Mouritzen, P. E., & Rose, L. E. (2014). Size and Local Democracy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elster, J. (1989). Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Getimis, P., Heinelt, H., & Sweeting, D. (2006). Introduction and Main Findings. In H. Heinelt, D. Sweeting, & P. Getimis (Eds.), Legitimacy and Urban Governance (pp. 3–21). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Habermas, J. (1992). Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  10. Habermas, J. (1996). Die Einbeziehung des Anderen: Studien zur politischen Theorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  11. Haus, M., & Heinelt, H. (2005). How to Achieve Governability at the Local Level. In M. Haus, H. Heinelt, & M. Stewart (Eds.), Urban Governance and Democracy: Leadership and Community Involvement (pp. 12–39). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Haus, M., Heinelt, H., & Stewart, M. (Eds.). (2005). Urban Governance and Democracy: Leadership and Community Involvement. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Haus, M., & Sweeting, D. (2006). Mayors, Citizens and Local Democracy. In H. Bäck, H. Heinelt, & A. Magnier (Eds.), The European Mayor: Political Leaders in the Changing Context of Local Democracy (pp. 151–175). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heinelt, H. (2010). Governing Modern Societies: Towards Participatory Governance. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Heinelt, H. (2013). “Councillors” Notions of Democracy and Their Role Perception and Behaviour in the Changing Context of Local Democracy. Local Government Studies, 39(5), 640–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heinelt, H. (2016). Notions of Democracy of Councillors at the Municipal and Second Tier of Local Government—And Their Role Perception and Behavior. In X. Bertrana, B. Egner, & H. Heinelt (Eds.), Policy Making at the Second Tier of Local Government in Europe (pp. 133–160). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Heinelt, H., & Hlepas, N.-K. (2006). Typologies of Local Government Systems. In H. Bäck, H. Heinelt, & A. Magnier (Eds.), The European Mayor. Political Leaders in the Changing Context of Local Democracy (pp. 21–33). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  18. Heinelt, H., Sweeting, D., & Getimis, P. (Eds.). (2006). Legitimacy and Urban Governance. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Hox, J. (2010). Multilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Inglehart, R. (1999). Postmodernization Erodes Respect for Authority but Increases Support for Democracy. In P. Norris (Ed.), Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government (pp. 236–256). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaase, M., & Marsh, A. (1979). Distribution of Political Action. In S. H. Barnes, M. Kaase, K. R. Allerbeck, B. G. Farah, F. Heunks, R. Inglehart, M. K. Jennings, H. D. Klingemann, A. Marsh, & L. Rosenmayr (Eds.), Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies (pp. 67–201). Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Mannheim, K. (1964). Das Problem der Generationen. In K. Mannheim (Ed.), Wissenssoziologie (pp. 509–565). Neuwied: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
  24. Mouritzen, P. E., & Svara, J. H. (2002). Leadership at the Apex: Politicians and Administrators in Western Local Governments. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The Concept of Representation. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2011). Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tausendpfund, M., & Vetter, A. (Eds.). (2017). Einstellungen von Kommunalpolitikern im Vergleich. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  30. Vetter, A. (2009). Citizens Versus Parties. Explaining Institutional Change in German Local Government 1989–2008. Local Government Studies, 35(1), 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wollmann, H. (1998). Kommunalpolitik—zu neuen (direkt-)demokratischen Ufern? In H. Wollmann & R. Roth (Eds.), Kommunalpolitik (pp. 37–49). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angelika Vetter
    • 1
  • Hubert Heinelt
    • 2
  • Lawrence E. Rose
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Social ScienceUniversität StuttgartStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Political ScienceTechnische Universität DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany
  3. 3.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations