THE SNS DEMOCRATIC AUDIT 1998/SNS DEMOKRATIRÅD 1998
Democracy and Citizenship
Report from the Democratic Audit of Sweden 1998
Olof Petersson, Jörgen Hermansson, Michele Micheletti, Jan Teorell and Anders Westholm
Summary in English
Today Swedes participate less in politics. There is also a drop or stagnation over the whole span of political resources from the ability to write a formal complaint about a decision of a public agency to active involvement in political meetings, participation in demonstrations, direct contact with decision-makers, and voter turnout.
Particularly notable is the drop in activity in political parties. Now less than eight percent state that they are a member of a political party. Even fewer go to political meetings or have a position of trust within a political party.
Civil society is not in much better shape. Our results show that the number of members in civic associations is decreasing. Today there are fewer Swedes who have a position of trust in a civic association. The proportion who are actively involved in associations has decreased dramatically as well. The group of people who are social movement entrepreneurs is becoming smaller and smaller. The existence of "social movement Sweden," an important traditional basis of Swedish democracy, is now threatened.
The study shows that the state of Swedish democracy is not all bleak. Women and men are now on more equal foot in many areas, though in some of them men are still more active than women. Belief in the openness of the political system and in one's own ability to influence the situation of the country has increased. There is no evidence that intolerance is growing. The results show that the qualities of toleration, discussion, knowledge, and contact with people one does not know or people who are different than oneself tend to reinforce each other. A noticeable development is the trend towards more toleration and broad-mindedness among the younger generations.
The report shows that Sweden should no longer be considered a homogeneous country as there are great differences among divergent groups of people. Immigrants and the unemployed are to large extent not involved in organized political life. The unemployed have much lower levels of engagement in civic associations and take much less contact to exercise influence over politics. This is also even the case when it comes to voter participation and other political means of expressing one's opinion.
Immigrants are also political outsiders. Immigrants believe that they are less able to appeal a decision of a public agency and that it is more difficult for them to influence their own situation. They also take fewer initiatives to influence their situation in the different social roles investigated in the study. The development over time is discouraging. The gap between immigrants and the rest of the population has been maintained or widened over the past ten years.
A combination of weak individual resources and badly functioning institutions is the reason. Many established organizations are better at maintaining the positions that they have reached than at adapting themselves to new social and political challenges. It is a serious flaw in Swedish democracy that new immigrants are not more welcome to enter Swedish society. Democracy is withering away behind the closed doors of the Swedish people's home.
Contemporary political life in Sweden includes two radically different groups of people. There are those who are not allowed to partake in political life and those who do not want to become involved. In particular, young and highly educated people as well as men use the exit option. They choose other channels than political and civil society to protect and promote their interests. The consequence is lower levels of party activity and civic engagement. This creates a very serious recruitment problem for the established civic associations.
In the long-run, these tendencies bed the way for a very worrisome development for Swedish politics. The basis for representative democracy is threatened when citizens start to leave political life. Today there are political outsiders in Sweden. It is forced upon some citizens. For others it is a free choice.
These and other results are part of a comprehensive study based on a survey of a representative sample of the entire Swedish population. It is posssible to compare these results with those presented in the comprehensive study of citizen power which was conducted by the Swedish Study of Power and Democracy (Maktutredningen) ten years ago. The conclusions from the 1997 study are presented today in the book Demokrati och medborgarskap ("Democracy and Citizenship"), SNS Publishers. It is the 1998 report from the SNS Democratic Audit of Sweden.
Table of Contents
Foreword
1 Being a Citizen
Meaning of Citizenship
Democracy and Citizenship
Outline of the Report
About the Citizenship Survey
2 Influencing One's Own Situation
Ability to Influence
Paths of Citizen Action
Microdemocracy
3 Influencing the Situation of the Country
Can Citizens Influence Politics?
Political Participation
A Thirty Year Perspective
Civil Society
Crisis in Political Parties and Civil Society
4 Three-Three-Third's Society?
Dimensions of Democratic Citizenship
Women and Men
Generation
City and Countryside
Education, Occupation, and Unemployment
Immigrants and the Native-Born
Gaps in Democratic Citizenship
5 Power over the Political Agenda
Agenda of Political Participation
Agenda of Citizens
Selective Bias
6 Enlightened Understanding
Knowledge about Politics
Civic Skills
Democracy and Knowledge
7 Citizen Virtues
What is a Good Citizen?
Popular Support for Rights and Freedoms
Toleration and Tolerance
8 Citizens and Democracy
Main Results
Four Processes
Bibliography
List of Tables and Figures
Table 2.1 Perceived Possibilities of Exercising Influence 1987 and 1997
Figure 2.1 Paths of Citizen Action
Figure 2.2 Dissatisfaction 1987 and 1997
Figure 2.3 Initiatives 1987 and 1997
Figure 2.4 Type of Initiative
Figure 2.5 Correlation between Dissatisfaction and Initiative 1987 and 1997
Figure 2.6 Outcomes of Initiatives
Table 2.2 Paths of Citizen Action 1987 and 1997
Table 3.1 Trust in the Political System and Self-Confidence
Figure 3.1 Assessment of the Effectiveness of Different Ways to Exercise Influence 1979 and 1997.
Figure 3.2 Political Participation 1987 and 1997
Figure 3.3 Distribution of Political Participation 1987 and 1997
Table 3.2 Political Participation and Political Resources 1968-1997
Figure 3.4 Political Participation and Political Resources 1968-1997
Table 3.3 Membership, Activity, and Position of Trust in Civic Associations 1987 and 1997
Figure 3.5 Average Number of Memberships, Activity, and Positions of Trust in Civic Associations 1987 and 1997
Figure 3.6 Distribution of Membership, Activity, and Positions of Trust in Civic Associations 1987 and 1997
Figure 4.1 Four Forms of Political Participation
Table 4.1 Ten Dimensions of Democratic Citizenship
Figure 4.2 Gender and Citizenship
Figure 4.3 Ability to Appeal and Individual Opinion Formation for Women and Men
Figure 4.4 Generation and Citizenship
Figure 4.5 Generation and Activity in Political Parties 1968-1997
Figure 4.6 Generation and Involvement in Civic Associations 1987 and 1997
Figure 4.7 City-Countryside Dimension and Citizenship
Figure 4.8 Education and Citizenship
Figure 4.9 Occupation and Citizenship
Figure 4.10 Unemployment and Citizenship
Figure 4.11 Immigration and Citizenship
Figure 5.1 Agenda of Political Participation 1987 and 1997
Figure 5.2 Agenda of Citizens
Figure 5.3 Correlation Between the Agenda of Citizens and Political Participation Based on Sixteen Types of Activities
Figure 5.4 Correlation Between the Agenda of Citizens and Political Participation Based on the Three Most Frequent Types of Activities
Figure 5.5 Correlation Between the Agenda of Citizens and Political Participation Based on the Thirteen Least Frequent Types of Activities
Table 6.1 Knowledge about Politics
Figure 6.1 Education and Knowledge about Politics
Figure 6.2 Knowledge about Politics 1978 and 1997
Figure 6.3 Gender and Knowledge about Politics 1978 and 1997
Table 6.2 Discussion on Societal Issues
Figure 6.4 Discussion on Societal Issues and Knowledge about Politics
Table 6.3 Use of Computers and Internet in Relation to Societal Issues
Table 6.4 Civic Skills
Figure 6.5 Differences among Groups in Use of Civic Skills
Table 7.1 Assessment of Ideals of Citizenship 1987 and 1997
Table 7.2 Assessment of Ideals of Citizenship and Reality
Table 7.3 Opinions on Rights and Freedoms 1994 and 1997
Table 7.4 Tolerance Towards Groups that are Disliked in Society
Table 7.5 Social Relations with "Others"
Demokrati och medborgarskap. Demokratirådets rapport 1998.
Olof Petersson, Jörgen Hermansson, Michele Micheletti, Jan Teorell and Anders Westholm.
SNS Förlag, Stockholm 1998.
The Democratic Audit of Sweden is organized by SNS, the Swedish Center for Business and Policy Studies, a Stockholm-based research organization. The task set itself by successive Democratic Audit Groups has been to contribute to a constructive, objective debate on the workings of Swedish democracy by highlighting different aspects of the Swedish political system. The group is variously composed each year, but it is always made up of four to five independent social scientists.
Previous study on citizenship and democracy: Citizen Power by Olof Petersson, Göran Blomberg and Anders Westholm (1989).
