Citizens & Election Systems Workshop on electoral methods KTH Stockholm #kthwem Professor HENRIK EKENGREN OSCARSSON Head of the SOM-institute, University of Gothenburg Principal investigator Swedish National Election Studies

SOME (MAJOR) CONSTRAINTS FOR ELECTORAL REFORM In all election systems, the citizens do the voting The players (parties) decide themselves if and how they want to change the rules of the game (electoral reforms)

Separate Elections and Spring elections (2001) Personal vote (1998) Attitudes Towards the Democratic Rules of the Game among Citizens and Members of Parliament (2008) Absentee Voting in Sweden (2009)

Some findings The effects of the personal vote reform (mid 1990s) is far from what was intended 2006: 22%; 2010: 25%; only about half can remember (correctly) who they voted for Candidate recognition is very low (30 percent) no personalisation of politics here The new threshold (8%  5%) will most likely have little effect Absentee voting reforms ( ) have measureable and significant positive effects on turnout levels, according to micro level panel analyses. Issues on electoral reform is weakly politicized both in the electorate and among the MPs. Attitudes toward all kinds of electoral reforms are negative (except for local referendums). Status quo tend to be the most preferred option. Attitudes toward electoral reforms are more negative among the MPs than among the citizens.  More

1.Citizens’ estimates of fairness of elections 2.Swedish Citizens’ knowledge of the electoral system 3.Swedish Citizens’ trust in the Election Authority (Valmyndigheten)

1.Citizens’ estimates of fairness of elections 2.Swedish Citizens’ knowledge of the electoral system 3.Swedish Citizens’ trust in the Election Authority (Valmyndigheten)

Perceived Fairness of the Last Election ( ) “In some countries, people believe their elections are conducted fairly. In other countries, people believe that their elections are conducted unfairly. Thinking of the last election in [country], where would you place it on this scale of one to five where ONE means that the last election was conducted fairly and FIVE means that the last election was conducted unfairly?” COUNTRY MEANS

Perception of Fairness of Elections in Sweden % ”last election was conducted fairly” Sweden 1998: 74 % (post election interview) Sweden 2006: 64 % (pre election interview) Sweden 2006: 65 % (post election mail questionnaire) Sweden 2010: 58 % (post election interview) Source: SNES

1.Citizens’ estimates of fairness of elections 2.Swedish Citizens’ knowledge of the electoral system 3.Swedish Citizens’ trust in the Election Authority (Valmyndigheten)

Average political knowledge among men and women during the life span

Source: SNES

Factual knowledge (cont.)

What Swedes know about politics Knowledge of party standpoints Knowledge of the political system Factual knowledge on political matters Knowledge of candidates/political representatives

Source: SNES 2010

Some preliminary results Voters of small parties tend to have a higher probability of answering the ”6-percent threshold” question correct.

1.Citizens’ estimates of fairness of elections 2.Swedish Citizens’ knowledge of the electoral system 3.Swedish Citizens’ trust in the Election Authority (Valmyndigheten)

Job performance Election Authority (Valmyndigheten 2001-) NO RECOGNITION (24%) DON’T KNOW (4%) ”How do you think the following authorities are doing their job?” Source: National SOM survey 2010

Job performance Election Authority (Valmyndigheten) NO RECOGNITION (24%) DON’T KNOW (4%) ”How do you think the following authorities are doing their job?”

Job performance/Trust in the Election Authority Proportion of Swedes (among those having an opinion) that think that Election Authority is performing ”very well” or ”rather well” : SOM-survey 2010 (POST ELECTION): 56 percent Proportion of Swedes (among those having an opinion) that have ”very high” or ”rather high” trust in the Election Authority: SNES 2010 (PRE ELECTION): 92 percent

Who has an opinion on Election Authority job performance? Politically interested The younger citizens

Who thinks the Election Authority is doing a good job? The politically interested The older The well educated Sympathisers to the established Riksdag parties

Job performance ”Election Authority”, post election period Source: 2010 National SOM survey; estimates corrected for composition effects Field work 0=first two weeks 1=week 3+4 2=week 5+6 3=week =week 10+

Re-election Campaign Panel 2011 self recruited access panel (n=2000+) ”Do you think that the decision to arrange a reelection was a good or bad decision?” PREPOSTELEC Very good 22%15% Rather good20%20% Neither good nor bad16%16% Rather bad19%24% Very bad15%22% DK7%3% %

Re-election Campaign Panel 2011 self recruited access panel (n=2000+) Reasons not to vote in the re-election 2011 (rank ordered) (% very important+rather important) 1.I distrust the politicians (45%) 2.It was wrong to arrange a reelection (44%) 3.I was busy/away from home (33%) 4.No party represents my views in political matters (31%) 5.I am not informed of the issues of the regional election (29%) 6.My vote has no effect (23%) 7.I do not trust that the counting of votes is fair (22%) 8.I am not interested in politics (14%) 9.I did not know about the election (4%)

1.Citizens’ estimates of fairness of elections 2.Swedish Citizens’ knowledge of the electoral system 3.Swedish Citizens’ trust in the Election Authority (Valmyndigheten)

Citizens & Election Systems Workshop on electoral methods KTH Stockholm Professor HENRIK EKENGREN OSCARSSON Head of the SOM-institute, University of Gothenburg Principal investigator Swedish National Election Studies

Andel som bedömer Valmyndighetens arbete

Andel som anser att Valmyndigheten sköter sitt arbete ”mycket bra” eller ”ganska bra”