1. FP6 CivicActive Institutional arrangements for European Parliament elections: Do they facilitate? Do they mobilise? Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher University of Plymouth, UK Eva Anduiza Perea and Joan Font Barcelona and Madrid, Spain

2. Institutional mobilisation – Attributes of the political system and of the political process that make people want to vote Institutional facilitation – Attributes of the administration of elections and of the political communication process that make it easy to vote FP6 CivicActive

3. Underlying mobilizing indicators Degree of political decentralization Financial autonomy of local units Indices on degree of federalism and decentralisation State format and organisation FP6 CivicActive

4. Scores on the composite index of non-central independence from central government FP6 CivicActive 643210 GermanyAustriaFrance HungaryCzech RGreece Belgium Italy LithuaniaEstonia Denmark Poland Lux’bourgIreland Finland UK Netherl’sLatvia Spain PortugalMalta Sweden SloveniaSlovakia

5. Underlying mobilizing indicators Availability of direct democracy institutions FP6 CivicActive

6. Underlying mobilizing indicators Social fragmentation Religious fragmentation Linguistic fragmentation Ethnic fragmentation FP6 CivicActive

7. Linguistic fragmentation Belgium2.2Finland1.1 Spain1.8Netherlands1.1 France1.3Ireland1.1 Sweden 1.2Denmark1.1 Germany1.2Austria1.0 Italy1.2Portugal1.0 UK1.2 FP6 CivicActive

8. Contextual mobilizing indicators Degree of political fragmentation and polarization Party system fragmentation Government Fragmentation Political Polarisation FP6 CivicActive

9. 20 40 60 80 Voter turnout in the 2004 EP elections (%) 010203040 Vote for extreme political parties (%) % voteFitted values Vote for ‘extreme’ political parties

10. Contextual mobilizing indicators Electoral cycle Time since last elections Simultaneous elections FP6 CivicActive

12. Facilitating indicators Pre-vote ‘Automatic’ registration Flexible voting opportunities Voter education Campaign funding FP6 CivicActive

13. Flexible voting opportunities Postal voting – GB all postal (14m); on demand -Spain, Germany; at post offices -Finland, Sweden E-voting – polling place -Belgium (3.2m), France, Portugal (pilots) remote –Netherlands (very limited) ‘Mobile’ voting – any polling station in country -Czech R, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia FP6 CivicActive

14. Facilitating indicators At vote Ballot paper design Availability of ‘choice’ FP6 CivicActive

15. Ballot paper design Party symbols/logos – Colour -Ireland, Italy Black and White -Latvia, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, UK Candidate photographs – Cyprus, Ireland Non-alphabetic ordering – Lithuania (random listing), Netherlands (parl. strength), Slovakia (random within parties) FP6 CivicActive

16. Explaining turnout change 1999-2004 Turnout increases 19992004 Finland31.441.1 GE 31 st March ‘Candidate-centred’/media Ireland50.259.7 Local elections + Ref Local elections + Ref Netherlands30.039.1 ‘More polarised parties’ UK24.038.9 Locals 6 th MayLocal elections + all postal FP6 CivicActive

17. Explaining turnout change 1999-2004 Turnout decreases 19992004 Austria49.441.8 (GE 3 rd October)Pres 25 th April Greece75.362.8 GE 7 th March Spain63.045.9 Local + Reg electionsGE 14 th March FP6 CivicActive

18. The British case I % increase in turnout 1999-2004 All-postal regions Local electionNo local elections North East133.692.1 North West119.566.2 Yorkshire /Humber130.068.2 East Midlands96.690.5 Non-postal regions West Midlands76.844.3 Eastern62.435.5 South East61.338.8 South West56.230.6 FP6 CivicActive

19. The British case II Dependent variable = change in % turnout 1999-2004 BStd error All postal9.69*0.33 Locals4.07*0.30 % aged 65+-0.020.07 % aged 18-29-0.180.06 % manag/prof0.12*0.03 % council/HA0.020.03 % white-0.16*0.02 (constant)24.17*3.02 Adjusted R 2 0.78*significant at 0.01 level FP6 CivicActive

20. Countries seem to have ‘normal’ turnout levels which can be depressed/boosted by specific events/initiatives Moving a country to a different level is more difficult –and requires legislative change/long bedding in period Therefore, 2009 likely to be much like 2004 – with observed differences ‘explainable’ in a similar way Conclusions