Search

Consociationalism promises to resolve tensions among groups in deeply divided societies by constructing shared identity that transcends ethnic divisions. Yet there is no guarantee that this will happen, and empirical studies testing this claim yield inconsistent results. We examine the extent to which political parties appeal to shared identities within a consociation, focusing on the Brussels Capital Region (BCR) in Belgium. The BCR constitutes a regional consociation aimed at addressing divisions between Dutch and French speakers. Based on a quantitative analysis of party programs, and a qualitative analysis of thirty interviews with Brussels MPs, our findings indicate that parties do indeed appeal to a common sense of belonging, often on issues that have a low ethnolinguistic salience. When addressing contentious community matters, however, we observe that Dutch-speaking parties (especially ethnic outbidders) prioritize their own linguistic group identity more than Francophone parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why do men and women vote for the populist radical right? This question, which speaks to the phenomenon of the "radical right gender gap", has been the topic of much scholarly interest. While previous studies refer to the role played by differences in political resources, attitudes, and socialization, this paper examines whether negative emotions towards the political system, and system-directed anger in particular, drive support for populist radical right parties differently for men and women. Drawing on the premise that populist radical right parties tend to appeal to angry voters, and given that acting upon anger is seen as an "agentic" trait, we expect that system-directed anger is more strongly associated with support for populist radical right parties among men compared to women. We test the hypothesis using original data from the RepResent voter survey organized in Belgium during the 2019 federal elections. In line with previous studies, we find that voters of the populist radical right party Vlaams Belang report high levels of system-directed anger. Men and women voters are similar in their display of this emotion, and contrary to our expectations, they are similar in how system-directed anger relates to vote choice as well. More than explaining gender differences in populist radical right voting, our findings confirm the idea that system-directed anger can incite women as well as men to cast a populist radical right vote. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Swiss Political Science Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Even though the European project has often been claimed to be a secular one, studies point out that the European Parliament is an arena in which a more Christian-inspired version of Europe is sometimes advocated. The question we therefore address in this contribution is what role does religion play in the parliamentary work of Dutch and Belgian MEPs? Within the larger RelEP2 project, this contribution specifically focuses on MEPs from Belgium and the Netherlands, countries in which religion has historically been one of the most prominent political cleavages. Based on surveys and an analysis of MEPs parliamentary questions, we find that the old religious conflict between Christian and secular groups is no longer dominant in Belgium and the Netherlands, although Dutch MEPs from ChristenUnie and Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij do still frequently rely on Christian values in their parliamentary work. Instead, religion has taken up a more prominent role among radical right MEPs from Belgium and the Netherlands, who primarily advocate an anti-Islam stance. Taken together, these findings suggest that there are few remnants of the old religious consociation, but rather we are seeing a politicisation of Islam is a driver of Dutch and Belgian MEPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is generally argued that representative democracies are unresponsive to the needs of future generations. Representatives, standing for re-election, are incentivized by the needs of current generations, and fail to take the interests of the unborn into account. However, this argument bypasses the institutional diversity among parliaments. In this article, we focus in particular on bicameralism, and we ask whether the representation of future generations is more prevalent in upper than in lower houses. We expect that posterity's interests will be taken into account more strongly in upper houses which are (1) mandated to reflect on the long-term impact of policies, (2) less politically and publicly visible and (3) at least partially composed of non-elected members. Based on an exploratory analysis of representative claims made on behalf of future generations in the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate, we conclude that the institutional status of the parliamentary assembly is not related to the propensity of making claims on behalf of posterity. We provide several explanations why this might be so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given that modern democracies face generation-transcending policy challenges, this study asks whether the interests of future generations are sufficiently taken into account in present-day parliamentary politics. Through analysis of parliamentary documents in Belgium (2010–2019), we examine whether present-day MPs make representative claims on behalf of future generations, how such claims are made and by whom. We find that MPs do formulate claims, but only to a limited extent and with little or no justification. Moreover, claims-making is driven by electoral-strategic considerations. Only those who hold prominent positions make claims for future generations and fewer claims are made in election years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a variety of deliberative practices in the organization and activities of political parties. What remains unclear, however, is how parties can promote deliberative democracy in an environment that remains predominantly representative. To investigate this tension, we study the Agora party in Brussels. Agora competed for the first time in the 2019 regional elections in Brussels with the aim of institutionalizing a permanent, randomly selected Citizen's Assembly with legislative power in the Brussels Capital Region and immediately gained a seat in the Brussels Regional Parliament. Based on an in-depth qualitative study including 20 semi-structured interviews with a broad range of party members and document analysis, we study whether and how Agora's organizational structure, i.e. its leadership and centralization, its intra-party democracy, and its organizational resources, allow it to promote deliberative democracy in a representative context. We argue that Agora experiences tensions between its deliberative ideals and its representative means and that there is a looming danger of becoming "just another part" of the system. However, it succeeds in simultaneously rejecting and competing in the representative system by adopting a stratarchical party organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several studies have investigated the impact of mini-publics on public policy. These works do not however integrate the fact that decision-makers have preferences before a minipublic, and that these preferences affect the way a mini-public can impact public policy. The article develops a model to measure the influence of mini-publics on public policy, called the Sequential Impact Matrixes (SIM). This framework distinguishes multiple types of influences that a mini-public can exert on decision-makers following the latter's initial sets of policy preferences. The model suggests that a minipublic can exert five different kinds of influences on decision-makers, namely a continuous, enriching, innovating, shifting, or an inhibiting influence. The framework is applied on the Citizens' Panel 'Make Your Brussels Mobility' and it shows that most of the Panel's recommendations were in line with the decision-makers' initial preferences, whereas influences altering these preferences are rarer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is often claimed that we are living in an age of increasing polarization. Political views, opinions, and worldviews become increasingly irreconcilable (idea-based polarization), while at the same time society appears to be getting fractured in antagonistic, opposing camps (identity-based polarization). However, a closer look at international datasets reveals that these forms of polarization do not affect all democracies to the same extent. Levels of identity-based and idea-based polarization strongly vary across countries. The question then becomes what can explain these diverging levels of polarization. In this paper, we hypothesize that the institutional design of a country impacts polarization, and that consensus democracies would display lower levels of polarization. Based on a quantitative analysis of the Comparative Political Dataset and Varieties of Democracy data in 36 countries over time (2000–2019), our results show that institutions did matter to a great extent, and in the hypothesized direction. Countries with consensus institutions, and more in particular PR electoral systems, multiparty coalitions, and federalism did exhibit lower levels of both issue-based and identity-based polarization, thereby confirming our expectations. Moreover, we found that consensus democracies tend to be better at coping with identity-based polarization, while the effect on idea-based polarization is smaller. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous studies have demonstrated that deliberation can affect how people think about complex policy options. In this paper, we operate on the assumption that while democratic processes cannot guarantee specific policy outcomes (without losing some of their legitimacy), certain types of democratic practices – such as deliberation – can be used to encourage people to support environmental policies. We test this assumption with an experiment that was designed to examine whether there are systematic differences in support for climate action policies among groups of people who deliberated the policies with each other and those who did not. In our experiment, 330 participants were asked to consider two policies designed to help mitigate climate change: (1) increases to the US federal gas tax; and (2) a tree planting policy. Our results show that those who deliberated became more supportive of government action on the gas tax policy, and they also became more willing to pay higher gas taxes than those who did not deliberate. These findings are consistent across model specifications and substantively significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Youth parliaments have been conceived as means to reconnect young people with politics, give them a voice in public debates, and ultimately boost the legitimacy of parliaments as democratic institutions. However, to contribute to the overall quality of democracy, youth parliaments must also reflect certain democratic principles in their own organisation. This paper identifies five principles to assess the democratic credentials of youth parliaments: the quality of representation, quality of participation, openness of the agenda, meaningful impact, and enlightened understanding, and applies them to the Belgian Jeugd Parlement Jeunesse (JPJ). Our results show that the JPJ offers a safe space for open and respectful political discussion among youngsters, but faces difficulties in generating impact and guaranteeing representativeness among the participants. The latter limits the JPJ's potential to close the widening gap between young people and politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the enduring importance of Lijphart's work for understanding democracy in Belgium, the consociational model has come under increasing threat. Owing to deep political crises, decreasing levels of trust in elites, increasing levels of ethnic outbidding and rising demands for democratic reform, it seems as if Lijphart's model is under siege. Even though the consociational solution proved to be very capable of transforming conflict into cooperation in Belgian politics in the past, the question we raise in this article is whether and to what extent the 'politics of accommodation' is still applicable to Belgian democracy. Based on an in-depth analysis of the four institutional (grand coalition, proportionality, mutual veto rights and segmental autonomy) and one cultural (public passivity) criteria, we argue that consociational democracy's very nature and institutional set-up has largely hollowed out its potential for future conflict management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the coproduction of local health plans in two heavily polluted “hot spots” in Belgium is explored. First, the results of the processes are examined, focusing on idea generation, policy impacts, participant relationships, support for the policy, and the strength of the partnership. Next, the process rules are analyzed, and the extent to which “open” rules (i.e., early, intensive, and broad public involvement in policy making) contributed to good results is examined. Findings indicate that good results were achieved in both cases, but those results do not seem to be related to the overall “openness” of the process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Democratic deliberation is claimed to improve the legitimacy of democratic decision making. However, deliberation’s beneficial effects do not come about easily. If deliberative innovations want to contribute to the legitimacy of political decision making, they have to reflect the principles of legitimacy in their own functioning. In this paper, we set out to assess the input and output legitimacy of four deliberative events, and determine which are the favourable conditions for their legitimacy. Based on a comparison of the British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly, the Belgian G1000, the Dutch Burgerforum, and the Irish We The Citizens, we argue that the institutional embeddedness of deliberative innovations strongly affect their claims to legitimacy, but also that their disruptive potential is unrelated to legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]