Direct Democracy and Policies: Mapping out Practices and Success Factors
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Nanuli Silagadze Nanuli Silagadze // Direct Democracy and Policies: Mapping Outand Success Factors and Policies: Direct Democracy Practices Direct Democracy and Policies: Mapping Out Practices and Success Factors // 2021 9 789521 240836 ISBN 978-952-12-4083-6 Nanuli Silagadze Previous studies and degrees Diploma in International Relations, Moscow State Linguistic University, 2009 M.A. in Political Science, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, 2015 Cover design by Ilia Gugenishvili Direct Democracy and Policies: Mapping Out Practices and Success Factors Nanuli Silagadze Political Science Faculty of Social Sciences Business and Economics Åbo Akademi Supervisors: Prof. Kimmo Grönlund & Prof. Brigitte Geißel Reviewers: Prof. Emeritus Hannu Nurmi & Prof. PerOla OÖberg Opponent: Prof. Georg Lutz 978-952-12-4083-6 978-952-12-4084-3 ISBN (printed)2021 ISBN (digital) Painosalama, Turku, Finland To my parents, Zaal and Manana Acknowledgments “Enjoy the little things, for one day you may look back and realize they were the big things” This quote by Robert Brault resonates with me deeply. My PhD has been a journey filled with many small and mundane happenings and occasional large events which enriched me profoundly and contributed to who I am today. This journey would not have been possible if it were not for all those wonderful people who accompanied and supported me along the way. An enormous thank you goes to my main supervisor Kimmo Grönlund. Thank you for offering me the opportunity of undertaking my PhD at Samforsk. I am appreciative of your kind supervision and guidance throughout the process, and for your continuing care, for all the autonomy you entrusted me. with and for affording me the opportunity of attending countless conferences and summer schools. I could not have wished for a better supervisor I am also deeply grateful to Brigitte. Geissel who has been my second supervisor during both my master and PhD studies. Thank you for your valuable assistance, feedback, and support Next, I would like to thank, with all my heart, the entire team at Samforsk and its head of research, Lauri Rapeli who was always present for me and made sure that I felt at home in the academic community. I am also very grateful to Henrikr Serup Christensen whose door was perpetually open, beckoning me to drop by and ask whatever questions. I had. I am ever so grateful for you kind invitations to participate in your projects as I have learnt– so much during our collaborations- Additionally, I have had the pleasure of working and sharing the floor with the most wonderful colleagues Marko Joas, Carsten Anckar, Ann Sofie Hermanson, Peter– Söderlund, Inga Saikkonen, Sam Grönholm, Maria Bäck and many others. And of course, our team in Vaasa, it is always such a delight to meet you Marina Lindell, Kim Strandberg, Thomas Karv, Janne Berg and others. – I would also like to thank the entire administrative– staff at the Faculty of Social Sciences, Business and Economics at AÅbo Akademi and especially the super helpful and effective Tina Sigfridsson who made sure that everything ran smoothly. I am ever so appreciative of having had the privilege of receiving feedback on my thesis during the monthly political science research seminars. and biannual Finlandssvenska forskarskolan. I hope this tradition continues into the future so that other PhD students can benefit as much as I did – Certainly, my PhD journey wouldn’t be so much fun without my fellow PhD students/friends and junior researchers Marco Svensson La Rosa, (our 1 newly minted doctor) Fredrik Malmberg, Emily Sundqvist, Janette Huttunen, Varvara Lahtinen,. Richard Eveli, –Ran Goren, Aleksi Suuronen, Albert– Weckman, Rasmus Sirén, Jonas Schauman.. I loved our weekly fikas, lunches and dinners My two dearest friends Savitri Jetoo and Ilia Gugenishvili you made my time in Turku so special Thank you for being part of my life, I don’t know how I would have made it without you. As I reflect here today, I am reminded of my high school dream of becoming a PhD one day. However, as life would have it, I had somewhat abandoned this idea during my master’s study in Germany as I had stumbled upon many seemingly insurmountable challenges along the way. The turning point came when I encountered Sergiu Gherghina during my last (and his first) seminar at the Goethe University in Frankfurt. He introduced me to his fascinating world of scholarship and I became open to the idea that this work can be exciting and doable. More importantly, he believed in me and was persuaded that I had the inherent potential to pursue this path. Sergiu, I am so grateful for your encouragement and invaluable advice; I wouldn’t– be in the academia if it weren’t for you. Mulțumesc foarte mult! On a more personal note, I would like to thank my beloved family my parents, Manana and Zaal, and my brother Leo. Thank you for supporting me in every single way imaginable. It is such a comfort to know that you are always there for me, loving me in your own unique ways. Last but not least, r my warmest thanks to my partner,. Joachim. I appreciate you helping to illuminate my world in so many ways, by challenging long held notions, fo making me laugh and wonder I am grateful for our journey and growth together. Finally, I -would like top express immense gratitude for my dog Fluffy who has been a source of unlimited joy for almost four years now. You have been the best anti stress thera y, my six kilos of joy! Nanuli Silagadze Turku, June 2021 2 Contents 1. .................................................................... 9 2. Introduction: The Age of Referendums ..... 13 2.1 Analytical Perspective: Key Concepts, Functions and Success Factors ....................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Direct democracy and democratic theory: the virtues and ......................... vices 15 of2.2.1 referendums - ..................................................... 17 Key2.2.2 concepts and typologies- within direct ................................................. democracy 20 2.3 Towards a policy based ................................................................................. approach 21 2.4 Merits of the policy based typology ......................................... 22 2.5 Functions of referendums ......................................................................... 24 Political2.5.1 parties’ role in a referendum process .................................................... 25 Success2.5.2 factors in referendum .......................................................................................... 26 2.5.3 Redefining the concept of success ....................................................... 27 Policy domains 3. Approval ............................................................................................................. degree in referendums 31 3.1 ......................................................................................................... 31 Empirical Design 3.1.1 ........................................................... 32 Case3.1.2 selection ................................................................ 33 3.2 National vs. local referendums ..................................................................................... 35 3.3 Referendums .................................................................................................................... in autocracies 38 Why an original dataset 4. Methods .......................................................................................................... 41 4.1 Article Summaries .................................................................................... 41 4.2 Bringing the Policy in: A New Typology of National Referendums (Article 1) ............................................................... 42 4.3 When Who And How Matter: Explaining The Success Of ....... 43 4.4 Referendums In Europe (Article 2) Abortion referendums: Is there a recipe for success (Article ........................ 3) 44 When do Citizens Approve Policies? Explaining Variation in 5. National Level Referendums ................................................................................. across Europe (Article 4) 46 5.1 .................................................................... 46 Contributions and Conclusions 5.2 ............................................ 48 5.3 Reflections on the main ............................................................................................. findings 49 Limitations and avenues for future research Concluding ................................................................................................................................ remarks 50 References 3 List of publications This1. thesis is based on the following articles: European Political Science 19 461Silagadze,–477. Nanuli, & Gherghina, Sergiu (2020). Bringing the policy in: a new typology of national referendums. , , 2. ComparativeSilagadze, Nanuli, European & Gherghina, Politics 16 Sergiu (2018).–922. When Who And How Matter: Explaining The Success Of Referendums In Europe. 3. , (5), 905 Politics & Policy 49 –389. Silagadze, Nanuli (2021). Abortion Referendums: Is There a Recipe for 4. Success? , (2), 352 Silagadze,European Nanuli. Political When Science do Review. Citizens Approve Policies? Explaining Variation in National Level Referendums across Europe. Under review in All articles are reprinted with permission 4 Abstract - There is an increased interest in democratic innovations as a way to foster