Linköping University| Institutionen för ekonomisk och industriell utveckling Master’s Thesis 30 hp | Masters’ Programme Political Science Spring Semester 2018 | LIU-IEI-FIL-A--18/02953--SE United or divided? Towns and rural areas in Sweden’s mid-sized municipalities. – What do Parliamentary elections between 2006 and 2014 say? Enade eller delade? Stad och land i Sveriges mellanstora kommuner. – Vad säger riksdagsvalen mellan 2006 och 2014? Jesper Holmström Zenk Supervisor: Mikael Rundqvist Examinator: Bo Persson Linköpings universitet SE-581 83 Linköping, Sverige 013-28 10 00, www.liu.se Abstract Sweden has a divided pattern in terms of voting patterns from region to region in terms of the urban/rural divide in the 2006-14 three-time election cycle. The country’s mid-sized municipalities outside of the three major metropolitan areas show a general likelihood to vote for the left-leaning red-green coalition than to vote for the centre-right “alliance” in the urban areas. On the contrary, the alliance had a general advantage on the countryside or in minor locations in said municipalities. Out of the 31 municipalities studied, regional variations are significant. Northern municipalities, while left-leaning in both demographic groups, saw a general trend of the red-green parties winning more relative votes outside of the urban centres. This went heavily against the rest of the country’s tendencies, while southern Sweden also saw many towns vote for the alliance over the red-greens, especially in 2010. The study confirmed that towns and rural areas are moving further apart, especially when considering the influence of the social conservative and nationalist Sweden Democrats on the rural areas. The Social Democratic party has instead become ever more dependent on urban voters during the eight years of opposition to the alliance between ’06 and ’14. The other main party of Sweden, namely the Moderates was slightly stronger in towns than rural areas in ’06, before shifting in a slightly more rural-dependent direction in the forthcoming elections. The scope of the study covered all eight parliamentary parties elected into the Swedish Riksdag in 2014. The findings did indicate tendencies for several of them in the electoral research being done around that election. Areas with lower trust in the political system, lower political personal interest, sense of direction of the country going in the wrong direction and low trust ratings for the European Union were linked with rural areas, where the Sweden Democrats gained strong support as an anti-establishment party. Interestingly, in spite of a larger number of the Swedish electorate self-identifying as to the right rather than to the left, the strong divide of right-leaning voters between the alliance parties and the Sweden Democrats contributed to a minority left-leaning government led by the Social Democrats being able to take office after the 2014 election. This study has helped identify and confirm regional and demographical differences between parties and has correlated well with previous findings. 2 Table of contents 1…................................Introduction………………………………………………………..p. 5 1.1…............................ Aim………………………………………………………………..p. 9 1.2…............................Research questions……………………….……………...………...p. 10 1.3…............................Disposition…………………………….……………………....…..p. 10 2…...............................Theory & contribution to science…………....…………….....……p. 12 2.1…............................Frame of interpretation…………………………………...........…..p. 17 3…...............................Previous research……………………….…………………………p. 19 3.1………………........Swedish research…………………..…………………….……..….p. 19 3.2…............................Non-Swedish research……………………………………………..p. 26 3.3……………............Hypothesises.……………………………………..…………..…...p. 28 4…...............................Method…………………………………….…………….………...p. 29 4.1…............................Approach during research……………………………….. ........….p. 32 4.2…............................Definitions of study objects ………………………………..….….p. 35 4.3…............................Sample and empirical considerations………………………..….....p. 39 5…...............................Results.………………………………………………………...…..p. 44 5.1…............................Summary of nationwide results………………………….........…...p. 48 5.2……………............Party results………………………...………………….…..……....p. 49 5.3…............................Regional results………………………………..…...…………..….p. 58 6…...............................Analysis of the electoral results………………..………….……....p. 78 7…............................. Conclusions……………………………..………………………….p. 87 8…..............................Teori- och litteraturdiskussion……………………………..………p. 88 9….............................Concluding comments……………..……………………………......p. 90 10…...........................Suggestions of future research……………..…………………….…p. 91 …………………….. References..………………………………………………………....p. 94 3 Tables 4.2……………………Inhabitant numbers of Sweden’s metropolises……..……...……...p. 35 4.3…............................Regions, counties and municipalities………………......……...…..p. 42 4.3……........................Regions……………………………………...……….…..…….......p. 43 5.…..............................Results in towns 2006……………………….….….………….......p. 45 5.…..............................Results in rural areas 2006…….…………………………..............p. 45 5.…..............................Results in towns 2010………………….…………..…..……..…...p. 47 5.…............................. Results in rural areas 2010…….…………………...................…...p. 47 5.…............................. Results in towns 2014……………………….……………….........p. 49 5.………………......... Results in rural areas 2014……………...………….……………...p. 49 5.2…............................Averages in towns 2006……………...………….…….…….…….p. 52 5.2……………............Averages in rural areas 2006…………………………..…..….…...p. 53 5.2…............................Averages in towns 2010…………………...……….………….…..p. 54 5.2…............................Averages in rural areas 2010………………………….……..….…p. 55 5.2…............................Averages in towns 2014……………………..…………..….……..p. 56 5.2…............................Averages in rural areas 2014……………………………….….......p. 57 5.3…............................Southern Götalands results …………………...…………...............p. 63 5.3…............................Western Götalands results ………………………………………...p. 66 5.3……………............Eastern Götaland’s results ……………..…….………….…..…….p. 69 5.3…............................Svealand’s results ……………………………………………...….p. 72 5.3…............................Norrland’s results ……………………………………….…...........p. 75 6…...............................Towns’ bloc advantage…………………………………………....p. 81 6…...............................Rural areas’ bloc advantage………………………..……………...p. 81 6…...............................Varying blocs for towns and rural areas…………….…………….p. 81 4 1. Introduction Why towns and rural areas? In a time of rapid political change in Sweden and in the Western World as a whole is it in my view, as author of this thesis exceptionally relevant to go down on a deep level in one of those factors that can result in differences in terms of how voters cast their vote. Towns and rural areas are often linked together in Swedish municipalities, which makes possible contrasts extra visible and relevant to study if one compares parts of municipalities versus one another. Is there a harmony, or do large splits within municipalities exist regarding the political will? 31 municipalities shall be examined. These are located across the entire country, in all counties bar one (see maps on pages 41-43). Based on the accumulated numbers of those votes that have been cast in the examined municipalities there are approximately three out of ten voters in Swedish parliamentary elections.1 The four large metropolitan areas and those municipalities that have fewer than 50,000 inhabitants could each be counties as separate thirds. Therefore, I do argue that 31 municipalities with between 50,000 and 150,000 inhabitants are perfect for categorizing as mid-sized in a population perspective since they are situated right in between metropolitan areas and smaller municipalities in terms of population. The question that this thesis answers is whether the political will among town-based and rural voters are matching one another? Does one or the other demographic group in these modern Swedish merged municipalities an advantage in their municipalities’ accumulated result depending upon party preferences in the parliamentary elections? It is to that question this study shall try and answer in the context of Sweden’s parliamentary riksdag elections 2006, 2010 and 2014 in the country’s mid-sized municipalities. The ideal size for a set area for local politics is a historically fought question without clear answers. Robert Dahl among others notes in the book Size and Democracy that the conflict is between how efficient it is for the citizenry to be able to participate and in terms of how society’s possibilities to have resources to realize the wishes of said citizenry.2 Sweden’s municipalities nowadays have everything from a couple of thousand to many hundreds of thousands of inhabitants. In conjunction with the municipal reform in Sweden in the early 1970’s many small municipalities were merged with surrounding towns. Since then 1 Swedish Electoral Agency & Microsoft Excel 2 Dahl, Robert & Tufte, Edward, R. (red.) (1973); Size and Democracy; p. 20; Stanford University Press 5 has these former municipalities been a part of