I t was after the 2001 general election – when four out of every ten voters chose to stay at home – that turnout became a major political story. The overall turnout figure of 59.4 percent was bad enough to make all involved in politics examine what they were doing to repel so many potential voters. But that figure masks even greater levels of abstention among sub-sections of the population, with a majority (six out of ten) of young people aged eighteen to 24 deciding not to make the trip to the polling station.
Many academics, commentators and students of psephology have studied the question of low turnout and the only thing they are agreed on is that there’s no single explanation or simple solution to reverse this decline. As candidate in Maidstone and the Weald, facing an incumbent with a 10,000 majority, my best prospects for victory lie in the hands of the 22,000 constituents who failed to use their vote last time round. I am focusing my energies on reaching them and believe they will be receptive to Labour’s message, but the challenge lies in translating that dormant support into real crosses on the ballot paper.
Some determinants that increase the likelihood of voting, such as being older or better educated, are not factors that even the most energetic campaign team can affect. So the search is on for other indicators that positively affect turnout. As with so many problems facing social democrats, one answer lies across the North Sea. Scandinavian countries have not experienced the same downward slide in voter turnout that has afflicted the rest of the western, democratic world. So what do places like Denmark and Sweden have that we don’t? The answer may well be found in the far higher levels of active citizenship that are commonplace in these countries.
While Americans are bowling alone and Brits are staying home, Scandinavian civil society is flourishing, with high levels of volunteering, participation in social activities and support for all forms of active citizenship. It seems true, at a common sense level, that people who are involved in their communities are more likely to take a trip to the polling station in their stride. It is even said that overlaying a map of voter turnout with one that indicates the presence and degree of recycling activity shows clearly the links between these ‘outward facing’ activities.
But there is also academic evidence to support this theory of ‘attitudinal engagement’ as a driver for electoral turnout. Studies have shown that the propensity to vote is significantly affected by three variables: trust in others, perception that others are fair, and being asked to participate in social life. By being involved in the world outside our front door, whether as a supporter of a local charity, a member of a sports team or a worshipper in a religious congregation, we build connections with others that affect our decision-making.
Deprived of this social context, we are more inclined to weigh up costs and benefits to us as an individual, resulting, for example, in the utility-maximising individual choosing to stay home and watch TV rather than cast a vote in a race that seems already decided. Furthermore, people who are isolated from each other are inevitably less likely to embrace collective solutions to public problems. The active citizen votes, not because they truly believe their one vote may decide the race, but rather because it is the accepted social norm to be involved in democratic processes and because they feel genuinely connected to fellow citizens whose future depends on the outcome
of the election.
By this analysis, declining voter turnout is inextricably linked to the decline in participation in other social, civil and voluntary activity. Depressing, yes. But it does at least provide a purchase on the problem. If we want to encourage people to turn out at the next general election then we can begin by abandoning a narrow focus on the specific activity of voting and attend to encouraging other forms of participation. I suspect it is easier to encourage people to recycle, especially with doorstep collections, or to encourage people to donate or volunteer at a local, popular charity and then build on that renewed spark of awareness of their role in the greater scheme of things to persuade them to use their vote.
The virtuous circle of volunteering and voting is reinforced because the very act of being ‘out there’ and involved in anything leads to a greater likelihood of acquiring information, developing civic skills and gaining other resources that predispose people to engage in politics. Attention to the small things that create a healthy, active, civil society may seem a distraction from the serious business of winning votes. But it may in fact be the surest way of attracting non-voters, many of them Labour supporters, back to the ballot box.