EUYOUPART Final Symposium“Why participate? Youth, Politics and the Future of European Democracy”July 14th 2005Brussels

Which Factors Can Motivate Youth Participation

in European Democracy ?

Anne MuxelCevipof

Part One

Youth Participationin European Democracy

Common TrendsRelationship to politics

Low interest in politics Distrust towards politicians Significant political knowledge More or less Good level of information ⎬

Age effects Gender effects Education level effects Familial background effects Country and contextual effects

Political participation

Attachment to representative democracy

Voting as the most effective political action

Already an experience of voting Protest not so used Weakness of political

involvement

Political Participation related to Politicization and to Trust in Politics

Clo sePart iesMemb Org°Yes

MembOrg °No

WaysEff--WaysEff++

Po Comp ++

LRDK

Po lInt++

Po lInt+

VoteYes

VoteNo

Meeting Yes

News++

News--

Persuad e++

Future--

Future++

Gvt++

Gvt--

Po Comp +-

Rig ht

Liber--

Lib er+

Lib er++

Po Dis trus t--

Po Dis trus t++

Left

Po lInt--

DemonsYes

-1.2 7

-0 .77

-0 .2 7

0 .2 3

0 .73

-1.72 -1.22 -0 .72 -0 .22 0 .28 0 .78

Axis 1 - 11,4 %

Axi

s 2

- 5,9

%

Axis_1:Significant_ Variables

Axis_2:Significant_Variables

Axes_1_and_2:Significant_ Variables

Politicization Level: Weak

Political distrust: Weak

Political distrust: Strong

Politicization Level: Strong

Part Two

Which Factors Do Motivate Political Participation ?

1. Influence of school and education2. Influence of media3. Influence of the young people’s

personal environment

1. Influence of School and Education

The more active people are in school, the more active they are outside school.

The more active people have been in school, the more active they are after they graduate.

The opportunity structures for participation in school foster political participation behavior.

Discussing politics with teachers (participation in school) correlates with participating in legal demonstrations (participation outside school).

N = 6206 valid cases, missings excluded, relationship is positive in all countries

1125387Never

1136485Rarely

12510477Sometimes

32815468Often

94513563Always

5 times and more

3-5 timesTwiceOnceNot during the last

12 monthsNeverDiscussing with

teachers

Participating in legal demonstrations (in %)

Supporting election campaigns is more often done by young people who have been a representative for their class.

17212UK

18921Slovakia

16956Italy

8654Germany

9240France

18733Finland

8534Estonia

11642Austria

(total numbers)Been “speaker for

the class”Not been “speaker

for the class”

Percentage of “speaker for the

class”

Countries

Supported election campaigns (in %)

Informal support for election campaigns is more frequent, if young people have been involved in protest movements in school (even if they have already left school).

Young people in paid work; this relationship is not significant in Finland and Estonia.

504UK

3815Slovakia

3724Italy

4223Germany

2411France

3329Finland

2116Estonia

4022Austria

Ever participated in a protest movement in school

Never participated in a protest movement in schoolCountries

Ever convinced others to vote for a party or candidate (in %)

Policies to encourage participation in school will

strengthen European democracy

Promoting political participation in schools, either through formal institutions like boards, representatives, pupils unions, or informal like political discussions or protest movements, fosters political participation outside school and fosters as well political participation after school.

2. Influence of Media

Television is most frequently used to follow politics.Each country presents its peculiarities:

- in Austria and Germany, radio still keeps an influential role,

- in Estonia and Finland, the use of internet for political purposes is already established,

- in France, Italy and Slovakia, television is heavily predominant,

- in the UK a remarkable number of young people does not make use of any mass media.

46.0 54.8 54.773.9 65.2

80.4 72.2 64.2

16.7 6.3 2.3

5.012.5

3.77.8

3.224.9

8.7 16.4

7.3 15.9 10.48.3

15.1

5.828.6 25.4 7.8

4.5 4.0 8.57.7

6.5 1.7 1.1 6.0 1.9 1.5 3.2 9.8

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 Austria2 Estonia3 Finlan

d4 France

5 Germany

6 Italy

7 Slovakia 8 UK

1 TV 2 radio 3 newspaper 4 internet 5 none of these

There is a relationship between the choice of some mass medias (TV, radio, newspapers and internet) and young people’s democratic behavior.

Active-reception media (newspapers, internet) strengthen political participation.

Passive-reception medias (TV, radio for some aspects) are less decisive and associated to lower participation.

Percentage of young people voting in 2004 European elections according to their media use / per country (only young people eligible to vote)

0102030405060708090

100

Austria

Estonia

Finland

FranceGerm

any Italy

Slovakia UK

TVRadioNewspaperInternetTotal

Average number of associations in which young people took part during last 12 months, according to their media use / per country (sport clubs are excluded).

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Austria

Estonia

Finlan

d

France

German

y

Italy

Slovakia UK

TVradionewspaperinternetTotal

Policies to encourage the use of active-reception media to inform young people about politics (newspapers, internet)

will help to support active political participation.

3. Influence of the Young People’s Personal Environment

Weakness of the level of parental politicization as of the peers’ one:- only 20% have strongly politicized parents,- only 16% present their peers as having a strong level

of politicization.

Nevertheless, the political family background is always decisive: The higher the level of parental politicization is, the more the young people are politicized. The lower it is, the less the young people are politicized.

The correlation is similar concerning the influence of the politicization of their friends. The more the latter are politicized, the more the young people are also politicized.

The ideological affiliation has a direct impact: There is a major difference between the young people who can locate themselves in an ideologically leftist or rightist continuity with their parents and the young people who cannot. The first ones have more structured and more consistent political choices, while the second ones stay more distant towards politics, less involved and less participative.

Ideological Affiliation and Political Behavior

Political interest Partisanship proximity

Have already voted

Have already taken part in a

demonstration

Member of an association

Effectiveness of political

actions

Trust in political institutions

Very fairly interested

People who declare a proximity

Yes Yes Yes Very effective Strong

Total 37 17 59 19 48 25 14Khi-Deux 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Right filiation 52 37 75 17 54 30 26Left filiation 57 31 74 40 56 38 16Neither nor filiation 25 8 50 10 42 19 11Incoherent filiation 52 27 66 28 56 29 15Change 58 30 74 37 59 34 16Disconnection 29 12 54 18 47 23 9Others 31 10 54 16 51 21 13

Do the family’s influence and the friends’ one have the same impact on political participation of the young people?

The politicization of the personal environment is always very significant and in most cases more explanatory than the other factors, no matter whether they are social or political.

The parental socialization seems more effective on the political attitudes and on the ideological orientations of the individuals.

The peers’ socialization, even if the family background has an impact, seems to have more effect on the political behavior and on political participation.

In other words, political attitudes are more printed according to a vertical process of socialization (intergenerational) while political behavior is mostly generated in an horizontal one (generational).

Political Socialization and Political Participation

Clo sePart iesMembOrg °Yes

Memb Org °No

WaysEff--

WaysEff++

Po Comp ++

LRDK

Po lInt++

Po lInt+

Vo teYes

Vo teNo

MeetingYes

News++

News--

Persuad e++

Future--

Future++

Gvt++

Gvt--

PoCo mp+-

Rig ht

Lib er--

Liber+

Lib er++

PoDis trus t--

Po Dis trus t++

Left

Po lInt--

Demo nsYes

Austria

Es to niaFinland

FranceItaly

Slo vakia

UK

Stand Liv--

Stud Dip --Stud Dip ++

Dip --

Pro tes tant

Rig htFil

LeftFil

NNFilIncoFil

FilInt

FilNo Int

FilMo veIntFilParHetInt

ParVo te++

ParVo te--

ParVo teDK

Friend sPo --

FriendsPo +

Friend sPo++

ParPo --

ParPo ++ Kno w--Know++

KnowDK

ParLeft

ParRight

ParDKParNo tInt

-1.2 7

-0 .77

-0 .2 7

0 .2 3

0 .73

-1.72 -1.22 -0 .72 -0 .22 0 .2 8 0 .78Axis 1 - 11,4 %

Axi

s 2 -

5,9

%Axis_1:Significant_Variables

Axis_2:Significant_ Variables

Axes 1 and 2:Significant Variables

Political distrust: Strong

Politicization Level: Strong

Politicization Level: Weak

Political distrust: Weak

Family Politicization in Europe

-1.2 7

-0 .77

-0 .2 7

0 .2 3

0 .73

-1.72 -1.2 2 -0 .72 -0 .22 0 .2 8 0 .78Axis 1

Axi

s 2

Level_ Of_ Family_Po lit icizat ion:Very_ WeakLevel_ Of_ Family_Po lit icizat ion:WeakLevel_ Of_ Family_Po lit icizat ion:Med iumLevel_ Of_ Family_Po lit icizat ion:Stro ng

4 countries where parental politicization is quite strong and where there are the most numerous politicized and participative young people: Austria, France, Italy, Germany.

Austria:Respondents

-1,27

-0,77

-0,27

0,23

0,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0,72 -0,22 0,28 0,78

Factor 1

Level_Of_Family_Politicization:Very_WeakLevel_Of_Family_Politicization:WeakLevel_Of_Family_Politicization:MediumLevel_Of_Family_Politicization:Strong

France:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,22 0 ,2 8 0 ,78

Facto r 1

Italy:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,22 0 ,2 8 0 ,78

Facto r 1

Germany:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,2 2 0 ,28 0 ,78Facto r 1

4 countries where parental politicization is weak and where young people are also less politicized and less participative: Estonia, Finland, Slovakia, the UK.

Estonia:Respondents

-1,27

-0,77

-0,27

0,23

0,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0,72 -0,22 0,28 0,78

Factor 1

Finland:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,22 0 ,2 8 0 ,78

Facto r 1

Slovakia:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,22 0 ,2 8 0 ,78

Facto r 1

UK:Respondents

-1,27

-0 ,77

-0 ,27

0 ,2 3

0 ,73

-1,72 -1,22 -0 ,72 -0 ,22 0 ,2 8 0 ,78Facto r 1

Democratic paradoxes and shifts between political representation and

political behavior

• Young people are more and more critical about the political system but they still participate within the frameworkof the representative democracy

• As a social and political representation, protest is more and more considered as important, but in practice it is not yetused very much by the young people

• New social movements and new political organisations are well considered and are more attractive than traditionalones, but they concern only very few young people