[en] The literature on technocracy has shown that expertise is a crucial factor in driving support for technocrats. However, the literature has not investigated yet what happens when technocrats are opposed to partisan experts. In this article, we want to fill this gap by analysing the support for two potential ministers of health with relevant expertise for their portfolio but with a different relationship to partisan politics. For this purpose, we run a novel survey in 14 European countries with more than 20,000 respondents. Our main results show that non-partisan experts are preferred over partisan experts across Europe, both when citizens have a high sympathy and a low sympathy for the party appointing the minister. However, in the latter case, the effect is more evident.
Disciplines :
Sociologie & sciences sociales
Auteur, co-auteur :
Vittori, Davide ; Université Libre de Bruxelles - CEVIPOL (Centre d’étude de la vie politique), Bruxelles, Belgium
Rojon, Sebastien ; Université Libre de Bruxelles - CEVIPOL (Centre d’étude de la vie politique), Bruxelles, Belgium
Pilet, Jean-Benoit; Université Libre de Bruxelles - CEVIPOL (Centre d’étude de la vie politique), Bruxelles, Belgium
PAULIS, Emilien ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE) > Department of Humanities (DHUM) > Philosophy ; Université Libre de Bruxelles - CEVIPOL (Centre d’étude de la vie politique), Bruxelles, Belgium
Co-auteurs externes :
yes
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
Technocracy above partisanship? Comparing the appeal of non-partisan and partisan experts as ministers – A survey in 14 countries
Date de publication/diffusion :
2023
Titre du périodique :
British Journal of Politics and International Relations
The author(s) disclosedreceipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No. 773023).
Achen CC Bartels LM (2016) Democracy for Realist. Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Governments? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Alexiadou D Gunaydin H (2019) Commitment or expertise? Technocratic appointments as political responses. European Journal of Political Research 58(3): 845–865.
Alexiadou D Spaniel W Gunaydin H (2022) When technocratic appointments signal credibility. Comparative Political Studies 55(3): 386–419.
Anderson CJ Blais A Bowler S, et al. (eds) (2005) Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Anderson CJ Bol D Ananda A (2021) Humanity’s attitudes about democracy and political leaders: Patterns and trends. Public Opinion Quarterly 85: 957–986.
Andeweg RB Elgie R Helms L, et al. (eds) (2020) The Oxford Handbook of Political Executives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barkema WE (1991) The ministerial career. In: Blondel J Thiebault JL (eds) The Profession of Government Minister in Western Europe. Basingstoke: Macmillan, pp.70–98.
Bartels L (2000) Partisanship and voting behavior, 1952-1996. American Journal of Political Science 44(1): 35–50.
Beckman L (2006) The competent cabinet? Ministers in Sweden and the problem of competence and democracy. Scandinavian Political Studies 29(2): 111–129.
Bengtsson Å Mattila M (2009) Direct democracy and its critics: Support for direct democracy and “stealth” democracy in finland. West European Politics 32(5): 1031–1048.
Bertsou E (2022) Bring in the experts? Citizen preferences for independent experts in political decision-making processes. European Journal of Political Research 61: 255–267.
Bertsou E Caramani D (2020) People haven’t had enough of experts: Technocratic attitudes among citizens in nine European democracies. American Journal of Political Science 66(1): 5–23.
Bertsou E Pastorella G (2017) Technocratic attitudes: A citizens’ perspective of expert decision-making. West European Politics 40(2): 430–458.
Besley T (2005) Political selection. Journal of Economic Perspectives 19(3): 43–60.
Bickerton C Invernizzi Accetti C (2017) Populism and technocracy: Opposites or complements? Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20(2): 186–206.
Bickerton CJ Invernizzi Accetti C (2021) Technopopulism: The New Logic of Democratic Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blondel J Thiébault JL (1991) The Profession of Government Minister in Western Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bovens M Wille A (2017) Diploma Democracy: The Rise of Political Meritocracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Camerlo M Perez-Liñan A (2015) The politics of minister retention in presidential systems: Technocrats, partisans, and government approval. Comparative Politics 47(3): 315–333.
Campbell A Converse PE Miller WE, et al. (1960) The American voter. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Caramani D (2017) Will vs. reason: The populist and technocratic forms of political representation and their critique to party government. American Political Science Review 111(1): 54–67.
Carnes N Lupu N (2016) Do voters dislike working-class candidates? Voter biases and the descriptive underrepresentation of the working class. American Political Science Review 110(4): 832–844.
Castanho Silva B Jungkunz S Helbling M, etal. (2019) An empirical comparison of seven populist attitudes scales. Political Research Quarterly 73(2): 409–424.
Chiru M Enyedi Z (2022) Who wants technocrats? A comparative study of citizen attitudes in nine young and consolidated democracies. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 24(1): 95–112.
Copelovitch M Rickard S (2021) Partisan technocrats: How leaders matter in international organizations. Global Studies Quarterly 1(3): 1–14.
Costa Pinto A Cotta M Tavares de Almeida P (2018) Technocratic Ministers and Political Leadership in European Democracies. Cham: Macmillan Press.
Dalton R (2000) The decline of party identifications. In: Dalton R Wattenberg MP (eds) Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.19–36.
Dalton R (2021a) Party identification and its implications. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Available at: https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-72 (accessed 29 April 2022).
Dalton R (2021b) Modeling ideological polarization in democratic party systems. Electoral Studies 72: 1–10.
Dalton RJ (2004) Democratic challenges, democratic choices. The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dominguez JL (1997) Technopols: Freeing Politics and Markets in Latin America in the S1990. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Dowding K Dumont P (eds) (2014) The Selection of Ministers Around the World. London: Routledge.
Eberl J-M Huber RA Mede NG, et al. (2023) Populist attitudes towards politics and science: How do they differ? Political Research Exchange 5: 1.
Fernández-Vázquez P Lavezzolo S Ramiro L (2023) The technocratic side of populist attitudes: Evidence from the Spanish case. West European Politics 46(1): 73–99.
Ferrín M Kriesi H (eds) (2016) How Europeans View and Evaluate Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Galasso V Nannicini T (2011) Competing on good politicians. American Political Science Review 105(1): 79–99.
Hanimann A (2023) Do citizens judge health experts through a partisan lens? Evidence from a factorial survey experiment. Swiss Political Science Review 29(1): 1–140.
Harteveld E Mendoza P Rooduijn M (2022) Affective polarization and the populist radical right: Creating the hating? Government & Opposition 57: 703–727.
Horiuchi Y Smith DM Yamamoto T (2020) Identifying voter preferences for politicians’ personal attributes: A conjoint experiment in Japan. Political Science Research and Methods 8(1): 75–91.
Ignazi P (2014) Power and the (il)legitimacy of political parties: An unavoidable paradox of contemporary democracy? Party Politics 20(2): 160–169.
Jann W Wegrich K (2019) Generalists and specialists in executive politics: Why ambitious meta-policies so often fail. Public Administration 97(4): 845–860.
Jungkunz S Fahey RA Hino A (2021) How populist attitudes scales fail to capture support for populists in power. PLoS ONE 16(12): Article e0261658.
Kaplan SB (2017) Partisan technocratic cycles in Latin America. Electoral Studies 45: 219–229.
Kirkland PA Coppock A (2018) Candidate choice without party labels. Political Behavior 40(3): 571–591.
Lavezzolo S Ramiro L Fernández-Vázquez P (2021) The will for reason: Voter demand for experts in office. West European Politics 44: 1506–1531.
Lavezzolo S Ramiro L Fernández-Vázquez P (2022) Technocratic attitudes in COVID-19 times: Change and preference over types of experts. European Journal of Political Research 61: 1123–1142.
Leifeld P (2013) Texreg: Conversion of statistical model output in R to LaTeX and HTML tables. Journal of Statistical Software 55(8): 1–24.
Lewis-Beck MS Stegmaier S (2007) Economic models of voting. In: Dalton RJ Klingemann HD (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.518–537.
McDonnell D Valbruzzi M (2014) Defining and classifying technocrat-led and technocratic governments. European Journal of Political Research 53(4): 654–671.
Mair P (2014) On Parties, Party Systems and Democracy: Selected Writings of Peter Mair. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Mede NG Schäfer MS (2020) Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science. Public Understanding of Science 29(5): 473–491.
Mudde C Kaltwasser CR (2017) Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Önnudóttir EH Harðarson OP (2020) Party identification and its evolution over time. In: Oscarsson H Holmberg S (eds) Research Handbook on Political Partisanship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.167–176.
Petrarca CS Giebler H Weßels B (2022) Support for insider parties: The role of political trust in a longitudinal-comparative perspective. Party Politics 28(2): 329–341.
Rojon S Pilet JB Vittori D, et al. (2023) Which political outsiders do Europeans prefer as ministers? European Political Science Review. Epub ahead of print 15 February. DOI: 10.1017/S1755773923000048.
Schulz A Müller P Schemer C, et al. (2017) Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 30(2): 316–326.
Taggart P (2000) Populism. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Torcal M (2017) Political trust in Western and Southern Europe. In: Zmerli S Van der Meer TWG (eds) Handbook of Social Trust. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.418–439.
Valbruzzi M (2020) Technocratic cabinets. In: Bertsou E Caramani D (eds) The Technocratic Challenge. London: Routledge, pp.111–130.
Van der Meer TWG Ouattara E (2019) Putting ‘political’ back in political trust: An IRT test of the unidimensionality and cross-national equivalence of political trust measures. Quality & Quantity 53(6): 2983–3002.
Vittori D Paulis E Pilet JB, et al. (2023a) Do technocrats boost the acceptance of policy proposals among the citizenry? Evidence from a survey experiment in Italy. Electoral Studies 81: 102566.
Vittori D Pilet JB Rojon S, et al. (2023b) Technocratic ministers in office in European countries (2000–2020): What’s new? Political Studies Review. Epub ahead of print 4 January. DOI: 10.1177/14789299221140036.
Webb P (2013) Who is willing to participate? Dissatisfied democrats, stealth democrats and populists in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Political Research 52(6): 747–772.
Wuttke A Schimpf C Schoen H (2021) When the whole is greater than the sum of its parts: On the conceptualization and measurement of populist attitudes and other multidimensional constructs. American Political Science Review 114(2): 356–374.
Závecz G (2017) Post-communist societies of Central and Eastern Europe. In: Zmerli S van der Meer TWG (eds) Handbook of Social Trust. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.440–460.
