Widespread approval of direct democracy has been attributed to politically engaged citizens who seek more opportunities to participate in politics. Others suggest that people prefer a limited role in politics, but cynicism with representation leads them to embrace direct democracy. The authors analyze opinion in sixteen affluent democracies to test these explanations. The authors find expectations of “more participation” were motivated by distrust of government and the belief that a citizen had a duty to keep a watch on government. Distrust, however, had an inverse relationship with approval of referendums in several nations. Support for referendums was greater among people who expect more opportunities to participate in public decisions and from people who were interested in politics, trusted government, and were satisfied with how democracy was working. Enthusiasm for direct democracy may reflect what people find lacking in representative democracy as much as it reflects interest in a more participatory version of democracy.
Beard, Charles, and Birl Schultz.1912. Documents on the state-wide initiative, referendum and recall. New York: Macmillan.
2.
Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan.2007. Reasoning about institutional change: Winners, losers, and support for electoral reforms. British Journal of Political Science. 37 (3): 455-467.
3.
Bowler, Shaun, Todd Donovan, and Jeffrey A. Karp.2002. When might institutions change? Elite support for direct democracy in three nations. Political Research Quarterly. 55 (4): 731-754.
4.
Budge, Ian.1996. The new challenge of direct democracy. Oxford, UK: Polity.
5.
Burke, Edmund.1774/1854. Address to the electors of Bristol. In Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, ed. H. Bohn.London: Henry G. Bohn.
6.
Cain, Bruce E., and Kenneth P. Miller .2001. The populist legacy: Initiatives and the undermining of representative government. In Dangerous democracy? The battle over ballot initiatives in America, ed. Larry J. Sabato, Howard Ernst , and Bruce A. Larson.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
7.
Craig, Stephen C., Aimie Kreppel, and James G. Kane.2001. Public opinion and support for direct democracy: A grassroots perspective. In Referendum democracy, ed. M. Mendelsohn and A. Parkin.Houndsmills, UK: Palgrave.
8.
Cronin, Thomas.1989. Direct democracy: The politics of initiative, referendum, and recall. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Dalton, Russell.1984. Cognitive mobilization and partisan dealignment in advanced industrial democracies. Journal of Politics46:264-84.
10.
Dalton, Russell, Wilhelm Burklin, and Andrew Drummond. 2001. Public opinion and direct democracy . Journal of Democracy12:141-53.
11.
Delli Carpini, Michael, and Scott Keeter.1996. What Americans know about politics and why it matters . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
Donovan, Todd and Jeffrey A. Karp .2006. Popular support for direct democracy. Party Politics12(5): 671-688.
13.
Dyck, Josh, and Mark Baldassare .2006. The limits of support for direct democracy. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association meeting, Philadelphia.
14.
Gerber, Elisabeth R.1999. The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
Haynes, George.1907. The education of voters. Political Science Quarterly22:484-97.
16.
Hibbing, John, and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse .1995. Congress as public enemy . New York: Cambridge University Press.
17.
———. 2001. Process preferences and American politics. American Political Science Review95:145-54.
18.
———. 2002. Stealth democracy: Americans' beliefs about how government should work. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Hicks, John.1931. The populist revolt. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
20.
Hofstadter, Richard.1955. The age of reform: From Bryant to FDR. New York: Knopf.
21.
Inglehart, Ronald.1977. Silent revolution Changing values and political styles among Western publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
———. 1991. Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
Johnson, Claudius.1944. The adoption of the initiative and referendum in Washington . Pacific Northwest Quarterly35: 291-304.
24.
LeDuc, Lawrence.2003. The politics of direct democracy: Referendums in global perspective. Peterborough, Canada: Broadview Press.
25.
Lowi, T.1969. The end of liberalism: The second republic of the United States. New York: Norton.
26.
Matsusaka, John.2004. For the many or the few. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27.
Norris, Pippa.1999. Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance . Oxford: Oxford University Press .
28.
Olson, Mancur.1964. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
Piott, Steven.2003. Giving voters a voice: The origins of the initiative and referendum in America. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.
30.
Schattschneider, E.E.1960. The semi-sovereign people: A realists view of democracy in America. New York: HoltReinhartWinston.
31.
Schrag, Peter.2004. Paradise lost: California's experience, America's future . Berkeley: University of California Press.
32.
Sullivan, J.W.1892. Direct legislation by citizenship through the initiative and referendum. New York: True Nationalist Pub. Co.
