Post on 16-Jan-2023
Policy Response to: House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform
Committee
Inquiry: Voter engagement in the UK
Date: 20th February 2014
Name: Dr Rebecca Rumbul
Address: Wales Governance Centre, Pierhead Building, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff,
CF99 1NA
Email: Rumbulra@Cardiff.ac.uk
Contact number: 02920 688 056
About the Wales Governance Centre
The Wales Governance Centre is a Cardiff University research centre undertaking innovative
research into all aspects of the law, politics, government and political economy of Wales, as
well the wider UK and European contexts of territorial governance. A key objective of the
WGC is to facilitate and encourage informed public debate of key developments in Welsh
governance not only through its research, but also through events and postgraduate teaching.
The Centre is sponsored and supported by Cardiff University’s Law School and School of
European Studies, while also collaborating with scholars from across the University. The WGC
enjoys formal ties with both WISERD and the Institute of Welsh Affairs while also maintaining
close cooperative relationships with colleagues in other institutions across Wales, the UK,
Europe and beyond.
Introduction
Whilst consideration of recent voter engagement and turnout relates to all those aged 18 and
above, this submission will focus on turnout and engagement of ‘younger voters’ aged 18 –
29. The political engagement experience of this age group is distinct from older voters, and
any consideration of voter engagement should examine these distinct concerns. The submission
will also consider issues, education and services concerned with those aged under 18 that may
affect, improve or depress turnout once the individual becomes able to vote.
Young voters: Generational and Lifecycle Effects
Political engagement of young people needs to be examined in the context of two different
effects – Lifecycle and Generational.
Lifestyle effects take into account the relative high mobility and activity of young people
during their early adult lives that can prevent them from registering to vote or devoting time
to political engagement. During this period, studying for further or higher education, moving
often for university or work, securing driving licenses, and extended travelling are priority
activities. However, the lifecycle effect demonstrates that a young person’s growing
diversification of responsibilities related to becoming an adult, such as purchasing a house or
having children, and the growing stability that accompanies such change, will eventually mean
that they come to adopt the traditional behaviours of adulthood.
Assuming voting is a socialised behaviour that young people have experienced through their
parents or older social groups, voting and political engagement will be one of those adult
activities that these people then take up. Contemporary studies of young people’s political
engagement in the USA at least in part support this, and demonstrate that the ‘older’ young
people were more likely to investigate specific campaign issues and to vote than their younger
counterparts1.
A lack of voter turnout amongst young people due to the lifecycle effect is therefore
disappointing in its lack of representation of younger people’s preferences, but not in itself an
indicator of overall declining engagement.
Generational effects are significantly more concerning for those attempting to maintain or
increase voter engagement against a backdrop of decline. Such effects are the result of early
experiences of politics and political engagement in a young person’s life, and inform their
attitudes and opinions as they progress in their lifecycle. Therefore, negative experiences or
exposure to negative politics early in the lifecycle are likely to inhibit voting later in the
lifecycle. Generational effects are ongoing, incremental, and are transmitted inter-
1 Kushin M. J., Yamamoto M. (2010). Did social media really matter? College students’ use of online media and
political decision making in the 2008 Election. Mass Communication & Society, 13, 608–630
generationally, and parental behaviours that assign a low value to political engagement can
not only be emulated by younger people, but can often be slightly amplified. Many scholars
link the decline in voting amongst younger people to a wider generational decline in
participation in civil society.
What are the main factors that have contributed to low voter turnout in recent UK
elections?
Voter registration and turnout is an expression of individual external and internal political
efficacy, that is, the level of belief that the individual holds that their vote can influence
government and that government will be responsive to collective demands of civil society.
Political cynicism:
Occurs when young people develop a negative orientation towards government and
politicians
Is expressed by the belief that the government is not delivering its promises, and thus
not satisfying the needs of the public
Is also expressed by disbelief in the possibility of politicians’ good intentions when
dealing with others.
Direct engagement between politician/campaign and voter is shown to increase trust and
increase turnout, however these direct links are declining2 in the age of mass communication. A
generational shift has occurred in the political attitudes of young people, manifesting as a
gradual shift away from traditional party-oriented forms of political engagement. Young
people are now less confident in differentiating between parties, and undecided voters are
less likely to turn out to vote, particularly where negative campaigning on all sides has been
employed3.
Identification with a party, if not a specific politician, is considered key in voter turnout,
however:
Fewer young people than ever before now identify with a specific political party
Amongst young people, party membership has decreased from 8% in 1964, to 1% in
20104
This is mirrored across age groups, and clearly shows a generational decline that will
further depress party membership over time.
2 Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-
scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(01), 33-48. 3 Carraro, L., Gawronski, B., & Castelli, L. (2010). Losing on all fronts: The effects of negative versus positive
person‐based campaigns on implicit and explicit evaluations of political candidates. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(3), 453-470. 4 British Election Survey 1964 & British Election Survey 2010
Linked to this is a lack of visibility of politicians that young people consider to reflect their own
experiences. The popularly televised politicians (Government Ministers / Shadow Ministers
/ Party Leaders) appear not only generic, but physically and behaviourally distant from
young people. Where young people are unable to identify individually with politicians, they
are less likely to make effort to turn out to vote for them, even if they believe their policies to
be favourable5.
What are the main factors that affect voter registration?
Lifecycle factors relating to mobility such as:
frequently changing address,
living between university and familial residences,
living in shared houses
taking extended periods to travel
often act as a significant barrier to voter registration amongst young people. Due to the
length of time and bureaucracy involved in voter registration, significant numbers of young
people fail to register in sufficient time to take part in elections. Even where young people are
resident over a longer period of time, young people are more likely to wait until the last
minute to vote than experienced voters6, and if these young people have not registered, they
are unable to participate.
Educational lifecycle factors also contribute to a level of apathy and lack of confidence
amongst younger voters which reduces their inclination to register.
Many young people in the UK receive little or no school-age education on the
contemporary political and constitutional structures of the UK, and therefore are
unprepared to negotiate the political landscape at the time of an election.
Young people growing up in devolved areas of the UK are even further
disadvantaged, as the additional layer of politics creates confusion over which
government is responsible for specific policy areas.
This lack of educational emphasis on current affairs during a young person’s academic
career also contributes to a belief that politics is not important for them, and is for
other people7.
5 Henn, M., Weinstein, M. and Forrest, S. (2005), Uninterested Youth? Young People's Attitudes towards Party
Politics in Britain. Political Studies, 53: 556–578. 6 Fournier P., Nadeau R., Blais A., Gidengil E., Nevitte N.(2004). Time-of-voting decision and susceptibility to
campaign effects. Electoral Studies, 23, 661–681 7 Harris, A., Wyn, J., & Younes, S. (2010). Beyond apathetic or activist youth ‘Ordinary’young people and
contemporary forms of participation. Young, 18(1), 9-32.
It is not until later life, when this age group come to actively consume news media, that they
may have the confidence and sufficient information to register to vote.
To what extent does the public’s perception of MPs, Parliament, the Government and
events such as Prime Minister’s questions affect voter registration and turnout?
What role does the media play in this context?
Young people’s perception of government and their own level of political efficacy is heavily
influenced by the representation of government and politicians across media platforms, e.g.:
Young people see only noise and confusing, cynical bluster when watching PMQ’s, and
have little understanding of how debate in the House works8.
First-time voters have been shown to be more susceptible to television panel debates9,
therefore, how politicians represent themselves during these specific events is key to
engaging individuals in the legitimacy and necessity of political process as well as in
attracting voters to their party.
Broad representation of politics across media platforms has an important role to play in
developing voter efficacy and increasing voter turnout amongst young people. Studies show
that use of internet, talk radio and television in accessing political information actually
increases political cynicism in young people, and has a negative effect on political
engagement10. This is due to the nature of media content available concerning politics and
covers both direct information from parties (such as quotes, speeches, party information) and
content produced by media outlets themselves (such as news stories, comments, blogs). These
studies show that young voters’ use of the internet allows them to be more informed about
politics, but the information accessed does not make them feel like the government would be
effective, thereby decreasing the likelihood of them participating in the political process.
Whilst some studies11 have found that active consumption of political news from any type of
media platform increases likelihood of political engagement, in younger people this is often
‘passive’ engagement, such as:
commenting on posts / tweets
8 Dean, D. (2006). View from the armchair: why young people took no interest and no notice of the campaigns.
The marketing of political parties: political marketing at the 2005 British general election, 231. 9 Aalberg T., Jenssen A. (2007). Do television debates in multiparty systems affect viewers? A quasi-
experimental study with first-time voters. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30, 115–135. 10 Lee T. (2005). Media effects on political disengagement revisited: A multiple-media approach. Journalism and
Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 416–433 AND Lee T.(2005). Media effects on political disengagement revisited: A multiple-media approach. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 416–433 11Austin L., Halvorson E. (2008). What drives political activity in college students? An application of the situational theory of publics. Paper presented at International Communication Association 2008 Annual Convention, Quebec, Canada.
blogging
‘liking’ pages on Facebook
signing online petitions.
And is also focused on ‘single-issue’ politics, such as:
tuition fees
boycotting certain brands
campaigning on climate change
This combines into an overall light-touch and volatile approach to political engagement
that rejects traditional forms of engagement in favour of online and social movements led
by social groups, civil society and private sector.
Whilst young people are increasingly receiving political information from online sources, and
have been shown to be more susceptible to online peer influence, only those individuals with
high levels of political efficacy actively engage through this platform. Rather than mobilising
the less active people to become involved in politics, social news media may merely be
becoming a space to create a common political agenda for those who actively care about the
process. Young people that are politically disengaged remain so, while the engaged utilise
more online and social media to participate in politics12.
What socioeconomic factors affect registration and turnout and what, if anything, can we
learn from this about how to improve voter registration and turnout?
Voter registration and turnout has declined sharply amongst young people that are
considered ‘resource poor’, that is, young people with lower levels of educational attainment,
and from families with lower income levels13.
The decline amongst this group has been greater than amongst young people with higher
levels of educational attainment and from more affluent families, and this pattern is mirrored
when looking at non-voting forms of political engagement14.
The fact that voting is a habit learned early which is less likely to be acquired in later life,
coupled with generational effects of familial non-voting behaviour and a negative
representation of politics in the media, means that this cycle may be likely to continue in
12
Ha, L. S., Wang, F., Fang, L., Yang, C., Hu, X., Yang, L., ... & Morin, D. (2013). Political Efficacy and the Use of Local and National News Media Among Undecided Voters in a Swing State A Study of General Population Voters and First-Time College Student Voters. Electronic News, 7(4), 204-222. 13
Zukin, C.,et al.(2006).A new engagement?: political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen Oxford: Oxford University Press 14
Blais, A., & Loewen, P. (2009). Youth electoral engagement in Canada (p. 10). Elections Canada.
‘resource poor’ young people, and gradually increase the gap between those who vote and
those who do not.
What are the costs to society of low voter registration and turnout?
Research has shown that young people suffer disproportionally from cuts to government-
funded services, and this can be in part attributed to the fact that parties are oriented
towards their solid voting base – the older generation.
Low registration and turnout amongst young people therefore perpetuates a cycle of
negativity in which young people do not vote because politicians are not offering any
attractive policies to them, and politicians do not target their policies at them because they
don’t believe that they will vote.
The cost to society is a generational shift towards declining voter engagement and a future in
which only a small class of individuals possess the confidence and information to vote. This is a
future in which, logically, policies are aimed at a small, engaged ‘resource rich’ majority, and
a political non-engaged underclass without representation emerges.
Improving voter turnout
What are the principal ways in which voter registration and turnout could be improved?
Registration and turnout amongst young people is declining across the developed, English-
speaking world, however this process is occurring most rapidly in the UK. Countries such as the
USA and Australia have comprehensive educational programmes focusing on citizenship, and
in these countries, young people are more likely to vote and more likely to believe that voting
is important (British young people that thought voting was very important amounted to 14%,
compared to 42% in Australia and 55% in the USA15). Programmes of political and
constitutional education throughout primary and secondary education focusing on current
affairs would provide young people with the confidence and information to enable them to
vote.
Inclusion of political and constitutional education at Key Stages 2 – 5, to include current
affairs and analysis of the parties, would significantly improve this issue. This should be
delivered solely as part of the history or geography curriculum, but should focus on
contemporary politics.
Studies show that voting is a habit developed at an early age, and it is therefore vital to
provide young people with the tools they need to enable them to vote as soon as possible
after their 18th birthday. Some reports have recommended incentivising voting or penalising
15
International social survey program 2004: Citizenship
non-voting for first time voters. In the case of states that utilise compulsory voting, non-voting is
penalised, and this is found to be effective in increasing turnout. Whilst there is currently no
research evidence that providing a monetary incentive or penalty will increase turnout in the
UK, this could logically provide the ‘nudge’ required to increase registration and turnout.
Provision of a non-monetary incentive / penalty to encourage young voters to the first
voting opportunity that arises after their 18th birthday may reverse the current decline.
The time-requirement and bureaucracy involved in registering to vote is cumbersome to young
people, especially those living between university and familial homes, those sharing residences
on short-term contracts, and those coming in and out of the country due to travel. Whilst filling
out an online form, printing it, signing it and posting it doesn’t sound like much effort to
exercise a civic right, in reality, it is a barrier that prevents young voters from engaging.
Reform of the registration procedure to enable complete online registration that can
be processed within a very short period of a voting opportunity would increase the
turnout of younger voters.
To what extent could electoral reform, rebuilding political parties or changes to party
funding improve public engagement and voter turnout?
A clear preference has now been demonstrated amongst young people for cause-oriented
forms of participation around single issues, rather than traditional party membership and
identification. Additionally, more ‘light-touch’ engagement opportunities are favoured by this
group, such as using online apps, media pages, surveys and petitions. As such, any reform of
both electoral and non-electoral political participation should consider provision of opportunity
for young people to mobilise in this fashion.
Political parties should take at least some of the responsibility for this, and consulting
young people widely on developing manifesto pledges or how the party should vote
in the commons through mobile apps would reduce the distance between politics and
the voter, and give young people greater ownership over the political process.
In what ways could new technologies be used to encourage people to vote?
The importance of using new technologies to engage younger voters cannot be overstated.
The average teenager now spends over 8 hours per day using different media platforms, and
in this time, is bombarded with a diverse landscape of information, misinformation and
opinion.
The development and use of mobile apps by both parties and the institutions of
government should be a priority in engaging young people in politics and voting. Such
apps could cover a broad spectrum of functions, from updating individuals on party
policies, to reminding people of upcoming voting opportunities, to enabling people to
cast their general election vote online rather than attending a polling station.
What would be the advantages and disadvantages of allowing voters to register on the
day of an election?
Allowing registration on the day of an election would facilitate increased turnout for young
people. Young people are more likely to wait until the last minute to vote, and may not even
decide to do so until the day in question, and as a result, often find themselves unable to
participate.
Whilst provision of such a registration service may be cumbersome for the agencies
involved in voter registration, the benefit in enabling participants from an under-
represented group to vote would be symbolically, if not numerically, significant.