Abstract
Evidence from both sample surveys and the marked electoral registers is used to compare the participation of individual electors at the 2001 general election and the 2002 local elections in England. In those cases where conventional electoral procedures have been retained, there is a continuing gap between local and general election turnout. Those who vote at both types of election tend to have a sharper sense of civic duty and/or an incentive to vote based on the benefits perceived to be likely to accrue from the outcome of the local contest. However, in those places where the costs of participation are reduced through the introduction of all-postal voting, the turnout gap disappears as does the distinctive character of those who vote in local elections. In each case the findings support a rational choice model of participation with respondents weighing the benefits and costs of voting in the context of their own sense of duty.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
References
Berinsky, A., Burns, N., & Traugott, M. (2001). Who votes by mail? A dynamic model of the individual-level consequences of voting-my-mail systems. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 178–97.
Blais, A. (2000). To Vote or Not to Vote? University of Pittsburgh Press: Pittsburgh.
Blondel, J., Sinnott, R., & Svensson, P. (1998). People and Parliament in the European Union. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Clarke, H., Sanders, D., Stewart, M., & Whiteley, P. (2004). Political Choice in Britain. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Curtice, J., Seyd, B., & Thomson, K. (2001). Devolution to the Centre: Lessons from London's First Mayoral Elections, CREST Working Paper 90.
Denver, D. (2002). Voting in the 1997 Scottish and Welsh devolution referendums: Information, interests and opinions. European Journal of Political Research, 41, 827–843.
Denver, D., & Hands, G. (1997). Turnout. In P. Norris & N. Gavin (Eds.), Britain votes 1997. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
DETR. (2000). 1998 British social attitudes survey: Secondary data analysis of the local government module. DETR: London.
Electoral Commission. (2002). Public opinion and the 2002 Local Elections. Electoral Commission: London.
Franklin, M. (2004). Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Heath, A., McLean, I., & Taylor, B. (1997). How much is at stake? Electoral behaviour in second-order Elections, CREST Working Paper 59.
Heath, A., & Taylor, B. (1999). New Sources of Abstention? In G. Evans & P. Norris (Eds.), Critical elections. Sage: London.
Karp, J., & Banducci, S. (2000). Going postal: How all-mail elections influence turnout. Political Behavior, 22, 223–239.
Local Government Association. (1998). Encouraging people to vote. LGA: London.
Miller, W. (1988). Irrelevant elections? Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Pattie, C., & Johnston, R. (1998). Voter turnout at the British General Election of 1992: Rational choice, social standing or political efficacy? European Journal of Political Research, 33, 263–283.
Rallings, C., & Thrasher, M. (1990). Turnout in local elections: An aggregate data analysis with electoral and contextual data. Electoral Studies, 9, 79–90.
Rallings, C., Thrasher, M. et al. (2000). Turnout at local elections. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions: London.
Reif, K. (1984). National electoral cycles and European elections 1979 and 1984. Electoral Studies, 3, 244–255.
Reif, K., & Schmitt, H. (1980). Nine second order elections. European Journal of Political Research, 8, (3–45), 145–62.
Riker W., & Ordeshook, P. (1968). A Theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62, 25–43.
Southwell, P. L. (2004). Five years later: A re-assessment of Oregon's vote by mail electoral process. PS-Political Science & Politics, 37(1), 89–93.
Swaddle, K., & Heath, A. (1989). Official and reported turnout in the British General Election of 1987. British Journal of Political Science, 19, 537–551.
Van Heerde, J., Johnson, M., & Bowler, S. (2004). Barriers to participation, voter sophistication, and candidate spending choices in U.S. senate elections, 1990–1994. Paper presented at 2004 annual meeting of the Elections, Public Opinion and Parties workgroup, University of Oxford.
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This paper was first presented to a British Politics Group panel at the American Political Science Association meeting, Philadelphia, August 2003. It draws on research funded by the British Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) under its Democracy and Participation programme.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rallings, C., Thrasher, M. The turnout ‘gap’ and the costs of voting – a comparison of participation at the 2001 general and 2002 local elections in England. Public Choice 131, 333–344 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-006-9118-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
Keywords
- Local and general elections
- Turnout
- Costs and benefits of voting