Skip to main content

Voice, equality and education: the role of higher education in defining the political participation of young Europeans

Abstract

Much attention has been paid by academics and policy-makers in recent decades to declining levels of voter turnout and engagement with traditional political and social institutions in established democracies. These trends are particularly marked amongst young people. Drawing on data from the European Social Survey, this article examines the role of higher education (HE) both as a source of unequal participation and as a means of fostering civic and political engagement amongst young Europeans. It uncovers two significant new findings. First, that being in education matters more than an individual’s level of educational attainment for levels of civic and political participation, and second, that HE establishments play a key role as social levellers: being in education neutralises differences between young people from high-income and low-income backgrounds with regards to such participation. The article argues that this places added emphasis on the role of educational institutions in nurturing democratic engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sander and Putnam (2010) record the doubling of civic engagement amongst college students in the US between 2001 and 2010, but also a growing participation gap between college students and young people who do not go on to university.

  2. 2.

    The ‘EU15′ countries are Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and (until it left at 11 pm GMT on 31 January 2020) the UK.

  3. 3.

    The ‘High Education’ group includes those holding qualifications that are at least the minimum level necessary to gain admission to university-level study in each country (upper tier upper secondary and above). The Low Education group includes all others who did not achieve this level of educational attainment.

  4. 4.

    This variable is a composite of the highest qualification achieved variable and the main activity variable, and includes categories of 18–24-year-olds who have experience of higher education (HE) and those who do not. The first group includes those who are either currently enrolled in HE or who have previously completed HE studies, while the second group includes young Europeans who have completed their secondary education but did not then continue into HE.

  5. 5.

    ‘Low-income’ refers to the bottom quartile (the bottom three categories on a 12-point scale) of income in each country. ‘High-income’ refers to the top quartile (on the same scale) of income in each country. Focussing our analyses only on these particular highest and lowest income groups leads to low N for some sub-samples in the tables and in the analyses.

  6. 6.

    At the time of examining the data, only waves 1–8 were available for cumulative analysis.

  7. 7.

    Mean scores rather than percentages are reported for these four “political engagement” variables. Social trust and political trust are both 11 item variables, while there are four categories for political interest and five for political understanding (personal efficacy). See footnote 10 for coding details.

  8. 8.

    However, numbers are very small, so caution should be exercised when interpreting the figures on party activism, given the rarity of this form of political participation across the EU15.

  9. 9.

    The nature of the ESS data is not conducive to facilitating direct comparisons across the two regression analyses reported in Tables 3 and 4. The analyses therefore represent the predictive relationships between the variables for each individual group. The comparisons of the relationships between these groups therefore only provide indirect differences between them.

  10. 10.

    The coding for these variables is as follows: Income = 1 Low Income, 2 High Income; Educational attainment = 1 Low Education, 2 High Education; Gender = 1 Male, 2 Female; Ethnicity = 1 Minority ethnic group, 2 Majority ethnic group; Voted [in the] last national election = 1 Yes, 2 No; Worked in a political party or action group = 1 Yes, 2 No; Worked in another organisation or association (for a political cause) = 1 Yes, 2 No; Contacted a politician or government official = 1 Yes, 2 No; Signed a petition = 1 Yes, 2 No; Taken part in a lawful public demonstration = 1 Yes, 2 No; Boycotted certain products = 1 Yes, 2 No; Trust (social) = 0 Cannot be trusted to 10 Can be trusted; Trust (politicians) = 0 Cannot be trusted to 10 Can be trusted; Political interest = 1 Not at all interested to 4 Very interested; Political understanding/ Personal efficacy (Politics is too complicated to understand) = 1 Frequently to 5 Never.

  11. 11.

    One could make the point that college students—unlike those young people with secondary qualifications who are not in education—are different in that they are clearly on the pathway to higher educational attainment, and thus are more motivated, efficacious individuals. This may well be true but is unlikely to account for such a large gap between young people from poorer backgrounds inside and outside HE (as our analysis demonstrates).

References

  1. Amnå, E., and J. Ekman. 2014. Standby Citizens: Diverse Faces of Political Passivity. European Political Science Review 6 (2): 261–281.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arnett, J. 2004. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from Late Teens through the Twenties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bang, H., and A. Esmark. 2009. Good Governance in the Network Society: Reconfiguring the Political from Politics to Policy. Administrative Theory and Praxis 31 (1): 7–37.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beaumont, E., A. Colby, T. Ehrlich, and J. Torney-Purta. 2006. Promoting Political Competence and Engagement in College Students: An Empirical Study. Journal of Political Science Education 2 (3): 249–270.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bennett, W., and A. Segerberg. 2013. The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Berinsky, A., and G. Lenz. 2011. Education and Political Participation: Exploring the Causal Link. Political Behavior 33 (3): 357–373.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Busse, B., A. Hashem-Wangler, and J. Tholen. 2015. Two Worlds of Participation: Young People and Politics in Germany. The Sociological Review 63 (S2): 118–140.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cammaerts, B., M. Bruter, S. Banaji, S. Harrison, and N. Anstead. 2016. Youth Participation in Democratic Life: Stories of Hope and Disillusion. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Campbell, D. 2009. Civic Engagement and Education: An Empirical Test of the Sorting Model. American Journal of Political Science 53 (4): 771–786.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Castells, M. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chadwick, A. 2013. The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Colby, A., T. Ehrlich, E. Beaumont, and J. Stephens. 2003. Educating Citizens: Preparing America’s Undergraduates for Lives of Moral and Civic Responsibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dahl, R. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dalton, R. 2004. Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dalton, R. 2009. The Good Citizen: How a Younger Generation is Reshaping American Politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Della Porta, D., and S. Tarrow. 2005. Transnational Protest and Global Activism. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dewey, J. 1959. [1916] Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  18. European Commission. 2007. Young Europeans: Survey Among Young People Aged Between 15–30 in the European Union (Eurobarometer 202), European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_202_sum_en.pdf. Accessed 7 Sep 2020.

  19. European Commission. 2009. Youth in Europe: A statistical portrait of the lifestyle of young people, European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STAT_09_177. Accessed 7 Sep 2020.

  20. European Commission. 2019. Population with Tertiary Education. European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Tertiary_education_statistics. Accessed 7 Sep 2020.

  21. Fieldhouse, E., M. Tranmer, and A. Russell. 2007. Something About Young People or Something About Elections? Electoral Participation of Young People in Europe: Evidence From a Multilevel Analysis of the European Social Survey. European Journal of Political Research 46 (6): 797–822.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Flanagan, C. 2013. Teenage Citizens: The Political Theories of the Young. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Flanagan, C., P. Cumsille, S. Gill, and L. Gallay. 2007. School and Community Climates and Civic Commitments: Processes for Ethnic Minority and Majority Students. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (2): 421–431.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Flanagan, C., A. Finlay, L. Gallay, and T. Kim. 2012. Political Incorporation and the Protracted Transition to Adulthood: The Need for New Institutional Inventions. Parliamentary Affairs 65 (1): 29–46.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Flanagan, C., and P. Levine. 2010. Civic Engagement and the Transition to Adulthood. The Future of Children 20 (1): 159–179.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Franklin, M. 2004. Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Furlong, A., and F. Cartmel. 2012. Social Change and Political Engagement Among Young People: Generation and the 2009/2010 British Election Survey. Parliamentary Affairs 65 (1): 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Galston, W. 2001. Political Knowledge, Political Engagement, and Civic Education. Annual Review of Political Science 4: 217–234.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gelmon, S.B., B.A. Holland, and A. Spring. 2018. Assessing Service-Learning And Civic Engagement: Principles and Techniques. Boston: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Goddard, J., E. Hazelkorn, and P. Vallance, eds. 2016. The Civic University: The Policy and Leadership Challenges. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Grasso, M.T. 2016. Generations, Political Participation and Social Change in Western Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grasso, M.T., B. Yoxon, S. Karampampas, and L. Temple. 2017. Relative Deprivation and Inequalities in Social and Political Activism. Acta Politica 54: 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hay, C. 2007. Why We Hate Politics. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Heath, A., S. Fisher, D. Sanders, and M. Sobolewska. 2011. Ethnic Heterogeneity in the Social Bases of Voting at the 2010 British General Election. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 21 (2): 255–277.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Henn, M., and N. Foard. 2014. Social Differentiation in Young People’s Political Participation: The Impact of Social and Educational Factors on Youth Political Engagement in Britain. Journal of Youth Studies 17 (3): 360–380.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Henn, M., B. Oldfield, and J. Hart. 2018. Postmaterialism and Young People’s Political Participation in a Time of Austerity. British Journal of Sociology 69 (3): 712–737.

    Google Scholar 

  38. House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee. 2014. Voter Engagement in the UK, Fourth Report of Session 2014–15. London: The Stationery Office Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Jacoby, B., et al. 2009. Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jennings, M., and L. Stoker. 2004. Social Trust and Civic Engagement across Time and Generations. Acta Politica 39 (4): 342–379.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kam, C., and C. Palmer. 2008. Reconsidering the Effects of Education on Political Participation. The Journal of Politics 70 (3): 612–631.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Keating, A. 2014. Education for Citizenship in Europe: European Policies, National Adaptations, and Young People’s Attitudes. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Keating, A., Kerr, D., Benton, T., Mundy, E. & Lopes, J. 2010. Citizenship Education in England 2001–2010: Young People’s Practices and Prospects for the Future: The Eighth and Final Report from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study. London: DfE.

  44. Kerr, D., J. Lopes, J. Nelson, K. White, E. Cleaver, and T. Benton. 2007. Vision Versus Pragmatism: Citizenship in the Secondary School Curriculum in England. Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Fifth Annual Report. Slough: NFER.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kyroglou, G., and M. Henn. 2017. Political Consumerism as a Neoliberal Response to Contemporary Youth Political Disengagement. Societies 7 (4): 34.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Levinson, M. 2010. The Civic Empowerment Gap: Defining the Problem and Locating Solutions. In Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth, ed. L. Sherrod, J. Torney-Purta, and C. Flanagan. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lewis-Beck, M., W. Jacoby, H. Norpoth, and H. Weisberg. 2008. The American Voter Revisited. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Longo, N., C. Drury, and R. Battistoni. 2006. Catalyzing Political Engagement: Lessons for Civic Educators from the Voices of Students. Journal of Political Science Education 2 (3): 313–329.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Marien, S., M. Hooghe, and E. Quintelier. 2010. Inequalities in Non-institutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multi-level Analysis of 25 Countries. Political Studies 58 (1): 187–213.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mossberger, K., C. Tolbert, and R. McNeal. 2007. Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society and Participation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Nie, N., J. Junn, and K. Stehlik-Barry. 1996. Education and Democratic Citizenship in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Niemi, R., and J. Junn. 1998. Civic Education: What Makes Students Learn. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nissen, S. 2019. Student debt and political participation. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Norris, P. 2011. Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Norris, P., and R. Inglehart. 2009. Cosmopolitan Communications: Cultural Diversity in a Globalised World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Norris, P., and R. Inglehart. 2019. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Norris, P., S. Walgrave, and P. Van Aelst. 2005. Who Demonstrates? Antistate Rebels, Conventional Participants, or Everyone? Comparative Politics 37 (2): 189–205.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Parry, G., G. Moyser, and N. Day. 1992. Political Participation and Democracy in Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pasek, J., L. Feldman, D. Romer, and K. Jamieson. 2008. Schools as Incubators of Democratic Participation: Building Long-term Political Efficacy with Civic Education. Applied Development Science 12 (1): 26–37.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Pattie, C., P. Seyd, and P. Whiteley. 2004. Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Pickard, S. 2019. Young People and DIO Politics: Do-It-Ourselves Political Participation. London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Pickard, S., and J. Bessant, eds. 2018. Young People Re-Generating Politics in Times of Crises. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Pryor, J., Hurtado, S., DeAngelo, L., Sharkness, J., Romero, L., Korn, W. & Tran, S. 2008. The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2008. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute. https://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/pubs/TFS/Norms/Monographs/TheAmericanFreshman2008.pdf. Accessed 23 Sep 2020.

  64. Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Sander, T., and R. Putnam. 2010. Still Bowling Alone? The Post-9/11 Split. Journal of Democracy 21 (1): 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Schlozman, K., S. Verba, and H. Brady. 2010. Weapon of the Strong? Participatory Inequality and the Internet. Perspectives on Politics 8 (2): 487–509.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Schulz, W., J. Ainley, J. Fraillon, D. Kerr, and B. Losito. 2010. ICCS 2009 International Report: Civic Knowledge, Attitudes and Engagement Among Lower Secondary School Students in Thirty-eight Countries. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Sloam, J. 2013. ‘Voice and equality’: Young People’s Politics in the European Union. West European Politics 36 (4): 836–858.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Sloam, J. 2016. Diversity and voice: The political participation of young people in the European Union. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 18 (3): 521–537.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Sloam, J., and M. Henn. 2019. Youthquake 2017: The Rise of Young Cosmopolitans in Britain. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Soler-i-Martí, R. 2015. Youth Political Involvement Update: Measuring the Role of Cause-orientated Political Interest in Young People’s Activism. Journal of Youth Studies 18 (3): 396–416.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Steiner, D. 1994. Rethinking Democratic Education: The Politics of Reform. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Stoker, G. 2006. Why Politics Matters: Making Democracy Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Stolle, D., and M. Hooghe. 2011. Shifting Inequalities: Patterns of Exclusion and Inclusion in Emerging Forms of Political Participation. European Societies 13 (1): 119–142.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Stolle, D., M. Hooghe, and M. Micheletti. 2005. Politics in the Supermarket: Political Consumerism as a Form of Political Participation. International Political Science Review 26 (3): 245–269.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Tormey, S. 2015. The End of Representative Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Torney-Purta, J., R. Lehmann, H. Oswald, and W. Schulz. 2001. Citizenship and Education in Twenty-eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amsterdam: IEA.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Van Deth, J., J. Ramón Montero, and A. Westholm. 2007. Citizenship and Involvement in European Democracies: A Comparative Analysis. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Verba, S., and N. Nie. 1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Verba, S., K. Schlozman, and H. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Wolfinger, R., and S. Rosenstone. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Youth Citizenship Commission. 2009. Making the Connection: Building Youth Citizenship in the UK. London: Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article. Of course, responsibility is ours alone.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Sloam.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sloam, J., Kisby, B., Henn, M. et al. Voice, equality and education: the role of higher education in defining the political participation of young Europeans. Comp Eur Polit 19, 296–322 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-020-00228-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Young people
  • Inequality
  • Higher education
  • Democratic engagement
  • Civic participation
  • Political participation