Can Fair Decision-Making Procedures Increase the Legitimacy of Democracies?

Arguably, the most pressing challenge to contemporary governance comes from the many citizens who have grown distrustful of politicians and institutions, and express discontent with the performance of democratic government and the democratic process in itself. The primary scientific objective of the Procedural Legitimacy project has been to better understand how democratic institutions and decision-making bodies should organize decision-making procedures and implementation procedures in order to make them more legitimate in the eyes of the public. We have studied if and how variations in political decision making procedures can make the outcomes more acceptable to the citizens, and especially to those who disagree with the outcome. Do people share universal perceptions of fair decision making procedures? In a nutshell, the project has addressed this issue and generates new knowledge that can be used to improve governance in the future. This was accomplished by conducting experimental and observational studies on the mechanisms of accepting decision-making procedures. The data was mainly generated within the infrastructure of DIGSSCORE at the University of Bergen, Norway. In addition, primary survey data has been collected through the 2017 European Internet Panel Study (EIPS), which is a consortium of academic, probability-based online panels in France, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and The Netherlands (N = 18 000). The project has generated a substantial amount of knowledge about citizens' attitudes towards democratic processes. A recurring pattern is observed where the support for democratic processes - which is strong in principle - dwindles if the decision outcome of the process is perceived as unfavorable to oneself. We draw from this insight that even in established democracies, democracy needs to deliver on people's instrumental interests to maintain its legitimacy as political system. Political leaders play a role in maintaining support for democracy by signaling to the voters that they tolerate being on the losing side without losing trust in the decision process.

Prosjektet har hatt store ringvirkninger både for prosjektleder, for prosjektmedlemmer, og for det utvidete eksperimentelle statsvitenskapelige miljøet prosjektet er en del av. Som det første yngre forsker-prosjekt gitt til dette miljøet ga det tid og ressurser til å designe egne unike eksperimenter og gjennomføre innsamling av primærdata. For prosjektleder har det ledet til muligheter til å videreutvikle forskningsagendaen og sikre nye prosjekter innenfor feltet. Andre prosjektmedlemmmer - inkludert andre yngre forskere - har fått anledning til å bygge seg opp kompetanse og nettverk som er ettertraktet innenfor sektoren. Flere av resultatene har blitt formidlet til norske myndigheter gjennom rapporter og muntlige presentasjoner. Langtidseffekter er vanskeligere å estimere, men vi mener at vi har gitt vårt bidrag inn i demokratiforskningen som viser hvordan kollektive beslutningsprosesser står seg bedre i etterkant hvis man i forkant av beslutningen sikrer demokratiske prosesser.

Although democracy is globally perceived as the only legitimate system of government, there is widespread discontent with the performance of democracy. One of the most striking developments in political culture during the last couple of decades has been the increase in "dissatisfied democrats", i.e. citizens who believe in the core values of democracy but nonetheless remain dissatisfied with the way the democratic political system works in practice. On top of this, we have observed low, and in many countries decreasing, levels of trust in fundamental democratic institutions such as political parties and governments for quite some time all over the world, not least in the wake of the financial crisis. Arguably, the most pressing challenge to contemporary governance comes from the many citizens, who have grown distrustful of politicians and institutions, and express discontent with the performance of democratic government and the democratic process in itself. While the widespread public discontent with the functioning of democracy and its institutions is widely acknowledged among scholars, there is disagreement about the causes and effects. In a nutshell, the PROLEG project will address this issue and generate new knowledge that can be used to improve governance in the future. This will be accomplished by conducting experimental and observational studies on the mechanisms of accepting decision-making procedures. The data will mainly be generated within the unique infrastructure of DIGSSCORE at the University of Bergen. This core social science facility takes advantage of changes in technology and research methodology that combine to bring computer laboratory research and survey studies closer together.