The Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG) and the Intergenerational Foundation (IF) award the Demography Prize, which carries a total value of 10,000 Euros, divided up among winning entrants. The Prize, funded and supported by the Stiftung Apfelbaum (Apfelbaum Foundation), is awarded every two years.
By means of this award, the FRFG and IF aim to open up a debate, based on sound academic research, about intergenerationally just politics and demographic change, and to encourage suggestions for potential future action. The invitation to enter is extended to young academics from all disciplines. The competition entries should be between 6000 and 8000 words long.
The topic for the 5th Demography Prize is:
“Low Electoral Turnout among Young People – Consequences and Remedies”
The deadline for submissions is 1 June 2015.
The official poster can be found here.
The following text will provide some first ideas for a submission:
In many of the world’s democracies, older people vote more consistently and in greater numbers than their younger counterparts. That is perhaps unsurprising: politics tends to be an older person’s game. But the global trend towards greater longevity means that the numbers of older voters is constantly increasing, and the proportional number of younger voters is decreasing. The apparent reluctance of the young to exercise their right to vote only serves to reinforce this demographic trend. The result is that politicians tend to pander to the ‘Grey Vote’, and young people run the risk of being under-represented in parliament, and of seeing their issues overlooked by governments. In such a scenario, young people may be easier targets for unpopular government measures, such as the belt-tightening associated with austerity.
The statistics make the case. In the 2010 elections in Britain only 44% of those aged 18–24 voted compared to 76% in the 65-plus age group. Furthermore, fewer than half of young adults in the UK are registered to vote, whereas 96% of those aged 65-plus are. By 2025 30% of the UK electorate will be over 65, and it is estimated that 478 constituencies (73.5% of the total) will have a ‘grey majority’ (where more than 50% of votes cast are from voters over 55).
In Germany’s 2013 general election, the average voting turnout was 72.4%. All of the age-cohorts above the age of 45 fell above this average, whereas all of the age-cohorts below 45 fell exactly on or below it. Turnout was highest amongst 60–70 year olds (almost 80%), which is more than 15% higher than the turnout of 18–21 year olds.
Would lowering the voting age make a difference? In Germany, where 16 year olds are eligible to vote in the local elections of some of the Länder (federal states), there is evidence that a cohort who obtain their voting right at 16 will have a higher poll turnout over their whole lives than a cohort who are not allowed to cast their first vote until a later age. In other words, early participation sets a trend for life.
The effect overall can be ascribed to the median voting age: the lower the median voting age, the more chance there is that youth will be properly represented. One possible way of reducing the median voting age could be the introduction of compulsory suffrage, as already exists in some countries, including Belgium, Greece, Luxemburg, Cyprus, and Australia – although this kind of enforced political legitimacy might be seen to offend the principles of liberal democracy. The question of whether the democratic act of voting should be recast from a civic duty to a punishable obligation is interdisciplinary and interesting for, for example, philosophers and political scientists.
Alternative measures to increase the electoral turnout of the younger age groups could aim to make the act of voting easier, more ‘user-friendly’ – for example through e‑voting. This issue is of interest to sociologists researching patterns of political participation among the young and old, and analysing the behaviour of the ‘Internet Generation’.
The principles of democracy are called into question if any group within it become sidelined, while others are favoured. There will be consequences if young people perceive that they are being left out of the political process, and remedies are needed to ensure that this does not happen. There is wide scope here for close analysis of how these issues affect democratic representation around the world, and for innovative thinking in search of solutions.
The jury will include:
- Prof. Uwe Wagschal (Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg)
- Prof. Rüdiger Schmitt-Beck (University of Mannheim)
- Prof. Franziska Wächter (Evangelischen Hochschule, Dresden)
- Christina Tillmann (Bertelsmann Foundation)
- Prof. Jörg Tremmel (Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen)
- Dr James Sloam (Royal Holloway, University of London)
- Katie Ghose (Chief Executive of the Electoral Reform Society, UK)
- Dr Andrew Mycock (University of Huddersfield)
- Prof. Matt Henn (Nottingham Trent University)
- Prof. Andy Furlong (University of Glasgow)
Berry, Craig (2012): The Rise of Gerontocracy? Addressing the Intergenerational Democratic Deficit. Intergenerational Foundation: London, online: https://www.if.org.uk/archives/1999/the-rise-of-gerontocracy-addressing-the-intergenerational-democratic-deficit
Cammaerts, Bart, Bruter, Michael, Banaji, Shakuntala, Harrison, Sarah, and Anstead, Nick (2013): ‘The myth of youth apathy: young Europeans’ critical attitudes toward democratic life’. American Behavioral Scientist, online: https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/55896
Farthing, Rys (2010): ‘The politics of youthful anti-politics: representing the “issue” of youth participation in politics’, in Journal of Youth Studies 13(2), pp. 181–95
Franklin, Mark (2004): Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies Since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Furlong, Andy, and Cartmel, Fred (2012): ‘Social change and political engagement among young people: Generation and the 2009/10 British Election Survey’, in Parliamentary Affairs 65(1), pp. 13–28
Green, Donald P. (ed.) (2005): The Science of Voter Mobilization. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications
Henn, Matt, and Foard, Nick (2012): ‘Young people, political participation and trust in Britain’, in Parliamentary Affairs 65(1), pp. 47–67
Kersting, Norbert (2012): Electronic democracy. Berlin: Budrich Verlag
Marsh, David, et al (2007): Young People and Politics in the UK: Apathy or Alienation. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Norris, Pippa (2003): Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Russell, Andrew, Fieldhouse, Edward, Purdam, Kingsley, and Kalra, Virinder (2002): Voter Engagement and Young People. London: The Electoral Commission, online: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/electoral_commission_pdf_file/0019/16093/youngpplvoting_6597-6188__E__N__S__W__.pdf
Sowa, Aleksandra (2006): Trust, e‑voting and political legitimacy: Studies in their interactions. Freiburg: Projektverlag.
Sloam, James (2007): ‘Rebooting democracy: youth participation in politics in the UK’, in Parliamentary Affairs 60(4), pp. 548–67.
Whitely, Paul (2001): ‘Turnout’, in Philip Norris (ed.) Britain Votes 2001. Oxford University Press
Bräunlich, Katharina (2013): Sichere Internetwahlen: Ein rechtswissenschaftlich-informatisches Modell. Baden-Baden: Nomos
Buchstein, Hubertus, and Neymanns, Harald (eds) (2002): Online-Wahlen. Leverkusen: Leske+Budrich Verlag
Bytzek, Evelyn (ed.) (2011): Der unbekannte Wähler? Mythen und Fakten über das Wahlverhalten der Deutschen. Frankfurt: Campus
Campagna, Norbert (2011): Wählen als Bürgerpflicht: Ein Plädoyer. Berlin: Parodos Verlag
Decker, Frank, Lewandowsky, Marcel, and Solar, Marcel (2013): Demokratie ohne Wähler? Neue Herausforderungen der politischen Partizipation. Bonn: Dietz Verlag
Eisel, Stefan (ed.) (2011): Internet und Demokratie. Freiburg: Verlag Herder
Faas, Thorsten (2012): Thinking about Wahlpflicht: Anmerkungen zu einer überfälligen Diskussion. Online: https://www.zpol.nomos.de/fileadmin/zpol/doc/Aufsatz_ZPol_12_03_Faas.pdf
Goos, Kerstin (2011): Wahlen im Internet. Eine Analyse ihrer Bedeutung für die Wahlbeteiligung. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer Verlag
Herr, Vincent-Immanuel, and Speer, Martin (2013): Wer nicht wählen will, soll zahlen. Der Trend zur politischen Verweigerung gefährdet die Demokratie. Ein Plädoyer für die Wahlpflicht. Online: https://www.zeit.de/2013/35/demokratie-wahlverweigerer-wahlpflicht. Abruf am 03.06.2014.
Kaina, Viktoria, and Römmele, Andrea (eds) (2012): Politiche Sociologie: ein Studienbuch. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
Keiser, Andreas (2013): Papierloses, sichere E‑Voting: ein Langzeitprojekt. Online: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/politik_schweiz/Papierloses,_sicheres_E-Voting_ein_Langzeit-Projekt.html?cid=37028496
Khorrami, Esfandiar (2005): Bundestagswahlen per Internet : zur rechtlichen und tatsächlichen Realisierbarkeit von Internetwahlen. Baden-Baden: Nomos
Kuhn, Frank (2006): Elektronische Partizipation. Digitale Möglichkeiten – Erklärungsfaktoren – Instrumente. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
Lüeße, Thiemo (2007): Bürgerverantwortung und abnehmende Wahlbeteiligung. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin: Lang.
De Nève, Dorothée (2008): NichtwählerInnen: eine Gefahr für die Demokratie? Berlin: Budrich Verlag
Richter, Philipp (2012): Wahlen im Internet rechtsgemäß gestalten. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Schneider, Sebastian, and Weber, Holger (2013): eVoting: ein Überblick über die Einsatzmöglichkeiten von eVoting mit dem Schwerpunkt Internetwahl und Wahlcomputer. Munich, Ravensburg: Grin Verlag
Vutkovich, Alexander (1906/2012): Wahlpflicht: Politische Studie. Reprint: Ulan Press
Woyke, Wichard (2013): Stichwort: Wahlen. Ein Ratgeber für Wähler, Wahlhelfer und Kandidaten. 12th edn. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften