Convergence, Divergence or Stability – How do Politicians' and Bureaucrats' Attitudes Change During an Election Period?

Abstract

The possibility that administrators mould politicians into bureaucratic thinking has been a recurring theme in politics since the writings of Weber and von Mises. However, empirical studies of attitude change in the interface between politics and officials are scarce. This study, using data from thirty Norwegian municipalities, investigates whether political attitudes towards diverse political issues change during an election period, and whether any such change aligns politicians' attitudes with those of the administrative leaders in the municipalities. Attitudes were measured among both politicians and administrators in 2000 (six months after the election) and 2003 (six months before the election). In general, there are few signs that politicians' attitudes converged with those of the administrators in the period studied. When attitudinal change does occur, it appears to be parallel in both groups. The findings do not support the notion that politicians' attitudes become aligned to the attitudes of leading administrators. Different explanations are discussed.

Key words:

• Attitude change
• influence
• local government
• politician–bureaucrat relationship

Notes

1 There are a few deviations. A separate analysis on political convergence towards or divergence from the administrative municipality mean in each municipality revealed that: (a) regarding expansiveness, politicians' attitudes diverged significantly from the administrative mean in two municipalities while converging significantly in three; (b) regarding reform, politicians' attitudes towards reform diverged significantly from the administration in their own municipality in only one case and converged in two; and (c) regarding amalgamation, politicians' attitudes converged towards their own administration in two municipalities and diverged in none. These ‘deviations’ do not alter the general result.