Explaining Deviant Voting in Subnational Elections: The Case of Local Council Elections in Germany

Figures & data

Table 1. Types of local democracies.

	Candidate-Oriented Democracies	Party-Oriented Democracies
Voting systems	Free lists	Closed lists
Key actors of electoral campaigns	Candidates	Parties
Nationalisation of local party system	Low	high

Source: Holtkamp (2006) and Vetter (2009).

Table 2. Differences in vote shares between local and national elections.

	CDU	SPD	Greens	FDP	Left	Other Parties	Volatility
Party-Oriented Democracies
North Rhine-Westphalia	−2.8	.4	2.3	.1	−3.3	3.4	12.8
Saarland	1.4	6.3	-.4	−1.2	−2.8	−3.3	12.7
Candidate- Oriented Democracies
Baden-Württemberg	−24.6	−6.7	−6.3	−4,6	−3.9	46.1	50.3
Brandenburg	−7.1	−25.3	−2.0	.1	−12.5	46.9	54.1
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania	−22.6	−10.6	−2.8	-.9	−14.4	51.3	58.5
Rhineland-Palatinate	−34.9	−17.9	−5.4	−4.7	−5.3	68.3	71.6
Saxony	−10.7	−6.9	−1.9	.1	−8.6	28.1	35.1
Saxony-Anhalt	−14.0	−6.0	−1.5	.1	−12.7	34.1	40.3
Thuringia	−21.8	−10.4	−3.4	−1.1	−17.8	54.5	67.7

Source: The numbers are based on official electoral data from the states’ statistical offices and the Federal Returning Office (2021).

Table 3. Share of deviant voters.

Party-Oriented Democracies	Candidate-Oriented Democracies
	Measurement 1: Only List Voters	Measurement 2: All Voters
39.4	30.5	53.7

Source: Own presentation.

Table 4. causes of deviant voting.

	Measurement 1: Only List Voters				Measurement 2: All Voters
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)
Type of Local Democracy	.510** (.192)	.501* (.283)	.448** (.198)	.446* (.337)	1.457** (.132)	1.457 (.196)	1.364* (.135)	.925 (.285)
Political Attitudes
Local Council Members	.832 (.169)	.826 (.198)	.829 (.170)	.835 (.170)	.788 (.133)	.788 (.191)	.788 (.133)	.787 (.133)
Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists	2.498* (.376)	2.496* (.376)	.718 (.521)	2.565* (.381)	2.686** (.273)	2.686** (.273)	.874 (.503)	2.964** (.278)
Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	.394** (.211)	.394** (.211)	.384** (.213)	.394** (.262)	.538** (.169)	.538** (.169)	.536** (.169)	.383** (.255)
PID	.299** (.171)	.300** (.172)	.298** (.173)	.298** (.171)	.338** (.132)	.338** (.132)	.339** (.132)	.336** (.132)
Interaction Effects
Type of local Democracy* Local Council Members		1.029 (.351)				1.054 (.251)
Type of local Democracy* Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists			9.639** (.692)				4.277** (.553)
Type of local Democracy* Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties				1.205 (.384)				1.758 (.311)
Constant	24.692** (.576)	24.728** (.576)	25.170** (.576)	26.059** (.588)	21.616** (.463)	21.616** (.465)	21.956** (.464)	27.677** (.486)
Observations	947	947	947	947	1354	1354	1354	1354
Nagelkerke R²	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.20	0.20	0.21	0.20

Source: Neu/Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation (2018). For complete regression models see Table A3 in appendix. Type of Local Democracy: Dummy-Variable (0 = Party-Oriented Democracy, 1 = Candidate-Oriented Democracy).

Note: Logistic Regression with Odds Ratios. Standard errors are clustered by states.

**p < 0.01.

*p < 0.05.

Table A1. Summary statistics for the dependent and independent variables.

Variables	Description	Min.	Max.	Mean	N
Dependent Variables
Deviant Voting	Voters who do not vote according to their national preference in the 2014 local elections	0	1	.49	1354
	Party-Oriented Democracies	0	1	.43	622
	Candidate-Oriented Democracies Measurement 1: Only List Voters Measurement 2: All Voters	0 0	1 1	.31 .54	325 732
Independent Variables
Candidate-Oriented Democracies	Respondents in a municipality with a candidate-oriented democracy	0	1	.55	1354
Party-Oriented Democracies	Respondents in a municipality with a party-oriented democracy	0	1	.45	1354
Local Council Members	‘Do you know one or more members of your city council personally?’ (Dummy-Variable)	0	1	.63	1354
Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists	‘All in all, which party, which local lists or which voters’ association do you think is most likely to solve the most important political problems in your municipality? (Dummy-Variable; 1 = Local Lists, 0 = Other Parties, No Parties)	0	1	.10	1354
Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	All in all, which party, which local lists or which voters’ association do you think is most likely to solve the most important political problems in your municipality?’ (Dummy-Variable; 1 = National Parties, 0 = Other Parties, No Parties)	0	1	.75	1354
National Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	All in all, which party, which local lists or which voters’ association do you think is most likely to solve the most important political problems in Germany?’ (Dummy-Variable; 1 = National Parties)	0	1	.81	1354
Population Size
Rural Community	Respondents: Population < 5.000 (Dummy-Variable)	0	1	.12	1354
Small Town	Respondents: 5.000 ≤ Population < 10.000 (Dummy-Variable)	0	1	.25	1354
Medium Sized Town	Respondents: 10.000 ≤ Population < 100.000 (Dummy-Variable)	0	1	.34	1354
Large City	Respondents: Population ≥ 100.000 (Dummy-Variable)	0	1	.28	1354
Political Attitudes
Party Identification	Dummy-Variable (1 = Yes, 0 = No)	0	1	.69	1354
Political Interest	Five-point Likert-scale (4 = Very strong, 3 = Strong, 2 = Medium, 1 = Less strong, 0 = Not at all)	0	4	2.5	1354
Social Demographics
Age	Age in years	18	95	52.31	1354
Gender	Dummy-Variable (0 = male, 1 = female)	0	1	.51	1354
Education	Five-point scale	0	4	2.16	1354

Table A2. Corellation (PEARSON).

	Type of Local Democracy
Independent Variables
Knowledge of Local Council Members	.156**
Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists	.164**
Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	-.150**
National Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	−0.040
Population Size
Rural Community	.308**
Small Town	.208**
Medium Sized Town	-.139**
Large City	-.256**
Political Attitudes
Party Identification	-.025
Political Interest	-.061*
Socio Demographics
Age	.022
Gender	.049
Education	.006

Source: Neu/Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation (2018).

Note: Type of Local Democracy (1 = candidate-oriented democracy; 0 = party-oriented democracy).

**p < 0.01.

*p < 0.05.

Table A3. Causes of deviant voting.

	Measurement 1: Only List Voters				Measurement 2: All Voters
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)
Type of Local Democracy	.510** (.192)	.501* (.283)	.448** (.198)	.446* (.337)	1.457** (.132)	1.457 (.196)	1.364* (.135)	.925 (.285)
Political Attitudes
Local Council Members	.832 (.169)	.826 (.198)	.829 (.170)	.835 (.170)	.788 (.133)	.788 (.191)	.788 (.133)	.787 (.133)
Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists	2.498* (.376)	2.496* (.376)	.718 (.521)	2.565* (.381)	2.686** (.273)	2.686** (.273)	.874 (.503)	2.964** (.278)
Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties	.394** (.211)	.394** (.211)	.384** (.213)	.394** (.262)	.538** (.169)	.538** (.169)	.536** (.169)	.383** (.255)
PID	.299** (.171)	.300** (.172)	.298** (.173)	.298** (.171)	.338** (.132)	.338** (.132)	.339** (.132)	.336** (.132)
Interaction Effects
Type of local Democracy* Local Council Members		1.029 (.351)				1.054 (.251)
Type of local Democracy* Local Problem-Solving Competence: Local Lists			9.639** (.692)				4.277** (.553)
Type of local Democracy* Local Problem-Solving Competence: National Parties				1.205 (.384)				1.758 (.311)
Population Size
(Rural Community	.854 (.355)	.852 (.356)	.769 (.355)	.847 (.354)	.770 (.229)	.770 (.229)	.752 (.231)	.768 (.228)
Small Town	.458** (.236)	.458** (.236)	.458** (.236)	.457** (.236)	.682* (.178)	.682* (.178)	.687* (.178)	.680* (.178)
Medium Sized Town	.502** (.186)	.503** (.187)	.522** (.186)	.502** (.186)	.778 (.153)	.778 (.153)	.799 (.153)	.776 (.153)
Large City	Reference Category
Political Attitudes
Political Interest	.818** (.087)	.818** (.087)	.830** (.087)	.819* (.087)	.808** (.067)	.808** (.068)	.813* (.068)	.811* (.068)
Socio Demographics
Age	.993 (.005)	.993 (.005)	.993 (.005)	.992 (.005)	.987** (.004)	.987** (.004)	.987** (.004)	.987** (.004)
Gender	1.214 (.158)	1.216 (.158)	1.194 (.158)	1.221 (.159)	1.170 (.121)	1.170 (.121)	1.161 (.121)	1.180 (.121)
Education	.832* (.081)	.831* (.081)	.825* (.081)	.832* (.081)	.819** (.063)	.819** (.063)	.818** (.063)	.823** (.063)
Constant	24.692** (.576)	24.728** (.576)	25.170** (.576)	26.059** (.588)	21.616** (.463)	21.616** (.465)	21.956** (.464)	27.677** (.486)
Observations	947	947	947	947	1354	1354	1354	1354
Nagelkerke R²	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.20	0.20	0.21	0.20

Source: Neu/Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation (2018). For complete regression models see Tables A3 in Appendix

Note: Logistic Regression with Odds Ratios. Standard errors are clustered by states.

**p < 0.01.

*p < 0.05.

Holtkamp, L. 2006. “Parteien und Bürgermeister in der Repräsentativen Demokratie. Kommunale Konkordanz- und Konkurrenzdemokratie im Vergleich.” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 47 (4): 641–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-006-0345-y.

 Google Scholar

Vetter, A. 2009. “Citizens Versus Parties: Explaining Institutional Change in German Local Government, 1989–2008.” Local Government Studies 35: 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930802574524.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

States’ Statistical Offices. 2021. Elections results of the 2014 local elections”.

 Google Scholar

Neu, V., and Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung. 2018. “Post-election Survey: European and Local Government Elections 2014.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA6972 Data file Version 1.0.0. https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13182.

 Google Scholar