Direct Democracy as a Cure from the Democratic Malaise? Decision-Making by Referenda at the Local Level

In recent years there have been numerous conflicts on siting decisions for renewable energy plants in Austria. Especially local governments have come under pressure in this context. In a study on six decision-finding processes on wind parks in Lower Austria we found that, following the general debate on democratic reforms in Austria, the involved actors see direct democratic instruments as a way to solve conflicts. But the instrument utilised often was not capable to fulfill these expectations. Rather mayors had to step back, enmities between political groups have risen and sometimes communities have been pulled apart. When assessed after criteria derived from deliberative and participatory democratic theory, the decision-finding processes had not much to offer. Citizens had mainly been given the opportunity to participate in information evenings, where they got informed about the decision to build a wind plant, while their interests and perspectives barely got taken into account. Only when serious resistance against the plans had been voiced, especially by a citizens’ initiative, public deliberation of some sorts set in. The crucial persons in the political processes in all cases were the mayors, who decided on the set of instruments to be utilized for decision-finding. Participation usually took the form of limited debates and emerged out of the belief that it is not possible any more to decide on such a project without some kind of citizen involvement. These processes sooner or later ended up in referendums - either because citizens’ initiatives managed to collect the amount of signatures needed, or because mayors didn’t want to be held accountable for the decision to be made. But the results turned out to be binding only in these cases, in which the citizens decided not to endorse the plans to build wind plants. In other cases these referendums often were followed by litigation pursued by citizens’ initiatives. While most mayors see the urge to integrate citizens into such decision-finding processes, the effects of the processes were negative for the communities in many cases, with more enmity amongst citizens and politicians, but mostly no positive participatory experience. Direct democracy in the ways carried out in the six cases therefore was no panacea and had a tendency to exacerbate the problems it was meant to solve – from the quality of dialogue to the legitimacy of decisions and the inclusion of citizens.