The Consequences of Face-to-Face Contact: Political Representation in Microstates

According to the academic literature on this subject, political representation in new democracies is generally of lesser quality than in established democracies. At the same time it should be noted that most of the publications in this field focus on the political systems of larger countries in Latin America, Eastern Europe, or Africa, and do not include the many microstates that also formed part of Huntington’s third wave of democratization. For this group of nations the situation may not be as bad as for larger ones, seeing that several scholars assert that the quality of political representation in small democracies is likely to be higher due to a decreased distance between citizens and politicians (Dahl and Tufte 1973, Anckar 2002, Ott 2000). The physical and psychological proximity between citizens and public officials in microstates is not only hypothesized to generate higher levels of political awareness, efficacy, and participation among citizens, but is also argued to enable politicians to acquire a better overview of the demands and preferences of their constituents. As a consequence, opportunities for political responsiveness are enhanced, which is assumed to benefit the legitimacy of the entire microstate-political system. The literature on politics in small states however also points to an increased tendency towards clientelism, patronage, nepotism, and conflicts of interest that result from multiple-role relationships that characterize the societies of microstates. Since electoral districts in these countries are inherently small, politicians are able to have personal contact with all the voters in their constituency. In this context, and due to the significance that a small number of votes may have for the outcome of an election, the establishment of patron-client links is argued to be stimulated. Furthermore, another alleged consequence of smallness is the predominance of personalistic politics over ideology, which leads to person-based, weak, or nonexistent parties. Under these circumstances, voting behavior is largely dependent on family or friendship relations and not on political preferences, which creates different dynamics when it comes to responsiveness and representation. As of yet, it is not clear whether the representative function that is normally assumed by parties has been replaced by another, perhaps more direct form of representation in these microstates. In the current paper, the characteristics and quality of political representation in microstates are analyzed. On the basis of data gathered from interviews and field research in the small island states of St. Kitts and Nevis, Seychelles, and Palau, an overview is given of the performance and quality of representation in these three microstates. The results of this comparison indicate that whereas microstate-politicians indeed have better opportunities to be aware of the preferences and demands of their constituents, in practice the consequences of these face-to-face relationships tend to be more negative. As the literature suggests, politician-citizens’ links in microstates are found to be characterized by patron-client networks, nepotism, and conflicts of interests. Furthermore, as a consequence of the inherently limited pool of political talent in microstates, the quality of these politicians can be questioned, which according to Alcántara’s (2008) findings would have a direct influence on the quality of representation. In this sense, the newly democratic microstates thus appear to be no different from larger new democracies when it comes to the quality of representation.