Abstract
Technocratic governments and similar systems that give more voice to experts in the decision-making process are one of the potential alternatives to traditional representative party government. These alternatives have become increasingly popular, especially in countries where strong political disaffection and previous favourable pro-expert attitudes exist simultaneously. The Spanish case is one of these settings, with the emergence of a political party, Ciudadanos (Citizens), that represents these ideas. This article contributes to the understanding of public opinion support for an expert government, its main motives, and social supports. We claim that experts are not so much a decision-making alternative as they are a desired piece of the decision-making process. Support for a more significant role for experts comes especially from those that credit them with ample technical capacities, but most citizens want them to work as a piece of representative government, not as an alternative to it. The article combines two types of evidence: A survey of a representative sample of the population, including innovative questions about support to expert governments, and 10 focus groups that allow a more in-depth comprehension of the support (and criticism) of an increased role for experts. The results provide a nuanced picture of the types of expert involvement sought and their respective social support.
Highlights
Significant theoretical research of the last decades highlights an increased desire for ‘unmediated’ political processes that challenge party democracy (Caramani, 2017; Urbinati, 2014)
It was through the focus groups that we were able to appreciate that the problem of technocratic attitudes was more complex; when talking about the suitability of experts for political positions, among other things because they are considered to be better prepared, the question of the legitimacy of the political results obtained always arose as an insurmountable problem for the majority
As already identified in the focus groups, when experts’ increased role is compared with alternative political procedures to decision-making, support is attenuated (Figure 2): If instead of mentioning ‘rulers,’ we focus on the procedure that characterizes party democracy—elections—we find that support for elections is clearly stronger (62% choose a value from 8 to 10) than for experts taking important political decisions (46%)
Summary
Significant theoretical research of the last decades highlights an increased desire for ‘unmediated’ political processes that challenge party democracy (Caramani, 2017; Urbinati, 2014). The relationship between populism and elitism has been built on the links that technocracy has with the same populism’s ideals, because it entails a similar unitary and idyllic vision of society, advocating unmediated political relations (Caramani, 2017). Both would be in opposition to the classic conception of party democracy, questioning (1) the role of mediation of the parties and (2) the procedural conception of democratic legitimacy Both would be in opposition to the classic conception of party democracy, questioning (1) the role of mediation of the parties and (2) the procedural conception of democratic legitimacy (Bickerton & Invernizzi Accetti, 2017, p. 190)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
