Dutch voting advice application.
Problems and Purpose
StemWijzer was developed to make politics in the Netherlands more accessible to Dutch voters.[1] The Netherlands is a multi-party party political system with three dominant parties and thirty total political parties, each with comprehensive and often overlapping platforms.[2] Currently, there are fifteen distinct political parties represented in the Dutch Parliament, none of which hold anywhere near a majority; the most well represented party is the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, with 32 of a possible 149 seats.[3] Due to the large breadth of political parties from which to select, Dutch voters may have a difficult time selecting from the myriad of options available to them. StemWijzer helps voters identify which parties they agree with most based on whether they agree or disagree with a series of relevant political statements.[4] StemWijzer is a tool to understand substantive differences between parties and how an individual’s opinions align with that of each party; it is not necessarily prescriptive, and users are free to ultimately decide which parties they will vote for on election day.[5] [6] At the same time, StemWijzer serves as an indicator for making a choice based on political party.[7]
Origins and Development
StemWijzer was developed in 1989 by the Citizenship Science Foundation (SBK), what was then the Netherlands Center for Political Education, in collaboration with the Documentation Centre of Dutch Political Parties (DNPP) and the faculty of Political Management of the University of Twente. It was originally published as a written brochure as well as on a diskette. It consisted of sixty propositions and statements, many of which were pulled directly from election manifestos of political parties.[8] The first StemWijzer was designed as a tool for junior-high education, and although the booklet was popular in the education sector, only fifty diskette copies were sold.[9] The idea for a voting aid came from Paul Lucardie, an employee of the Documentation Center for Dutch Political Parties.[10] A more advanced digital version of StemWijzer was released leading up the 1994 elections, but despite greater publicity in nation-wide newspapers and radio interviews, use remained limited.[11] In 1998, StemWijzer was distributed both via diskette and on the Internet. The 1998 Internet version garnered 6500 users. By 2006, StemWijzer was used by about five million people.[12] In 2020, the Stemwijzer was used about 7 million times; the Netherlands as a whole has a population of about 17 million and had a voter turnout rate of 77.6% in 2020.[13]
StemWijzer is currently developed and operated by ProDemos- House for Democracy and the Rule of Law, which absorbed the Dutch Institute for Political Participation in 2010.[14] ProDemos receives subsidies from the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations and the House of Representatives of the States General, in addition to subsidies from third parties for individual projects from municipalities, provinces, and other clients.[15]
Participant Recruitment and Selection
Participation in the StemWijzer is voluntary and self-selective. The StemWijzer has its own website through which users take the survey. ProDemos also makes StemWijzer on a smaller scale on behalf of municipal and provincial governments, as well as international StemWijzers.[16] Since the 2002 and 2003 parliamentary election cycles, StemWijzer has become both an election tradition and a household name in the Netherlands. This can be partially attributed to the 2002 campaign of Pim Fortuyn and his creation of a new political party (LPF). StemWijzer’s inclusion of LPF in its 2002 version significantly increased its popularity as a tool for understanding one’s own political position on controversial issues, and was bolstered by another dramatic election four short months later.[17] Although exciting elections gave StemWijzer a much-needed publicity boost, its meteoric rise in popularity was also in large part due to increased Internet access, word-of-mouth dissemination, increased news coverage of the process. StemWijzer organized various TV and radio debates on the issue statements in the early 2000s, which further helped it take root in Dutch political culture.[18]
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
StemWijzer presents users with thirty statements, then compares respondent answers with the positions of the political parties. Each statement is accompanied by the option to view more information on the issue; for example, a statement regarding refugees would allow users to read a short blurb about current refugee policy in the Netherlands. Users can also choose to see which parties agree or disagree with each statement. [19] The issues that are presented in these thirty statements are based on party platforms and issues in the news media to avoid the StemWijzer itself setting a policy agenda.[20] ProDemos also uses voter panels, in which citizens indicate which themes they consider important, in order to determine the subject of questions. ProDemos selects statements that reflect distinctions between parties in order to help users determine which specific party they most align with. Users must select “Agree,” “Disagree,” or “Neither” for each statement, and may opt in to view additional context on the issue presented in the statement. At the end of the survey, users can indicate which topics they find especially important, and can choose to exclude smaller parties from their results. Based on the user’s political opinions, StemWijzer’s algorithm then matches voters to political parties. Every statement for which user and party gave the same answer count as one point, and positions to which users assigned extra weight produce two points. At the end of the survey, all points are tallied and output to show which parties the user agreed with from most similar to least similar.[21] [22] StemWijzer 2021 provides information on all thirty distinct political parties, which may draw increased attention to smaller parties; however, StemWijzer offers an option to only output parties that currently hold a seat in Parliament.[23] [24]
The process of selecting issue statements is essential in the creation of each StemWijzer iteration. Editors select issue statements from the election manifestos and programs of various political parties, with particular attention to the dispersion of issues, controversiality, and balanced positive and negative positions. This first pass at statement selection produces a few hundred theses, which are then introduced to voters’ panels, where voters are enabled to indicate which issues they consider most important and add additional statements.[25] [26] As a result of this process, around fifty issue statements remain and are disseminated to political parties, which indicate their agreement, disagreement, or neutrality toward the statements and provide feedback on the statements’ formulation and breadth of content. ProDemos then eliminates statements that are insufficiently controversial (i.e. statements which do not have at least one party agreeing or disagreeing, statements toward which too many parties adopt a neutral position, etc.) and incorporate feedback from political parties. ProDemos considers diversity in statement themes and party positions in making the final selection of 25 to 30 issue statements.[27]
Influence, Outcome, and Effects
Although designed and disseminated predominantly for educational purposes, by nature StemWijzer has a political bent. Each year, hundreds of thousands of Dutch voters may be influenced to change their votes based on the results of the StemWijzer. A survey of StemWijzer users in 2006 found that 10% of users intended to change their vote based on the information they received from the Voting Advice Application. StemWijzer 2006 counted 4.7 million users, about 40% of the Dutch electorate, which amounts to hundreds of thousands of votes potentially changed according to StemWijzer’s advice.[28] Its effects do not stop at the border, however: since StemWijzer was initially distributed, it has inspired the creation and development of various other Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) in Europe. 2002 saw the first use of the German Wahl-O-Mat, a national VAA, and in 2007, a French VAA was created for the presidential and parliamentary elections. In 2009, ProDemos produced a pan-European version of StemWijzer in addition to national versions for twelve other members of the European Union. Currently, over forty online VAAs are used across Europe.
Analysis and Lessons Learned
StemWijzer has been accused of lacking requisite depth into various issues. Results are calculated from statements which have been criticized for insufficient nuance, which may inaccurately capture the political stance of a given party or the opinion of a given user. Parties are encouraged to fill out the StemWijzer in order to better match with voters, but this lack of nuance in the given statements can lead to discrepancies between a party’s response to a statement in the StemWijzer and its official party platform.[29] Discrepancies between party platform and party response to the StemWijzer may increase voter confusion rather than clarifying policy stances on important issues. Moreover, a simple “Agree,” “Disagree,” or “Neither” option selection on the part of the user may not convey important information as to why the user agrees or disagrees with the statement, a justification which may meaningfully affect voting habits. A voter may also express their opinion differently depending on how aware they are of the issue in question, but StemWijzer requires users to opt in to limited contextual information rather than providing it by default.
StemWijzer may also lack breadth in its collection of issue statements. The Dutch multi-party system allows for parties organized around a single issue, which are unable to sufficiently elucidate their particular ideology via the StemWijzer; instead, the format demands that these parties define their stance on subjects which may be irrelevant to their ideology and issue focus. The user’s ability to opt out of being matched with small parties exacerbates this issue, potentially depriving small parties of much-needed publicity. Although StemWijzer tries to avoid setting policy agendas in their selection of important issue statements, the popularity of the platform may inadvertently elevate certain issues to the detriment of others due to the limited number of statements provided.
That said, StemWijzer is exceptionally well-used in the Netherlands and has been a trusted source of political information for decades; so much so that nearly all European countries now have at least one comparable Voting Advice Application. The widespread educational effects of StemWijzer should not be overlooked, nor should its particular relevance in countries with multi-party systems and many parties from which to select.
See Also
References
[1] Lucardie, Anthonie. (1989).
[2] The Dutch Political System. (2017, February 16).
[3] Parliamentary Parties. (n.d.).
[4] Vote Match. (n.d.).
[5] Vote Match. (n.d.).
[6] StemWijzer. (2021).
[7] Lucardie, Anthonie. (1989).
[8] Ibid.
[9] VAA History | Voting Advice Applications. (n.d.).
[10] Lucardie, Anthonie. (1989).
[11] Garzia, D. (2010).
[12] VAA History | Voting Advice Applications. (n.d.).
[13] These Countries Have Had the Highest Voter Turnout. (n.d.).
[14] History. (n.d.).
[15] StemWijzer. (2021).
[16] Vote Match. (n.d.).
[17] Garzia, D. (2010).
[18] Ibid.
[19] Tweede Kamerverkiezingen 2021. (2021).
[20] StemWijzer. (2021).
[21] StemWijzer. (2021).
[22] Tweede Kamerverkiezingen 2021. (2021).
[23] Ibid.
[24] StemWijzer. (2021).
[25] Garzia, D. (2010).
[26] StemWijzer. (2021).
[27] Garzia, D. (2010).
[28] StemWijzer. (2021).
[29] Stemwijzer geeft stemadvies dat partijen willen. (n.d.).
External Links
Garzia, D. (2010). The Effects of VAAs on Users’ Voting Behaviour: An Overview (pp. 13–47).
History. (n.d.). ProDemos English. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://prodemos.nl/english/about-prodemos/history/
Lucardie, Anthonie. (1989). StemWijzer. In None (EN). Stichting Burgerschapskunde, Nederlands Centrum voor Politieke Vorming. https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/en/publications/stemwijzer(abb598ae-9a0f-4424-824c-7273bad0c952).html
Parliamentary Parties. (n.d.). [Text]. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://www.houseofrepresentatives.nl/members_of_parliament/parliamentary_parties
StemWijzer. (2021). StemWijzer. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://stemwijzer.nl/veel-gestelde-vragen/
Stemwijzer geeft stemadvies dat partijen willen. (n.d.). NRC. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2010/05/07/stemwijzer-geeft-stemadvies-dat-partijen-willen-11886458-a672244
The Dutch Political System. (2017, February 16). XPAT.NL. https://www.xpat.nl/moving-to-netherlands/netherlands-facts/the-dutch-political-system/
These Countries Have Had the Highest Voter Turnout. (n.d.). US News & World Report. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-10-30/these-countries-have-had-the-highest-voter-turnout
Tweede Kamerverkiezingen 2021. (2021). Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://tweedekamer2021.stemwijzer.nl/#/
VAA History | Voting Advice Applications. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2021, from http://vaa-research.net/?page_id=80
Vote Match. (n.d.). ProDemos English. Retrieved March 7, 2021, from https://prodemos.nl/english/activities/international-activities/vote-match/