A comparative study of referendums: Government by the people

Book abstract:

This book gives an overview of the use of the referendum from its inception and early development to the present day and outlines the theoretical history of the referendum device.

The book offers the first comparative assessment of the referendum, looking at its development in Britain, Europe and the United States. It seeks to answer the fundamental question - 'Are referendums a just and democratic means of increasing the role of the citizen?'

The text is divided into five chapters that are supported by tables drawn from studies in Europe, Scandinavia, the United States and New Zealand.

Following an introduction the first chapter uses case studies to determine when the referendum is compatible with the ideals of minority protection, enlightened understanding and equal participation. Chapter two outlines the political theory of the referendum as developed by the constitutional lawyer A.V. Dicey who maintained there was a case for obligatory referendums on constitutional issues. The challenge that inbuilt prejudice presents to the reasoned electorate is explored in chapter three through case studies of the referendums in different categories in different countries. Chapter four considers whether Dicey's theory is a sufficient constitutional safeguard or if the introduction of obligatory referendums is necessary. The final chapter examines two alternative referendum models, respectively the 'minority veto' and the 'popular referendum' before moving to the conclusion, which discusses how referenda can strengthen representative government.

This book is suitable for higher level undergraduates, academics and researchers in the fields of political theory and comparative politics.

Mads Qvortrup is a former senior research fellow at UCL and currently teaches at the London School of Economics. He is also an adjunct fellow at The Initiative and Referendum Institute, Washington DC.

• Primary Source