Legislators’ responsiveness to citizens constitutes a crucial element of democracy. Nevertheless, previous studies conducted in established democracies found that only about half of legislators respond to requests for constituency service and that they are more responsive to certain groups of citizens than others. To address such limitations, we conducted a field experiment in South Korea and found that only 12% of local councilors are responsive. We also found that despite such low responsiveness, local councilors were more responsive when the fictitious citizen introduced himself as a self-employed person running a small business versus an employee working at a small company.
BolsenT (2013) A light bulb goes on: norms, rhetoric, and actions for the public good. Political Behavior35: 1–20.
2.
BolDGschwendTZittelT, et al (2021) The importance of personal vote intentions for the responsiveness of legislators: a field experiment. European Journal of Political Research60: 455–473.
3.
BrehmJW (1966) A Theory of Psychological Reactance. New York: Academic Press.
4.
BroockmanDE (2013) Black politicians are more intrinsically motivated to advance Blacks’ interests: a field experiment manipulating political incentives. American Journal of Political Science57(3): 521–536.
5.
ButlerDM (2014) Representing the Advantaged: How Politicians Reinforce Inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
ButlerDMBroockmanDE (2011) Do politicians racially discriminate against constituents? A field experiment on state legislators. American Journal of Political Science55(3): 463–477.
7.
CampusDPasquinoGVaccariC (2008) Social networks, political discussion, and voting in Italy: a study of the 2006 election. Political Communication25(4): 423–444.
8.
CareyJMShugartMS (1995) Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: a rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies14(4): 417–439.
9.
CaseyKKamaraABMeriggiNF (2021) An experiment in candidate selection. American Economic Review111(5): 1575–1612.
10.
ChoeCS (2020) A study on the local councilor and National Assembly member relation in Korea: a political clientelist approach. The Korean Governance Review27(2): 57–81.
11.
CialdiniRBRenoRRKallgrenCA (1990) A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology58(6): 1015–1026.
12.
CoppockA (2019) Avoiding post-treatment bias in audit experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science6(1): 1–4.
13.
CostaM (2017) How responsive are political elites? A meta-analysis of experiments on public officials. Journal of Experimental Political Science4(3): 241–254.
14.
DriscollACepaluniGdeSáGuimarãesF, et al. (2018) Prejudice, strategic discrimination, and the electoral connection: evidence from a pair of field experiments in Brazil. American Journal of Political Science62(4): 781–795.
15.
EulauHKarpsPD (1977) The puzzle of representation: specifying components of responsiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly2(3): 233–254.
16.
FaroleSASari-GencE (2023) The experience premium and women’s nomination to local elections in South Africa’s African National Congress party. Party Politics30(6): 1051–1063.
17.
FredénARheaultLIndridasonIH (2022) Betting on the underdog: the influence of social networks on vote choice. Political Science Research and Methods10(1): 198–205.
18.
GaikwadNNellisG (2021) Do politicians discriminate against internal migrants? Evidence from nationwide field experiments in India. American Journal of Political Science65(4): 790–806.
19.
Gell-RedmanMVisalvanichNCrabtreeC, et al (2018) It’s all about race: how state legislators responde to immigrant constituents. Political Research Quarterly71(3): 517–531.
20.
GerberASGreenDPLarimerCW (2008) Social pressure and voter turnout: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review102(1): 33–48.
21.
HabelPBirchS (2019) A field experiment on the effects of ethnicity and socioeconomic status on the quality of representation. Legislative Studies Quarterly44(3): 389–420.
22.
HayesTJBishinBG (2020) Do elected officials serve the poor on health care? Evidence from a field experiment on members of Congress and state legislators. The Social Science Journal61: 30–46.
23.
HongJYParkSYangH (2023) In strongman we trust: the political legacy of the New Village Movement in South Korea. American Journal of Political Science67(4): 850–866.
24.
HwangAR (2012) The incumbency advantage in the 2010 local elections in Korea. The Korea Local Administration Review26(4): 3–26.
25.
JungMYoonJ (2003) The incumbency advantage on party nomination: evidence from the 8th local election of Korea. 21St Century Political Science Review33(1): 1–26.
26.
KallaJRosenbluthFTeeleDL (2018) Are you my mentor? A field experiment on gender, ethnicity, and political self-starters. The Journal of Politics80(1): 337–341.
27.
KangMGHaS (2016) The effectiveness of stipend system for a local council: focused on the change of legislative professionalization and legislative activity. Korean Comparative Government Review20(1): 101–122.
28.
KangWCParkWSongBK (2018) The effect of incumbency in national and local elections: evidence from South Korea. Electoral Studies56: 47–60.
29.
KavvourisCChrysochouPThøgersenJ (2020) Be careful what you say: the role of psychological reactance on the impact of pro-environmental normative appeals. Journal of Business Research113: 257–265.
30.
KimJ (2017) The relationship between professionalism and diversity in the local assembly member. The Korean Journal of Local Government Studies21(1): 169–193.
31.
KimBSeoJ (2015) The change of the power structure in Korean local politics. Korean Party Studies Review14(2): 225–255.
32.
KimTWLeeBJKimB, et al. (2020) Analyzing legislative performance of Busan Metropolitan City Council: re-election seeking and ordinance proposal. 21St Century Political Science Review30(4): 87–110.
33.
LeeSM (2008) Changes in local electoral systems and the recruitment patterns of local political elites. Korean Public Administration Review42(1): 123–147.
34.
LeeBJKimTWSuhJ, et al. (2021) Local government performance and democratic consolidation: explaining ordinance proposal in Busan Metropolitan Council. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies8(1): 15–41.
35.
LeeJJ (2022) A study on limitations and possibilities of youth politics through local elections. The Korean Regional Politics Review12(2): 27–51.
36.
LesschaeveCVan ErkelPFAMeulewaeterC (2018) Thinking alike: two pathways to leadership-candidate opinion congruence. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties28(4): 488–515.
37.
LouwerseTVan VonnoC (2022) Moving up or down: parliamentary activity and candidate selection. The Journal of Legislative Studies28(2): 216–242.
38.
MagniGPoncedeLeonZ (2021) Women want an answer! Field experiments on elected officials and gender bias. Journal of Experimental Political Science8(3): 273–284.
39.
McClendonGH (2016) Race and responsiveness: an experiment with South African politicians. Journal of Experimental Political Science3(1): 60–74.
40.
NamY (2022) The legislative activities of local councils, and the structure and competition of local governments: a panel data analysis on 17 provincial councils, 2008–2020. Journal of Parliamentary Research17(2): 123–149.
41.
National Election Commission (2018) Report of Turnout Result of the 7th Nationwide Simultaneous Local Election. Seoul: National Election Commission Publication.
42.
ParkSJParkKG (2022) Introduction of the stipend system for local councilors and comparative analysis of changes in the performance of local councils. The Korean Journal of Local Government Studies26(1): 351–371.
43.
ParkYAhnHParkM (2021) Legislative professionalism and legislative productivity of local council in Korea. Journal of Parliamentary Research16(1): 109–144.
44.
ParkYLeeJ (2020) An analysis of voting decision in the 7th gubernatorial elections: focusing on division of conservative camp and influence of national politics. Discourse and Policy in Social Science13(1): 1–23.
45.
PitkinHF (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
46.
SeddoneARombiS (2018) The selection of candidates and its impact on parliamentary behaviour: insights from the Italian case. In: CorderoGCollerX (eds) Democratizing Candidate Selection: New Methods, Old Receipts?Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.231–253.
47.
ShinHMahS (2020) ‘Alone in the dark’: South Korea's small business reel from new virus clampdown. Reuters, 24November. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2840GF/ (accessed 28 February 2024).
48.
SilviaPJ (2006) Reactance and the dynamics of disagreement: multiple paths from threatened freedom to resistance to persuasion. European Journal of Social Psychology36(5): 673–685.
49.
TajfelHBilligMGBundyRP, et al. (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology1(2): 149–178.
50.
TeresiHMichelsonMR (2015) Wired to mobilize: the effect of social networking messages on voter turnout. The Social Science Journal52(2): 195–204.
51.
YangCSongK (2023) Voting behavior of local voters and determinants of candidates: focusing on the 6.1 local elections in 2022. The Journal of Convergence Society and Public Policy16(4): 177–206.
52.
YouMHChoiYJKimJY (2022) Impact of the COVID-19 social distancing policy on the exit and entry of stores in South Korea. Korea and the World Economy23(1): 57–75.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
