This document analyzes data on political participation patterns of Turkish youth from 1998 to 2008. It shows that voting and membership in political parties and civil society organizations have declined over time, while unconventional activities like protesting online have increased. International comparisons show Turkish youth engage less in conventional politics than countries like France. Even if Turkish youth had the same education levels as French youth, their political participation would likely still be lower due to cultural and institutional factors.

1. An Example of «Reductio ad Absurdum»
Method: Political Participation of Turkish
Youth, if They were French…
Dr. Emre Erdoğan

2. Political Participation Patterns of Turkish Youth:
1998-2008
Percentages
1999
2003
2008
Voting
61,5
52,6
48,0
Being a member to the youth branch of a political party
10,0
8,3
9,0
Being a member to of a political party except the youth branch
6,0
3,5
4,1
Canvassing in a political campaign
6,7
4,1
5,0
Distributing brochures in a political campaign
8,1
5,3
5,3
Petitioning about a local problem
18,0
9,4
8,0
Petitioning about a personal problem
20,6
10,2
7,3
Participating in a political demonstration
12,8
9,4
11,3
Participating in a boycott
7,9
6,4
6,8
Participating in a protest activity conducted over internet
3,2
4,3
7,2
Being a member of a civil society organization
4,3
2,9
4,4

3. Conventional vs. Unconventional Political Participation
Percentages
1999
2003
2008
Voting
61,5
52,6
48,0
Being a member to the youth branch of a political party
10,0
8,3
9,0
Being a member to of a political party except the youth branch
6,0
3,5
4,1
Canvassing in a political campaign
6,7
4,1
5,0
Distributing brochures in a political campaign
8,1
5,3
5,3
Petitioning about a local problem
18,0
9,4
8,0
Petitioning about a personal problem
20,6
10,2
7,3
Participating in a political demonstration
12,8
9,4
11,3
Participating in a boycott
7,9
6,4
6,8
Participating in a protest activity conducted over internet
3,2
4,3
7,2
Being a member of a civil society organization
4,3
2,9
4,4

4. 0%
Belgium
Cyprus
Denmark
Sweden
Greece
Spain
Netherlands
Finland
Croatia
Hungary
Poland
Turkey
Russian Federation
Germany
Ukraine
Norway
Slovenia
France
Portugal
Slovakia
Israel
Romania
Bulgaria
Ireland
Switzerland
Estonia
Czech Republic
United Kingdom
Latvia
Conventional Political Participation: Source ESS-2008
Voted
100%
80%
64%
60%
40%
20%

5. 0%
Member of a Party
Worked for a Party
Croatia
Cyprus
Greece
Estonia
Romania
Norway
Ireland
Denmark
Israel
Sweden
Belgium
Portugal
Finland
Ukraine
Slovenia
Germany
Netherlands
Turkey
Russian Federation
Switzerland
France
Spain
Bulgaria
Slovakia
Poland
Latvia
United Kingdom
Czech Republic
Hungary
Conventional Political Participation: Source ESS-2008
15%
12,8%
10%
5%

6. 0%
Ukraine
Latvia
Poland
Bulgaria
Croatia
Greece
Hungary
Czech Republic
Portugal
Ireland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Israel
Romania
Estonia
Belgium
Russian Federation
France
United Kingdom
Cyprus
Spain
Germany
Netherlands
Switzerland
Sweden
Norway
Finland
Denmark
Turkey
Political Participation in a Comparative Perspective: Trust in Politicians and
Parliament
60%
40%
40,8%
20%
Trust Parliament
Trust in Politicians

7. MDS Positioning
Conventional Political Participation
PL
LV
HUCZ
SK
UA
HR
BG
GR
PT
EE
SI IL
IE
BE
GBRO
FR RU
ES DE
NL
CH
CY
NO
SE
FI
TR
DK

8. Phylogenetic Tree AnalysisGeneologic Similarities: Neighbor-Net and Neighbor Joining algorithmes

9. Unconventional Political Participation: Source EVS-2008
80%
60%
40%
0%
RO
RU
SK
HU
LT
BG
BY
CY
MT
SI
LV
EE
AM
PL
MD
PT
NIR
ES
NCY
GB
GE
TR
UA
NL
CH
HR
CZ
IE
BA
AT
DE
BE
DK
GR
ME
AL
RS
SE
LU
KOS
MK
NO
FR
IT
AZ
IS
FI
20%
Boycotts
Lawful Demonstrations

10. Unconventional Political Participation: Source EVS-2008
40%
0%
BG
BY
CY
EE
FI
GE
IS
LT
LV
NIR
SI
SK
RO
HU
MD
MT
PT
RU
SE
AM
GB
NL
NO
PL
BE
NCY
IE
ME
LU
ES
RS
BA
TR
UA
CZ
HR
MK
CH
KOS
DE
AL
AT
DK
FR
AZ
IT
GR
20%
Unofficial Strikes
Occupying Buildings

11. MDS
Unconventional Political Participation
-- Dim2 -->
AZ
UA
BY
MD
AM
TR
BG HU
RU
GE
FR
IT
GR
ES
LU
KOS
CY
DK
AL
DE
RS MK
CH AT
PT ME
CZ
LT
MT
RO LV EE PL
BA
NL
SI
IE
SK NIR
HR
GB
NCY
-- Dim1 -->
IS
NO
BE
SE
FI

12. Phylogenetic Tree AnalysisGeneologic Similarities: Neighbor-Net and Neighbor Joining algorithms

13. 0%
SI
CZ
BG
DE
DK
GR
RS
BA
HR
SK
RO
EE
KOS
AL
CH
HU
TR
LU
PT
MK
NCY
IT
GB
ME
NIR
CY
AT
SE
BE
LT
NL
NO
LV
PL
FI
MD
IE
ES
MT
FR
IS
BY
UA
RU
AZ
AM
GE
Education of Respondent
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Tertiary

14. 0%
TR
PT
BA
IT
CY
MT
SK
HU
AL
NCY
RS
IE
FR
GR
KOS
NIR
RO
PL
SI
ME
CZ
CH
AT
ES
HR
BG
MK
LU
DE
BE
GB
RU
MD
DK
NL
UA
EE
FI
SE
IS
AM
NO
LV
LT
BY
AZ
GE
Education of Respondent’s Father
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Tertiary

15. «If all countries had same distribution in
R’s and F’s education levels?»
Counterfactual Analysis
If education level of Turkish youth and
their fathers would be same with the
French youth?

16. Propensity Score Matching:
Definition:
Given X, the probability of receiving the treatment,
depending to several covariates
e (X) = P(T = 1|X)
Treatment: Being a French citizen or not…
Covariates: Respondent and Father’s
Education Level

19. Propensity Score Distribution
100%
80%
78,40%
60%
56,70%
40%
25,50%
20%
14,20%
10,80%
3,30%
4,10%
3,80%
3,20%
0,00%
0%
<= ,20000
,20001 - ,40000
,40001 - ,60000
Turkey
France
,60001 - ,80000
,80001+

20. France vs Turkey: After Weighting
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Signing a Petition
Boycotts
France
Lawful Demonstrations
Turkey
Unofficial Strikes
Turkey Unadjusted
Occupying Buildings

21. Father’s Education Level and Cohorts
(Tertiary Education)
20%
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
<= 1937 1938 - 1946 - 1952 - 1958 - 1964 - 1969 - 1975 - 1981 - 1986+
1945 1951 1957 1963 1968 1974 1980 1985
Respondent
Father

22. MDS
Unconventional Political Participation
RU
BG
UA
RO
AM
BY HU
LT
PL
NCY LV
TR
MT SK
EE
ME
PT
BA
AL
CZ NIR
MD
AZ
GE
RS
MK
CY
GR
NL
HR GB
AT
CH
DE
KOS
ES
SIIE
FI
LU
DK
IT
FR
IS
NO
BE
SE

23. Phylogenetic Tree AnalysisGeneologic Similarities: Neighbor-Net and Neighbor Joining algorithms

24. Thanks and Questions