Less is more or the more the merrier? Analysing attitudes towards multiple‐mandate holding among local officeholders

Abstract

The practice of multiple‐mandate holding is widespread across Europe. Critics argue that this practice contributes to a concentration of political power, a higher risk for conflicts of interest and damage to the public image of political actors. Advocates meanwhile claim that it provides clear benefits, such as local embeddedness of the national or regional political decision‐making and a greater degree of professionalisation in politics. However, little is known about how political actors themselves look upon this practice. This especially in a context like Finland, where this practice is said to be embedded in the political culture and where another institutional level has recently been implemented, making it possible for political actors to simultaneously hold political mandates at the local‐, regional‐ and national levels. This paper examines attitudes towards multiple‐mandate holding among local political decision‐makers using unique survey data gathered through a new online panel. The results suggest that councillors from a populist radical right party and those who perceive corruption and partial treatment as more common were the most negatively disposed towards this practice, while councillors from the traditionally strongest rural party were the most in favour.