Education and voting tendencies: Evidence from rural Bangladesh

• In Event: Highlighted Session: Education Policy and Practice in South Asia

Proposal

Elections are the heart of any political system and remain the democratic process through which individuals choose their government leaders. In any democracy, voting is the fundamental, if not only, way that individuals can actively participate, by electing representatives, in the democratic process. Through voting in elections, individuals have the power to shape public policy (Wolfinger & Rosenstone, 1980) and in turn, inequality and intergenerational mobility (Rauh, 2017). In this way, voting is a potentially powerful tool of protest where citizens get to exercise their opinion and choice. Bearing this in mind, in this paper, we explore the association between an individuals’ education level and their voting tendencies in the context of Bangladesh-a South-Asian lower middle-income country. For many Bangladeshi citizens, voting in elections is the only form of political participation.

The relationship between education and acts of political participation, such as voting, is well-established (Persson, 2015). On one hand, attendance at formal educational institutions may have a role to play through curriculum, textbooks, classroom lessons, school practices, and through better exposure to more cohesive social networks and stronger social norms around voting (Hansen & Tyner, 2021; Rolfe, 2012). Thus, higher levels of education may mean more exposure to social studies, civic studies and different teachings that make individuals more critical and politically aware, thereby leading to their better political engagement, and, by extension, electoral participation (Campbell et al., 1960; Downs, 1957; Lazarsfeld et al., 1968). Perhaps less educated and disadvantaged individuals are less likely to vote because they are less informed, less interested and less knowledgeable about politics (Downs, 1957; Rosenstone & Hansen, 1993; Verba et al., 1995).

One of the most widely accepted explanations of why individual’s education level is directly and positively linked to their political participation is referred to as the ‘civic education theory’, which postulates that education instils individuals with civic knowledge and awareness that, in turn, increases their likelihood of voting (Converse, 1972; Rosenstone & Hansen, 1993; Verba et al., 1995). In this paper, we test the central implication of the civic education theory in the case of evidence from rural Bangladesh, and investigate the question: As an individual pursues each additional education level, i.e., secondary from primary, higher secondary from secondary, tertiary from higher secondary, and thereby develops skills, knowledge and awareness that facilitate political engagement, are they more likely to vote? Our hypothesis is that, as is asserted by the civic education theory, more educated individuals are more likely to vote and vice-versa, and we test this empirically. We contemplate: Does the education system of Bangladesh take upon itself the responsibility of developing educated individuals who are politically informed and civically active? It may be argued that these should indeed be educational goals (see for example, Labaree, 1997). However, until now, the narrative on educational goals in Bangladesh has been focused on economic aspects rather than social and civic aspects such as voting. In the belief that an exclusive focus on the economic benefits of education can mask the broader civic and societal benefits of education, we focus on voting as an outcome-either direct or indirect- of education.

Using the nationally (rurally) representative Bangladesh Integrated Household Survey (BIHS) survey data-which has voting information of elections during the 2008-2014 period in Bangladesh- and employing logit and Poisson models, we find that individuals with higher levels of education, in certain cases, are less likely to vote, and this is a trend which is observed especially in the case of younger respondents. We draw three possible inferences from our findings: one, it may be the case that more educated individuals are not as aware of their political and civic responsibility in terms of voting as we expect them to be as a result of their education. In this case, it is important to ascertain the role of education in developing citizens’ sense of responsibility towards voting. It is also important to consider that, perhaps, our education system is lacking in serving the purpose of instilling individuals with political and civic literacy. Two, it could be the case that more educated individuals feel that their votes are inconsequential and thus, remain indifferent to voting responsibly. On one hand, this feeling of insignificance in the voting system may stem from the unstable political climate in which individuals live. On the other hand, it may also be that the political culture of the country has reached a point where individuals, especially those who are more educated, have become disenfranchised because they feel that their actions, their votes, will not make a difference. Three, more educated individuals may have more information and understanding of the political climate that leads them to be so frustrated that they feel that casting their votes would be feeding the system of corruption and wrong-doing. They may consciously be abstaining from voting as either a protest or as a personal promise to refrain from inadvertently becoming a part of the corrupt system in place. More educated citizens’ may simply choose to refrain from contributing to the legitimacy of the election process particularly because they view the elected government as illegitimate. In any case, it is the case that either the education system or the system of political practice, or potentially both, are at fault.

With the belief that voting remains the most powerful tool of citizens’ voice and protest, the findings of this paper lead us to suggest that the importance of informed voting should be better highlighted and emphasized in the curriculum at different levels of education in Bangladesh. In terms of the relevance of this paper with the theme and sub-themes of CIES 2024, this paper cross-cuts across the sub-themes of ‘curriculum and protest’ and ‘pedagogies and protest’, especially in its invitation to critically reflect on how education can be a catalyst for change-in this case, by exploring how education can influence voting behaviour.

Author

• Rubaiya Murshed, Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge