Sweden's representative democracy is based on a simple premise: there must be people who are prepared to run for political office. As fewer and fewer people get involved in the political parties, that group becomes smaller. That makes party democracy vulnerable.
In a couple of reports on the development of democracy, the Swedish Agency for Knowledge shows that the number of members in the political parties has decreased sharply. In 1991, approximately one in ten voters was a member of one of today's parliamentary parties. In 2025, the corresponding proportion was approximately one in thirty-five. This corresponds to a decrease of 60 percent.
The news reporting after the 2026 election actualizes the importance of a high level of trust in how the parties' candidate recruitment and, by extension, the general elections are conducted. The parties' ability to recruit and organize people who want to be active is therefore not just an internal party issue. It is a question of democracy.
The parties have a central function in Sweden's representative democracy. It is the parties that produce candidates for the general elections and it is the parties that provide the political assemblies with people for the many positions that are appointed indirectly after the elections.
A shrinking membership base means, first and foremost, a smaller recruitment base. Ahead of the 2026 election, the Riksdag parties nominated around 49,100 candidates, roughly the same number as in the last election. Seen in relation to the approximately 250,000 people who are members of a parliamentary party, this means that approximately one in five was on a ballot paper. In the early 1990s, the competition for seats was greater, then barely every tenth member was on a ballot paper.
The parties' dependence on the remaining members is also visible in the number of assignments that the same person takes on. For example, 14 percent of members of the Riksdag are also members of the municipal council. On average, each candidate stands in 1.3 elections, and the figure is higher for the smaller parties.
It is obvious that when there are few people to distribute the assignments to, every dropout, move or reduced commitment becomes more noticeable.
Another effect of the reduced membership base is that there may even be a lack of candidates when it's time for elections, which is particularly visible at municipal level.
Before the general elections in the spring, parties can choose to lock their candidate lists or the list can be kept open for additions until a couple of days before the election. An open list can be a way to deal with difficulties in finding candidates before the regular deadline. At the same time, an open list means that the party does not have the same control over which names may end up on the list.
In this year's municipal elections, the number of open lists increased compared to 2022. In some cases, there were still no candidates on election day and the list remained empty. In 94 of the country's municipalities – roughly one in three – at least one parliamentary party went to the elections with such an empty list.
After the election, lists without candidates notified by the party gain practical significance if the party is still voted into the council. Then the mandate can either be filled by a person who has registered himself or the result will be an empty seat.
That there is a continued political interest indicates that it is rather the form of the commitment that means that more people do not participate actively in party politics
The lack of candidates is a concrete illustration of what a smaller recruitment base can mean.
For smaller parties, the problem is particularly clear. Kunskapsverket's analysis shows that when the number of members approaches 15,000, it becomes more difficult for the parties to fill the lists, while a number of members of around 30,000 seems to be enough to at least avoid empty lists. Among the parliamentary parties, only three have over 30,000 members (S, M and SD).
The importance of the parties' members, however, extends further than the situation of the own party.
Party members are not only candidates and possible elected officials. They can also help shape the party's policy and they can be ambassadors for political participation at large. When fewer people get involved in parties, there are also fewer who make political involvement visible in everyday life.
The Norwegian Agency for Knowledge's analysis also shows a connection between the parties' local presence and political participation. The analysis does not in itself say what causes the connection, but it shows that turnout is lower in municipalities where fewer parliamentary parties field candidates.
The reduced involvement in political parties has occurred despite other indicators of political participation being more stable. The proportion who in surveys (the SOM survey at the University of Gothenburg) state that they are interested in politics has even increased in recent years.
That there is a continued political interest indicates that it is rather the form of the involvement that means that more people do not participate actively in party politics.
Representative democracy does not require everyone to be in a party. But it is based on the fact that there are people who are prepared to take the step from political interest to political tasks and that the parties have the ability to find and release them.
The declining membership of the parties therefore raises a bigger question. Given a representative system where parties have almost a monopoly on the path to political assignments, they also have a special responsibility to ensure that this path is open and attractive.
The political interest seems to be there. The question is whether the parties take their responsibility for democracy by getting more people to take the step from political interest to political commitment and, by extension, to a political mission?
Read more articles from DN Debatt:
Johan Welander, former chamber secretary in the Riksdag: "The Speaker must make the threat of by-elections real"
