After collecting turnout information in cross-campus ballots since 2001, some conclusions can be drawn, that will hopefully deal with the myth that there is such a thing as innate apathy, at least when talking about the Durham colleges. Whether the conclusions scale to elsewhere or not is unknown, but it seems probable.
Myth 1: Some colleges are just plain apathetic.
It's impossible to disprove this completely, partly because Ustinov and John Snow have consistently failed to get good turnouts. However, there is some evidence that this is not generally true, and certainly is not true for the Durham city undergraduate colleges.
Over the small sample size (February 2001 to December 2003):
- Hatfield's turnout has varied from 5% to 45% in a single year. They have had the second highest turnout, and also the 3rd lowest.
- St. Chad's turnout increased from 10% to over 40% in just four months. They have had the highest turnout (three times), and also the 4th lowest.
- Van Mildert went from 3rd to 12th between the 2004 Conference elections and the 2005 Sabb elections.
- Only two colleges (Grey and Collingwood) have never got less than the average turnout (if you ignore the time a ballot box was ruled out of order, this also applies to St. John's) .
- Likewise, only two colleges (John Snow and Ustinov) have never got more than the average turnout.
- Most colleges vary in their 'place' by 6-8 points.
If turnouts are expressed as percentages of the average turnout (to avoid skew from some elections being more interesting than others), similar patterns emerge.
Notably, St. Chad's did worse (44% of average turnout) in the NUS 2003 elections, than they did in the Sabb 2001 election when their Senior Rep forgot to open a ballot box (67% of average turnout despite this disadvantage). In the elections between these two, they consistently got between 160% and 220% of the average turnout. They also hold the record for highest turnout.
Myth 2: Without a candidate from that college, it's difficult to get good turnout.
It might be difficult, and having a candidate almost certainly helped George Stephenson in Sabb 03, but it's certainly possible to do well without one.
- Collingwood got the highest turnout in the Sabb 2003 election, despite having no candidates in any of the five elections, and got the second highest turnout in the Sabb 2005 election in the same circumstances.
- St. John's got the second highest turnout in both Sabb 2001 and President (re-run) 2001 elections, despite having two candidates in the first, and none in the second.
- Grey, which between Sabb 2001 and Sabb 2004 always had at least one candidate, varied between 3rd and 10th.
- Trevelyan had no candidates in any of the recorded elections in the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 academic years, but came 4th twice and 7th once. When it had two candidates in NUS 2002, and a candidate in Sabb 2003, it did worse, coming 9th and 12th respectively. In Sabb 2004, when it had no candidates, it recovered to 5th.
Other points
- Collingwood, St. Chad's, Hatfield, St. John's, St. Aidan's, St. Mary's and Van Mildert, seven very different colleges (in both size and general involvement), have all managed to get turnout over 40% at least once.
- There is currently a general upward trend for turnouts. As predicted here, the 2004 sabb elections saw the first college to break 50% turnout (perhaps unsurprisingly it was Collingwood), and the 2004 NUS Conference election saw St. Chad's get over 60% turnout.
- All-students emails sent by DSU tend to cause a massive increase in votes across all colleges. This increase tends to be slightly more pronounced in colleges with a currently low turnout, even if the election is nearly over.
Queen's Campus and Ustinov College
As mentioned above, these three colleges seem to be a possible exception to the 'not inherently myth' rule. I don't believe this is actually the case.
- The QC colleges have got reasonable turnouts in some previous elections. Having candidates from QC (not necessarily from that college - Stephenson got a slightly higher turnout than Snow when the candidate was from Snow) seems to help.
- Postgraduates in colleges other than Ustinov are (in general) no more or less likely to vote than undergraduates in the same college.
- This leads on to what I suspect is the real reason for low turnout - no-one gives them a reason to vote. Around half the candidates in the recent sabbatical election failed to mention the QC colleges at all. One candidate was heard to give an excuse for not campaigning in John Snow - "it was too far to walk [from Stephenson]" - imagine someone saying the same about the more widely-separated Hild-Bede and Collingwood.
- It's difficult for people in these colleges to know why they should vote, or even that they can, because no-one tries to draw it to their attention.
Can anything be done about this? Who knows? In years where a large effort has been made (2003 sabbatical election, for example) the turnout in all three was high (and in the case of Stephenson, above the average turnout for all colleges).
One final note. There are over 4500 potential votes in these colleges. Stephenson has proved that a 20% or above turnout is possible, under the right circumstances. This gives a possibility of around 900 votes - enough to easily swing most elections - that are almost entirely untapped. As a candidate, is it more worth your time trying to get a good share of this 900 in an almost competition-free environment, or trying to get a 10 vote advantage in the poster-blind and highly saturated environments of Collingwood or Hatfield.