This article analyzes the trajectory of the Pirate Party of Luxembourg from its founding in 2009 and its electoral breakthrough in a traditionally stable system, up to the internal crisis that occurred in 2024. Using a supply-and-demand theoretical framework, the study integrates the analysis of supply factors (organization, programme, modes of action) and demand factors (voter motivations). On the demand side, the party’s support is primarily driven by protest voting, linked to political alienation and low internal efficacy perceived by voters. Issue voting, conversely, is strongly connected to positive attitudes toward participatory democratic reforms rather than the traditional digital priorities of pirate parties. On the supply side, the combination of highly personalized leadership, non-conventional and institutionalized activism, increasingly populist communication and even ideological heterogeneity contributed to the party’s electoral rise. This model, however, led to growing tensions between the two leading figures and a mismatch between participatory ideals and actual centralized organization. The 2024 party crisis, triggered by financial irregularities and leadership conflicts, exposed Luxembourg’s Pirate Party’s chronic organizational fragility. The article contributes to debates on new party institutionalization and the dynamics between protest and issue voting for new party support.

The topic of constitution-making has been a constant presence in Luxembourgish politics for more than twenty years – sometimes occupying the foreground, sometimes receding into the background. Though the process of revising the constitution has predominantly been an elite-driven affair, spearheaded by parliament and major political parties, it has included some participatory elements and deliberative moments. In this report, we give an overview of Luxembourg’s formal constitution-making mechanisms, its incremental constitution-making processes and, most importantly, a series of recent constitution-making experiments. Along the way, we will gain a better understanding of the ongoing constitutional revision’s fate, as well as the prospects for deliberative constitution-making in Luxembourg.

This study examines whether exposure to a deliberative mini-public (DMP) shapes citizens’ attitudes toward this specific form of democratic innovation. Using panel surveys conducted before and after Luxembourg’s 2022 Climate Assembly (Klima-Biergerrot, KBR), we compare three groups: participants (direct exposure), informed non-participants (indirect exposure), and uninformed non-participants (no exposure). Our causal mediation analyses reveal a “foot-in-the-door” effect: when political authorities organize a national DMP, it boosts public support for future DMPs and increases willingness to participate. This effect is powerful when coupled with a positive evaluation of the outcomes and, to a lesser extent, of the process itself. While participants show the greatest attitudinal shift, informed non-participants also exhibit a weaker but similar trend. Overall, organizing a national DMP helps familiarize citizens with deliberative practices and strengthens their legitimacy, thereby contributing to the “deliberative wave” becoming eventually a lasting democratic trend rather than a short-lived experiment.

At the June 2024 European election, the soft Eurosceptic party that comes closest to the definition of right-wing populist in Luxembourg, the Alternative Democratic Reform Party, won one of the six seats for the first time in its history and joined the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the European Parliament. Despite suffering limited losses in its vote share, the Liberal party (Democratic Party/ Demokratesch Partei) only came out third in the election, behind the Christian Socials (Christian-Social People's Party/ Chrëschtlech-Sozial Vollekspartei ) and the Socialists (Luxembourg Socialist People's Party/ Lëtzebuerger Sozialistesch Aarbechterpartei ), and lost its second seat in the European Parliament. The DP had received the largest electoral support in the 2019 European election and remained a coalition partner in government after the 2023 national election.

AbstractLuxembourg politics in 2023 was dominated by the local election in June followed by the national election in October. Local elections were characterized by a limited participation of foreigners and a certain stability of the political forces. Christian‐Social People's Party/Chrëschtlech‐Sozial Vollekspartei (CSV) remained by far the first party despite a slight drop in seats, and The Greens/Déi Gréng experienced proportionally the most significant drop in seats. As for the local elections, the national elections have been marked by the maintaining of the CSV as the first party, and the massive loss of the Green party. The significant drop of the Green party made the existing three coalition parties (DP‐LSAP‐Gréng) arithmetically impossible, positioning the leader of the CSV and new Prime Minister, Luc Frieden, in an ideal position to lead a coalition government. As expected, Luc Frieden and his party formed a coalition with the DP, which is closer to its political program and guarantees a comfortable majority in the Parliament.

First, this chapter develops original criteria – inclusiveness, discursiveness, and effectiveness – in order to map information and communication technologies' uses in consultative processes that can be used for other cases of citizens' constitutional reforms. Second, reviewing five constitutional consultations cases (Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, and the German region North Rhine-Westphalia [NRW]), this chapter explores to what extent the opinions emerging online contribute to enriching the debate around the constitutional reforms and to what extent they were included in the consultative and law-drafting process. Not surprisingly, the inclusion is low and self-selection shows a strong bias. Organized interest groups, younger age groups, formerly engaged citizens dominate the online participatory process, which is, in some cases, compensated by the introduction of mini-publics. In most cases, online deliberation had an impact on the drafting of the process, even if it is more-or-less straightforward, depending on several factors such as the publicization on the debates and participatory instruments, the role of political parties, politicians, or powerful civil society organizations and media supporting these instruments, or the level of preparedness and quality of online proposals.

From Deliberation to Headlines: Media Coverage and Framing of the 2022 Luxembourg Climate Citizens’ Assembly (Klima-Biergerrot) Climate Citizens’ Assemblies (CCAs) have become a valuable tool for directly involving citizens in addressing the pressing challenges posed by the climate crisis. Central to their legitimacy is their capacity to engage a broad audience with the complexities of participatory and environmental politics. In this respect, the media plays a crucial role in influencing whether and how CCAs are portrayed. Recognizing a lack of research connecting media and (C)CAs, this study aims to advance the research agenda through a case study of the Luxembourgish Klima Biergerrot (KBR). Analysing 120 media pieces, we aim to better understand which factors influence both the volume and framing of a CCA in media discourse. Our findings are three-fold. First, coverage tends to be more extensive and positive when the media focuses on the CCA’s outcomes rather than procedural aspects. Second, media outlets with left-leaning ideologies tend to provide more extensive coverage but frame the CCA more negatively compared to right-leaning counterparts. Third, while the gender of journalists does not affect the extent of the coverage, it influences the framing: women journalists tend to present CCAs more positively. This research underscores the role of the media in communicating CCAs and climate action.

AbstractLuxembourg politics in 2022 was marked by the economic consequences of Russia's war against Ukraine. The government responded through policy packages negotiated with social partners. The decade‐long process of revamping the Constitution finally came to an end, and new measures were taken to allow for greater participation of foreign residents in local politics. The year 2022 was indeed a pre‐electoral year, as both local and national elections are scheduled for 2023. Parties started to prepare for these important deadlines through personnel movements.

AbstractLuxembourg politics in 2021 was again largely determined by the evolution of the Covid‐19 pandemic and its response by public authorities, with an easing of restrictions which was followed by the adoption of stricter measures due to the emergence of the Omicron variant. This sequence caused an outcry in the population, with protests that sometimes became violent. The three‐party coalition government was also shaken, at the end of the year, by the decision of three of its ministers to resign from their position. After changes of ministerial personnel within The Greens/Déi Gréng delegation in previous years, this time the turnover (set to become official in 2022) concerned the Socialists/Lëtzebuerger Sozialistesch Aarbechterpartei and the Democratic Pary/Demokratesch Partei. But 2021 was also a particularly difficult year for the historically dominant party of the Grand Duchy, the Christian‐Social People's Party/Chrëschtlech‐Sozial Vollekspartei, in opposition since 2013, but still the largest party in Parliament, as it saw its leader forced out of office.

Abstract In the last decades, online deliberation has gained prominence amongst scholars in political science, political philosophy, political communication, and big data analysis. This chapter presents a method to assess online deliberation: the Online Deliberative Matrix (ODM). This matrix refers to a criteria that assesses the quality of deliberation taking place in online discursive spaces. The chapter provides the theoretical foundation of the matrix by referring to the ideal speech situation and the two-track model of democracy advocated by Jürgen Habermas. It then presents a detailed operationalization of this theory based on nine deliberative criteria and discusses some examples that fully, or partially draw on the ODM to evaluate the deliberativeness of online debates in different contexts.

European Journal of Political Research Political Data YearbookVolume 60, Issue 1 p. 256-263 Original Article Luxembourg: Political Developments and Data in 2020 DAN SCHMIT, DAN SCHMIT University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorRAPHAEL KIES, RAPHAEL KIES University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorPATRICK DUMONT, PATRICK DUMONT University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg Australian National University, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author DAN SCHMIT, DAN SCHMIT University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorRAPHAEL KIES, RAPHAEL KIES University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorPATRICK DUMONT, PATRICK DUMONT University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg Australian National University, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 10 August 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-8852.12331Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume60, Issue1December 2021Pages 256-263 RelatedInformation

Dans cet article, nous présentons l’une des premières analyses à étudier de manière systématique les facteurs expliquant le degré d’appropriation par un gouvernement des demandes exprimées dans les e-pétitions qui lui sont soumises. Cette analyse se base sur l’ensemble des e-pétitions ayant obtenu les 4 500 signatures requises pour donner lieu à un débat public à la Chambre des députés du Luxembourg. Les hypothèses testées pour expliquer les variations dans le niveau d’appropriation des e-pétitions par le gouvernement ont été : 1) la compatibilité avec l’agenda du gouvernement, 2) la compétence du gouvernement pour traiter les e-pétitions en question, 3) la nature consensuelle (ou non) de l’e-pétition, 4) le nombre de signatures en sa faveur, 5) sa visibilité médiatique, et 6) le statut de son initiateur. Conformément à nos attentes, nous avons observé que les probabilités qu’une e-pétition soit prise en considération par le gouvernement sont liées à essentiellement trois facteurs : 1) la compatibilité avec l’agenda du gouvernement, 2) la compétence du gouvernement et 3) l’accord du gouvernement avec les revendications des pétitionnaires. Les autres facteurs, tels que le soutien populaire ou médiatique de l’e-pétition, sa thématique ou bien les coûts de sa réalisation, apparaissent peu significatifs.

European Journal of Political Research Political Data YearbookVolume 59, Issue 1 p. 245-253 Original Article Luxembourg: Political Developments and Data in 2019 DAN SCHMIT, DAN SCHMIT University of Luxembourg, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorPATRICK DUMONT, PATRICK DUMONT University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorRAPHAËL KIES, RAPHAËL KIES University of Luxembourg, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this author DAN SCHMIT, DAN SCHMIT University of Luxembourg, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this authorPATRICK DUMONT, PATRICK DUMONT University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorRAPHAËL KIES, RAPHAËL KIES University of Luxembourg, LuxembourgSearch for more papers by this author First published: 07 September 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-8852.12290Citations: 2Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume59, Issue1December 2020Pages 245-253 RelatedInformation