Diagonal Accountability
#17Key Findings
Austria falls into the middle ranks internationally (rank 17) in the category of diagonal accountability.
Media freedom is guaranteed by the constitution, with regulations enforced by the court. Governments can exert some influence via subsidies, and by using public money to promote specific policies.
ORF, the public broadcasting company, dominates the media market. It is mandated to operate independently. The ÖVP-FPÖ government attacked it for not being “objective,” but conditions have not improved significantly in the years since. The print media sector is also highly concentrated.
Capital and labor interest groups play a strong policymaking role, but public trust in this organizations is falling. Social welfare and environmental groups are often influential, but to a lesser degree.
Media freedom is guaranteed by the constitution, with regulations enforced by the court. Governments can exert some influence via subsidies, and by using public money to promote specific policies.
ORF, the public broadcasting company, dominates the media market. It is mandated to operate independently. The ÖVP-FPÖ government attacked it for not being “objective,” but conditions have not improved significantly in the years since. The print media sector is also highly concentrated.
Capital and labor interest groups play a strong policymaking role, but public trust in this organizations is falling. Social welfare and environmental groups are often influential, but to a lesser degree.
Graph View
Graph View
To what extent are the media free from government influence and able to act independently?
10
9
9
There are no disincentives, by law or in practice, for the media to criticize the government and public officials.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
2
1
1
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
Media freedom in Austria is guaranteed by the constitution. There is no censorship, and new electronic or print media organizations can be freely established. Limits on the freedom of expression in the media are defined by law, and the courts ensure these limits are enforced.
Some media outlets are not completely free of government influence. Both federal and regional governments have used public money to promote specific policies during election campaigns and beyond in various print publications. Public money has also been used to pay fines for violating established rules. This tradition, repeatedly criticized by the Austrian Court of Audit and media organizations, reduces the credibility and freedom of the media.
One of the defining features of the Austrian media landscape is the existence of powerful public media. The Austrian Public Broadcasting (Österreichischer Rundfunk Fernsehen, ORF) company dominates both the television and radio markets. The ORF is legally mandated to operate independently and submit comprehensive reports on its activities. All parties in parliament are represented on the ORF’s oversight body, the Stiftungsrat. Compared to the situation in Germany, for example, the majorities in the Stiftungsrat strongly reflect the respective majorities in the Nationalrat, with significant changes occurring after parliamentary elections.
Several cases of alleged political influence over the ORF by various political parties have been reported. However, the ORF generally fulfills its mandate very well, especially by international standards. There is an imbalance between the ORF and other TV and radio stations. The ORF is primarily financed by public fees, which must be paid by everyone who owns a TV or radio device. In contrast, other TV and radio broadcasters generate revenue through advertisements. The ORF and the government justify this imbalance by citing the ORF’s specific educational mission, which private companies are not required to fulfill.
There are other imbalances in print media that reflect an uneven regime of direct media subsidies. Subsidies for print journalism generally went to high-quality journals like “Die Presse” or “Der Standard.” Public money from advertising was twice as high in recent years, mostly benefiting the yellow press. This advertising is problematic because it leaves room for rewarding favorable journalism. Thus, popular tabloid titles benefit disproportionately from the existing funding regime.
While regional weekly newspapers tend to face disadvantages (see Seethaler & Beaufort, 2022).
Many observers deemed the period of the ÖVP-FPÖ government to be the nadir for media freedom due to government intervention, highlighted by unusually aggressive attacks from the FPÖ on the ORF for being “not objective.” However, the overall situation has not fundamentally improved under the new ÖVP-Green government, as evidenced by Austria’s position in international press freedom rankings. In the most recent Reporters Without Borders 2023 ranking, Austria was placed 29th among 180 countries worldwide, down from 17th in the 2021 report and slightly up from 2022.
The past year has been particularly marked by the resignations of several renowned editors-in-chief who maintained unreasonably close relationships with individual senior politicians. Additional recent developments – such as a house search at the newspaper “Heute” and the transformation of the “Wiener Zeitung,” the world’s oldest newspaper, into an online-only publication – were not yet accounted for in this recent assessment. Furthermore, Austria’s suggested involvement in the PEGASUS scandal, which concerns the distribution and use of spyware, has also cast an unfavorable light on media freedom.
In the Monitoring Report 2022 of the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom/EUI (covering the EU, Albania, Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia, and Turkey), Austria is highlighted as a country where “journalistic profession, standards and protection” have deteriorated, shifting from a low risk to a medium risk classification (with only three other countries in the same or a lower category). Regarding the sub-indicator on the “working conditions” of journalists, Austria is considered to be at a high risk (alongside thirteen other countries out of the 32 covered). Concerning the sub-indicator on the “legal protection of the right to information,” Austria, alongside Turkey, is the only country considered to be at a high risk.
At the same time, Austria is among the minority of countries (8 out of 32) that have rules aiming to ensure the fairness and transparency of political advertising on online platforms. Further, Austria is one of only five countries out of 32 that have a reasonably sophisticated and efficient regulatory framework designed to combat the spread of hate speech.
Citations:
https://rsf.org/en/region/europe-central-asia
https://rsf.org/en/index?year=2021
https://www.moment.at/story/wie-finanzieren-sich-unabhaengige-medien
https://www.puls24.at/news/chronik/pressefreiheits-index-oesterreichs-ranking-wieder-dramatisch-schlecht/296218
https://cmpf.eui.eu/mpm2022-results/
Seethaler, J, and Beaufort, M. 2022. Monitoring Media Pluralism in the Digital Era: Application of the Media Pluralism Monitor in the European Union, Albania, Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey in the Year 2021. Country Report: Austria. Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom. https://cadmus.eui.eu
https://orf.at/stories/3292919/
https://kurier.at/kultur/medien/hausdurchsuchung-bei-heute-nach-dichand-intervention-in-finanzministerium/402383861
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/regierungsausgaben-pressefoerderung-sinkt-inseratengelder-steigen/401773839
Some media outlets are not completely free of government influence. Both federal and regional governments have used public money to promote specific policies during election campaigns and beyond in various print publications. Public money has also been used to pay fines for violating established rules. This tradition, repeatedly criticized by the Austrian Court of Audit and media organizations, reduces the credibility and freedom of the media.
One of the defining features of the Austrian media landscape is the existence of powerful public media. The Austrian Public Broadcasting (Österreichischer Rundfunk Fernsehen, ORF) company dominates both the television and radio markets. The ORF is legally mandated to operate independently and submit comprehensive reports on its activities. All parties in parliament are represented on the ORF’s oversight body, the Stiftungsrat. Compared to the situation in Germany, for example, the majorities in the Stiftungsrat strongly reflect the respective majorities in the Nationalrat, with significant changes occurring after parliamentary elections.
Several cases of alleged political influence over the ORF by various political parties have been reported. However, the ORF generally fulfills its mandate very well, especially by international standards. There is an imbalance between the ORF and other TV and radio stations. The ORF is primarily financed by public fees, which must be paid by everyone who owns a TV or radio device. In contrast, other TV and radio broadcasters generate revenue through advertisements. The ORF and the government justify this imbalance by citing the ORF’s specific educational mission, which private companies are not required to fulfill.
There are other imbalances in print media that reflect an uneven regime of direct media subsidies. Subsidies for print journalism generally went to high-quality journals like “Die Presse” or “Der Standard.” Public money from advertising was twice as high in recent years, mostly benefiting the yellow press. This advertising is problematic because it leaves room for rewarding favorable journalism. Thus, popular tabloid titles benefit disproportionately from the existing funding regime.
While regional weekly newspapers tend to face disadvantages (see Seethaler & Beaufort, 2022).
Many observers deemed the period of the ÖVP-FPÖ government to be the nadir for media freedom due to government intervention, highlighted by unusually aggressive attacks from the FPÖ on the ORF for being “not objective.” However, the overall situation has not fundamentally improved under the new ÖVP-Green government, as evidenced by Austria’s position in international press freedom rankings. In the most recent Reporters Without Borders 2023 ranking, Austria was placed 29th among 180 countries worldwide, down from 17th in the 2021 report and slightly up from 2022.
The past year has been particularly marked by the resignations of several renowned editors-in-chief who maintained unreasonably close relationships with individual senior politicians. Additional recent developments – such as a house search at the newspaper “Heute” and the transformation of the “Wiener Zeitung,” the world’s oldest newspaper, into an online-only publication – were not yet accounted for in this recent assessment. Furthermore, Austria’s suggested involvement in the PEGASUS scandal, which concerns the distribution and use of spyware, has also cast an unfavorable light on media freedom.
In the Monitoring Report 2022 of the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom/EUI (covering the EU, Albania, Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia, and Turkey), Austria is highlighted as a country where “journalistic profession, standards and protection” have deteriorated, shifting from a low risk to a medium risk classification (with only three other countries in the same or a lower category). Regarding the sub-indicator on the “working conditions” of journalists, Austria is considered to be at a high risk (alongside thirteen other countries out of the 32 covered). Concerning the sub-indicator on the “legal protection of the right to information,” Austria, alongside Turkey, is the only country considered to be at a high risk.
At the same time, Austria is among the minority of countries (8 out of 32) that have rules aiming to ensure the fairness and transparency of political advertising on online platforms. Further, Austria is one of only five countries out of 32 that have a reasonably sophisticated and efficient regulatory framework designed to combat the spread of hate speech.
Citations:
https://rsf.org/en/region/europe-central-asia
https://rsf.org/en/index?year=2021
https://www.moment.at/story/wie-finanzieren-sich-unabhaengige-medien
https://www.puls24.at/news/chronik/pressefreiheits-index-oesterreichs-ranking-wieder-dramatisch-schlecht/296218
https://cmpf.eui.eu/mpm2022-results/
Seethaler, J, and Beaufort, M. 2022. Monitoring Media Pluralism in the Digital Era: Application of the Media Pluralism Monitor in the European Union, Albania, Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey in the Year 2021. Country Report: Austria. Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom. https://cadmus.eui.eu
https://orf.at/stories/3292919/
https://kurier.at/kultur/medien/hausdurchsuchung-bei-heute-nach-dichand-intervention-in-finanzministerium/402383861
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/regierungsausgaben-pressefoerderung-sinkt-inseratengelder-steigen/401773839
To what extent is a plurality of opinions in the media ensured?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, to a pluralistic media landscape that represents all existing political perspectives in society.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
The Austrian media system has a distinct lack of pluralism in both the broadcast and print media sectors. The TV and radio markets are still dominated by the public Austrian Broadcasting Corporation (ORF), though its market share has been shrinking. ORF’s television market share in 2022 was 34.6%, down from 35.5% in 2021, while its radio market share was 68%, down from 72% in 2021.
The ORF is required by law to follow a policy of internal pluralism, which in practice translates primarily into a reflection of the various political parties’ current strength in parliament. Thus, interests and movements not yet established in the political system may occasionally face a disadvantage.
The print media sector is highly concentrated by comparative standards. For nearly 9 million inhabitants, there are just 14 daily newspapers, compared to Switzerland with a population of 8.7 million, which has more than 40 dailies, or Sweden, with a population of 10.4 million and more than 90 dailies. Regional monopolies also pose a threat to media pluralism in Austria. In some states, a single daily paper dominates the market.
One paper, the tabloid Kronenzeitung, dominates the print market, though its market share has been shrinking recently. The Kronenzeitung’s market share was 22.4% in 2022, or 1.7 million readers (down from 23.9% in 2021 and more than 40% in 2009). With a reach of 9.4 and 8.9%, the two daily newspapers “Kleine Zeitung” and “Heute” were the second and third most important papers in 2022, respectively. The Kronenzeitung carries particular political weight as politicians of various parties seek to please its editor and staff, eroding the fair and open democratic competition of ideas and interests. Further limits to media pluralism arise from close personal relationships between the chief editors of different major newspapers. For example, the editor-in-chief of “Heute” is the spouse of the editor-in-chief of the Kronenzeitung.
According to data published by the Media Pluralism Monitor 2022, media pluralism in Austria is at medium risk in all areas investigated, except for one – fundamental protection – which shows a low risk. The report indicates that risks to media pluralism in Austria arise primarily from horizontal and cross-media concentration, insufficient reflection on changes in the media landscape within competition law, threats to the independence of public service media governance and funding, endangered editorial autonomy, shortcomings in provisions on media ownership transparency, limited access to media for women and minorities, the lack of a policy or resources to promote media literacy, and a system of state subsidies.
There is a notable amount of news media concentration on online platforms. Those who control online news media also hold powerful positions in other sectors, such as Mediaprint, ORF, or Styria Media Group. However, for now, there remains a sufficient number of major digital, print, and broadcast outlets that are able and willing to consistently critique government policies and report on abuses of power.
Citations:
https://www.parlament.gv.at/aktuelles/pk/jahr_2023/pk0875
https://kontrast.at/zeitungen-oesterreich/#Geringe_Pressevielfalt_bei_Tageszeitungen
https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000180498/oesterreichs-groesste-medienhaeuser-2023–vor-dem-umbruch
https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/74681
The ORF is required by law to follow a policy of internal pluralism, which in practice translates primarily into a reflection of the various political parties’ current strength in parliament. Thus, interests and movements not yet established in the political system may occasionally face a disadvantage.
The print media sector is highly concentrated by comparative standards. For nearly 9 million inhabitants, there are just 14 daily newspapers, compared to Switzerland with a population of 8.7 million, which has more than 40 dailies, or Sweden, with a population of 10.4 million and more than 90 dailies. Regional monopolies also pose a threat to media pluralism in Austria. In some states, a single daily paper dominates the market.
One paper, the tabloid Kronenzeitung, dominates the print market, though its market share has been shrinking recently. The Kronenzeitung’s market share was 22.4% in 2022, or 1.7 million readers (down from 23.9% in 2021 and more than 40% in 2009). With a reach of 9.4 and 8.9%, the two daily newspapers “Kleine Zeitung” and “Heute” were the second and third most important papers in 2022, respectively. The Kronenzeitung carries particular political weight as politicians of various parties seek to please its editor and staff, eroding the fair and open democratic competition of ideas and interests. Further limits to media pluralism arise from close personal relationships between the chief editors of different major newspapers. For example, the editor-in-chief of “Heute” is the spouse of the editor-in-chief of the Kronenzeitung.
According to data published by the Media Pluralism Monitor 2022, media pluralism in Austria is at medium risk in all areas investigated, except for one – fundamental protection – which shows a low risk. The report indicates that risks to media pluralism in Austria arise primarily from horizontal and cross-media concentration, insufficient reflection on changes in the media landscape within competition law, threats to the independence of public service media governance and funding, endangered editorial autonomy, shortcomings in provisions on media ownership transparency, limited access to media for women and minorities, the lack of a policy or resources to promote media literacy, and a system of state subsidies.
There is a notable amount of news media concentration on online platforms. Those who control online news media also hold powerful positions in other sectors, such as Mediaprint, ORF, or Styria Media Group. However, for now, there remains a sufficient number of major digital, print, and broadcast outlets that are able and willing to consistently critique government policies and report on abuses of power.
Citations:
https://www.parlament.gv.at/aktuelles/pk/jahr_2023/pk0875
https://kontrast.at/zeitungen-oesterreich/#Geringe_Pressevielfalt_bei_Tageszeitungen
https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000180498/oesterreichs-groesste-medienhaeuser-2023–vor-dem-umbruch
https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/74681
Graph View
To what extent are citizens able to freely form or join independent political and civic groups, openly raise and discuss political issues, and assemble without restrictions?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice to creating an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose very few or no significant obstacles to creating an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the creation of an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the creation of an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
Citizens in Austria can freely form or join independent political and civic groups, openly discuss political issues, and assemble without restrictions. The freedom of association and assembly is guaranteed by the constitution. This constitutional guarantee includes any religious, philosophical, or ideological position, with few exceptions, such as attempts to generate support for Nazi ideology.
The right to gather in public and hold a meeting or demonstration does not require a specific application. Authorities simply need to be informed about scheduled events no less than 48 hours in advance. Failing to do so can result in a fine, though this does not mean that an unregistered gathering will be automatically dissolved by the police. However, if the police have doubts about a particular gathering and suspect it might endanger public security, the event can be called off.
Recent events, especially during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, have seen an increase in such incidents. Planned demonstrations against Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip have been among these occurrences. The climate change protests, where young people adhered themselves to the floor, have also attracted significant public attention. Notably, key representatives of the Austrian state, including Federal President Van der Bellen, have sided with the demonstrators.
On some occasions, the courts declared government actions against groups that wanted to assemble as unlawful. The FPÖ, one of the harshest and most powerful critics of liberal democracy, benefited from these judgments, as seen in early 2021. This situation demonstrates that Austria is willing to face the challenging task of allowing public criticism against some of its most fundamental values, rather than simply keeping those groups at bay through legal means.
Different societal groups have played varying roles in the recent chapters of civil society development. Women have been particularly active in pandemic-related protests in Austria, while some observers believe that Muslims, or “political Islam,” have been gradually pushed to the sidelines of civil society by recent governments.
Citations:
https://www.wienerzeitung.at/h/demoverbot-wegen-corona-nicht-rechtens
https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000143726711/klimaproteste-und-versammlungsrechts
Simsa, Ruth. 2023. “Civic Spaces between Turbulent Politics and the Pandemic-The Civil Society in Austria.” Contested Civic Spaces: A European Perspective 22: 133.
Hafez, F. 2023. “Criminalizing Muslim Agency in Europe: The Case of ‘Political Islam’ in Austria, Germany, and France.” French Cultural Studies 34 (3): 313-328. https://doi.org/10.1177/09571558221133253
Daniel, Antje, Markus Brunner, and Florian Knasmüller. 2023. “Does Gender Play a Role?: A Gendered Frame Analysis of the Pandemic Skeptic Protests in Austria.” German Politics and Society 41 (2): 61-79.
The right to gather in public and hold a meeting or demonstration does not require a specific application. Authorities simply need to be informed about scheduled events no less than 48 hours in advance. Failing to do so can result in a fine, though this does not mean that an unregistered gathering will be automatically dissolved by the police. However, if the police have doubts about a particular gathering and suspect it might endanger public security, the event can be called off.
Recent events, especially during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, have seen an increase in such incidents. Planned demonstrations against Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip have been among these occurrences. The climate change protests, where young people adhered themselves to the floor, have also attracted significant public attention. Notably, key representatives of the Austrian state, including Federal President Van der Bellen, have sided with the demonstrators.
On some occasions, the courts declared government actions against groups that wanted to assemble as unlawful. The FPÖ, one of the harshest and most powerful critics of liberal democracy, benefited from these judgments, as seen in early 2021. This situation demonstrates that Austria is willing to face the challenging task of allowing public criticism against some of its most fundamental values, rather than simply keeping those groups at bay through legal means.
Different societal groups have played varying roles in the recent chapters of civil society development. Women have been particularly active in pandemic-related protests in Austria, while some observers believe that Muslims, or “political Islam,” have been gradually pushed to the sidelines of civil society by recent governments.
Citations:
https://www.wienerzeitung.at/h/demoverbot-wegen-corona-nicht-rechtens
https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000143726711/klimaproteste-und-versammlungsrechts
Simsa, Ruth. 2023. “Civic Spaces between Turbulent Politics and the Pandemic-The Civil Society in Austria.” Contested Civic Spaces: A European Perspective 22: 133.
Hafez, F. 2023. “Criminalizing Muslim Agency in Europe: The Case of ‘Political Islam’ in Austria, Germany, and France.” French Cultural Studies 34 (3): 313-328. https://doi.org/10.1177/09571558221133253
Daniel, Antje, Markus Brunner, and Florian Knasmüller. 2023. “Does Gender Play a Role?: A Gendered Frame Analysis of the Pandemic Skeptic Protests in Austria.” German Politics and Society 41 (2): 61-79.
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
The role of capital and labor interest groups remains notably strong in Austria (Karlhofer 2020). In many cases, these groups continue to formulate nearly complete laws independently, which parliament subsequently only needs to approve. Significant associations include the Austrian Economic Chambers (Wirtschaftskammern) and the Federation of Austrian Industry (Die Industriellenvereinigung) for businesses and employers; the Austrian Trade Union Federation (Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund) and the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labor (Arbeiterkammern) for employees; and the Chamber of Agriculture (Landwirtschaftskammern) for farmers. Membership in the various chambers is mandatory; the fees, amounting to 0.5% of the gross salary, are automatically deducted from it. Other membership fees to professional associations or donations to civil society organizations are tax-deductible.
The power of the major associations from the economic and labor sectors to shape politics and public policies may have been reduced as a result of Austria’s integration into the European Union, but in domestic politics their influence remains strong. Though formally independent of political parties, the groups have various individual links to the parties, especially to the Social Democratic Party and the Austrian People’s Party. Moreover, their influence is enhanced by their acting in a coordinated, neo-corporatist way through the social-partnership network.
These established patterns have begun to change in recent decades, particularly in the past few years (Paster 2022). The SPÖ’s closest allies have lost ground since the party’s fall from power in 2017. The formation of a new coalition government between the ÖVP and the Greens in early 2020 continued the post-2017 policies. The ÖVP-Green government was, in fact, the first national government that did not include any ministers representing the social partners (Sozialpartner).
The social partners have not only suffered from changing government complexions; compared to the peak of the Social Partnership, public trust and support have been shrinking. In 2022, just 35% of respondents declared they had much or very much trust in the social partners (i.e., employers’ and employees’ associations). By contrast, 24% of respondents had little or no trust at all (Statista 2024). Some of this distrust stems from the influence of the FPÖ, a party that is not represented in these organizations and is therefore fairly skeptical. On the other hand, employers’ and workers’ organizations have gained more access to public opinion through newly founded economic research and lobbying institutions like Agenda Austria and Momentum Institute.
Citations:
Statista. 2024. “https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1097082/umfrage/vertrauen-in-die-sozialpartner-in-oesterreich”
Paster, Thomas. 2022. “Sozialpartnerschaft und Arbeitgeber* innenverbände in Österreich.” In Sozialpartnerschaftliche Handlungsfelder: Kontinuitäten, Brüche und Perspektiven: Aktuelle Befunde, eds., 29-43. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Karlhofer, Ferdinand. 2020. “The Present and Future State of Social Partnership.” Austro-Corporatism. Routledge, 119-146.
Hofmann, Julia, Carina Altreiter, Jörg Flecker, Saskja Schindler, and Ruth Simsa. 2019. “Symbolic Struggles over Solidarity in Times of Crisis: Trade Unions, Civil Society Actors and the Political Far Right in Austria.” European Societies 21 (5): 649-671. DOI: 10.1080/14616696.2019.1616790
The power of the major associations from the economic and labor sectors to shape politics and public policies may have been reduced as a result of Austria’s integration into the European Union, but in domestic politics their influence remains strong. Though formally independent of political parties, the groups have various individual links to the parties, especially to the Social Democratic Party and the Austrian People’s Party. Moreover, their influence is enhanced by their acting in a coordinated, neo-corporatist way through the social-partnership network.
These established patterns have begun to change in recent decades, particularly in the past few years (Paster 2022). The SPÖ’s closest allies have lost ground since the party’s fall from power in 2017. The formation of a new coalition government between the ÖVP and the Greens in early 2020 continued the post-2017 policies. The ÖVP-Green government was, in fact, the first national government that did not include any ministers representing the social partners (Sozialpartner).
The social partners have not only suffered from changing government complexions; compared to the peak of the Social Partnership, public trust and support have been shrinking. In 2022, just 35% of respondents declared they had much or very much trust in the social partners (i.e., employers’ and employees’ associations). By contrast, 24% of respondents had little or no trust at all (Statista 2024). Some of this distrust stems from the influence of the FPÖ, a party that is not represented in these organizations and is therefore fairly skeptical. On the other hand, employers’ and workers’ organizations have gained more access to public opinion through newly founded economic research and lobbying institutions like Agenda Austria and Momentum Institute.
Citations:
Statista. 2024. “https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1097082/umfrage/vertrauen-in-die-sozialpartner-in-oesterreich”
Paster, Thomas. 2022. “Sozialpartnerschaft und Arbeitgeber* innenverbände in Österreich.” In Sozialpartnerschaftliche Handlungsfelder: Kontinuitäten, Brüche und Perspektiven: Aktuelle Befunde, eds., 29-43. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Karlhofer, Ferdinand. 2020. “The Present and Future State of Social Partnership.” Austro-Corporatism. Routledge, 119-146.
Hofmann, Julia, Carina Altreiter, Jörg Flecker, Saskja Schindler, and Ruth Simsa. 2019. “Symbolic Struggles over Solidarity in Times of Crisis: Trade Unions, Civil Society Actors and the Political Far Right in Austria.” European Societies 21 (5): 649-671. DOI: 10.1080/14616696.2019.1616790
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
Social welfare associations play an important role in Austrian politics. To some extent, the very nature of the Austrian welfare state reflects the major influence of these various groups. For example, the pensioners’ association enjoys a public status that no government has been willing or able to ignore (Ettinger 2016). Other groups, such as youth or family associations, have been able to express their views, but their impact on public policy has remained less obvious. In terms of intergenerational justice – and due to the strong influence of pensioners’ associations and demographic changes – such imbalances may be problematic.
Organized religious communities, particularly the officially recognized denominations, play a formal role in the decision-making process. The unique Austrian institution of the “officially recognized religious denomination” institutionalizes the participation of major religious groups in policymaking. Similar to economic interest groups, they are often – though not always – consulted before the cabinet approves the draft of a law. This is a critical stage of the process, as most cabinet-approved drafts are also approved by parliament.
Citations:
Ettinger, Karl. 2016. “Die Macht der Pensionisten.” Die Presse, February 13. https://www.diepresse.com/4925458/die-macht-der-pensionisten
https://www.agenda-austria.at/grafiken/die-macht-der-pensionisten/
Organized religious communities, particularly the officially recognized denominations, play a formal role in the decision-making process. The unique Austrian institution of the “officially recognized religious denomination” institutionalizes the participation of major religious groups in policymaking. Similar to economic interest groups, they are often – though not always – consulted before the cabinet approves the draft of a law. This is a critical stage of the process, as most cabinet-approved drafts are also approved by parliament.
Citations:
Ettinger, Karl. 2016. “Die Macht der Pensionisten.” Die Presse, February 13. https://www.diepresse.com/4925458/die-macht-der-pensionisten
https://www.agenda-austria.at/grafiken/die-macht-der-pensionisten/
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
International organizations, such as Greenpeace or WWF, have long held an established place in Austria’s CSO landscape. Donations to these organizations are tax deductible.
While civil society-based environmental policy has long been dominated by established and well-known organizations rooted in the late twentieth century, new initiatives and organizations have emerged more recently. In 2019, a new alliance called “Klimaprotest.at” was formed, comprising new movements and environmental CSOs. This alliance played important roles in building networks and coordinating protests (Simsa et al. 2021).
Since 2019, Austria, like many other countries, has witnessed major public protests against climate change and the government’s climate policies. In late September 2019, up to 150,000 people across Austria protested against climate change and demanded new anti-climate change policies. This movement also sparked new organizational collaborations between different groups, leading to the creation of “umbrella organizations.”
In recent years, new-style environmental or anti-climate-change movements, such as the Austrian branch of “The Last Generation,” have drawn considerable public attention through various public protest activities. Despite demands for a “climate law” and immediate government action to combat climate change, there have been very limited tangible effects.
Many observers agree that environmental issues were largely sidelined by the pandemic and economic concerns. More specifically, many believe that the concrete involvement of environmental CSOs in drafting laws and governmental orders has been rather limited.
Citations:
Simsa, R., Mayer, F., Muckenhuber, S., and Schweinschwaller, T. 2021. Rahmenbedingungen für die Zivilgesellschaft in Österreich. Berlin: Maecenata Institut für Philanthropie und Zivilgesellschaft. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-73615-2
https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/themen/bauen_wohnen_und_umwelt/oeffentlichkeitsbeteiligung-im-umweltbereich/umweltbezogene-plaene-programme-und-politiken.html
https://boku.ac.at/fileadmin/data/H03000/H73000/H73200/ReSciPI/Diskussionspapier_ReSciPI_Klimapolitikberatung_in_%C3%96sterreich.pdf
Daniel, Antje. 2022. “Jung und Widerständig. Die Fridays for Future in Wien.” In Das Politische in der Demokratiebildung, eds. Susanne Reitmair-Juárez and Dirk Lange, 136-159. Wochenschau Wissenschaft.
https://kurier.at/chronik/wien/internationaler-klimastreik-wo-in-oesterreich-demonstriert-wird/402593861
While civil society-based environmental policy has long been dominated by established and well-known organizations rooted in the late twentieth century, new initiatives and organizations have emerged more recently. In 2019, a new alliance called “Klimaprotest.at” was formed, comprising new movements and environmental CSOs. This alliance played important roles in building networks and coordinating protests (Simsa et al. 2021).
Since 2019, Austria, like many other countries, has witnessed major public protests against climate change and the government’s climate policies. In late September 2019, up to 150,000 people across Austria protested against climate change and demanded new anti-climate change policies. This movement also sparked new organizational collaborations between different groups, leading to the creation of “umbrella organizations.”
In recent years, new-style environmental or anti-climate-change movements, such as the Austrian branch of “The Last Generation,” have drawn considerable public attention through various public protest activities. Despite demands for a “climate law” and immediate government action to combat climate change, there have been very limited tangible effects.
Many observers agree that environmental issues were largely sidelined by the pandemic and economic concerns. More specifically, many believe that the concrete involvement of environmental CSOs in drafting laws and governmental orders has been rather limited.
Citations:
Simsa, R., Mayer, F., Muckenhuber, S., and Schweinschwaller, T. 2021. Rahmenbedingungen für die Zivilgesellschaft in Österreich. Berlin: Maecenata Institut für Philanthropie und Zivilgesellschaft. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-73615-2
https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/themen/bauen_wohnen_und_umwelt/oeffentlichkeitsbeteiligung-im-umweltbereich/umweltbezogene-plaene-programme-und-politiken.html
https://boku.ac.at/fileadmin/data/H03000/H73000/H73200/ReSciPI/Diskussionspapier_ReSciPI_Klimapolitikberatung_in_%C3%96sterreich.pdf
Daniel, Antje. 2022. “Jung und Widerständig. Die Fridays for Future in Wien.” In Das Politische in der Demokratiebildung, eds. Susanne Reitmair-Juárez and Dirk Lange, 136-159. Wochenschau Wissenschaft.
https://kurier.at/chronik/wien/internationaler-klimastreik-wo-in-oesterreich-demonstriert-wird/402593861