From seats to sentiments: What Austria teaches us about trust and representation in a multi-level Europe

Deutsch

By Ermela Gianna, Matilde Ceron and Zoe Lefkofridi

The Horizon Europe project Activating European Citizens’ Trust in Times of Crisis and Polarisation (ActEU) examines questions of political trust and democratic legitimacy in Europe. This article is part of a series in which ActEU researchers present their findings.

“Austria offers a microcosm of Europe’s democratic challenge: Representation has expanded, both in who speaks and in what is discussed, but trust remains uneven and fragile.”

Austria offers a revealing paradox that resonates well beyond its borders. The country’s parliament has become more inclusive, with growing diversity among its members and increased attention to equality issues in parliamentary work. Still, some citizens feel under-represented and express only moderate levels of trust in core political institutions.

In this short article, we discuss citizens’ objective representation (descriptive and substantive) along with their subjective experience of representation and their levels of trust in representative institutions. While it might be expected that these three aspects are all closely linked together, our actual findings are more complex. Understanding how citizens’ experience of being represented connects (or fails to connect) to their trust in democratic institutions can shed light on the links between inclusion, responsiveness, and perceived fairness across levels of governance.

Looking at these dynamics through a multi-level lens, namely local, national, and European, helps explain why trust does not always follow representation. For the European Union, Austria’s experience speaks to a broader question: what sustains legitimacy in a supranational democracy, where multiple arenas of representation coexist?

What do the numbers say? Descriptive and substantive representation

In descriptive terms, Austria’s parliament (Nationalrat) has become more diverse over the last two legislative periods. Between 2017 and 2024, the proportion of women rose from 36 to 41 per cent, and openly LGBTQI+ members increased from roughly 1 to 4 per cent. MPs with a migration background more than doubled from 2 to 5 per cent – albeit still below the roughly 8 per cent of Austrians with such a background. Youth representation remains limited, at around 6 per cent, and MPs continue to be drawn disproportionately from highly educated social groups. 

This gradual diversification matters, but it only tells part of the story. When we look at what MPs actually do, parliamentary questions reveal a pattern of selective responsiveness. Gender equality and climate change are among the most frequent topics, each accounting for roughly 13 to 15 per cent of all written questions. LGBTQI+ issues also enjoy relatively high visibility, while migration and minority matters attract far less attention. These patterns reflect the political incentives and ideological priorities that shape parliamentary work.

Do Austrian citizens feel represented?

Turning from parliaments to people, however, the picture becomes more complex. Survey data from the ActEU public opinion study show that Austrians’ perceptions of representation are mixed. More than one in ten citizens say they do not feel represented at all, and about one third consider themselves only “somewhat” represented. Only around 20 per cent report feeling well represented.

Perceptions also differ across social groups. Middle-aged and economically disadvantaged citizens tend to feel under-represented, while linguistic minorities and the highly educated report stronger connections to their representatives. These feelings vary across levels of governance: some groups perceive greater representation at the EU level, others at regional or national level. For example, respondents with a migration background may feel more seen in European politics, where they may feel represented through their own nationality, while those facing economic hardship often locate their representation gap at the national level, where welfare and taxation decisions are made.

These findings illustrate that representation is not a single-level process but a layered experience. People judge their sense of being heard according to where they believe decisions that matter to them are taken.

Trust in the Austrian parliament

On a ten-point scale, average trust in the Austrian Nationalrat reaches around 4.5, with slightly lower scores for governing parties (3.9). Median values hover around 5 for parliament and the opposition, and 4 for the government. A striking 11 to 17 per cent of Austrians report no trust at all in these institutions.

Levels of trust vary across social groups.  Women and middle-aged citizens show somewhat lower trust in parliament, while linguistic minorities report higher trust. Older respondents are less trusting of governing parties, and economically disadvantaged citizens express lower trust in the opposition – possibly reflecting disillusionment with political competition itself. Interestingly, citizens with a migration background and LGBTQI+ respondents tend to report higher trust in the national parliament than others, perhaps signalling a recognition of growing visibility in political life.

Across levels of governance, trust fluctuates rather than systematically declining with distance. There are citizens who doubt national politics but trust EU institutions, while others reverse the pattern. The result is a patchwork of partial trust, suggesting that positive experiences at one level do not automatically translate into confidence at another.

Bridging the gap between representation and trust

What do these patterns tell us about democracy in a multi-level Europe? The first lesson is that inclusion in parliament – who gets a seat – and responsiveness in parliamentary work – what issues are raised – are both necessary but not sufficient for sustaining citizens’ trust. Representation must also be recognised and felt. If groups do not see their concerns reflected in visible political agendas, or if improvements in descriptive representation are not matched by substantive engagement, trust gains remain fragile.

Second, the Austrian case shows how trust and representation interact differently across levels of governance. Citizens may evaluate fairness and responsiveness through the lens of where the locus of certain policy and politics are. For instance, while economic disadvantage hinders feelings of representation nationally, certain minoritized groups signal higher recognition at EU level. These patterns suggest expectations may be different across the national and local arenas than the EU one, matching the different competences and perceived stance on minorities rights across the two levels.

Finally, a mismatch between issue salience in the public and policy debate can reinforce these tensions. The strong focus on gender equality and climate change in Austrian parliamentary activity reflects genuine progress, but other topics that are highly politicized in discourse aimed to citizens, such as migration, find limited attention within the work of the Nationalrat.

Implications for a supranational democracy

For the EU, these insights highlight two broader implications. The first is the need for multi-level calibration of representation and trust. Efforts to enhance democratic legitimacy cannot stop at improving inclusion within national or European parliaments; they must also ensure that citizens perceive consistency and coherence across levels. When representation feels fragmented, trust cannot easily flow upward or downward.

The second is agenda breadth. A democracy that responds selectively risks hollowing out its own legitimacy. If institutions only amplify issues that fit mainstream ideological comfort zones, they leave unattended spaces – such as migration-related issues in Austria – that populists and anti-system actors can fill with resentment. Sustaining trust, especially in a supranational polity like the EU, requires keeping open channels for those who currently feel unseen.

Austria’s experience thus offers a microcosm of Europe’s broader democratic challenge. Representation has expanded, both in who speaks and in what is discussed, but trust remains uneven and fragile. Reconnecting seats to sentiments – linking measurable inclusion to lived recognition – is essential for ensuring that Europe’s multi-level democracy remains not only representative in form, but trusted in practice.

Ermela Gianna is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Department of Political Science of the University of Salzburg.

Matilde Ceron is a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Research Fellow at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence and a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Department of Political Science of the University of Salzburg.

Zoe Lefkofridi is Professor of Politics & Gender, Diversity & Equality at the Department of Political Science of the University of Salzburg.

This article is based on data collected for the ActEU project and included in the ActEU “Report on the patterns of objective and subjective representation across countries and across parties within countries”.

A spotlight on Austria is going to be part of the forthcoming book “ActEU: Towards a new era of representative democracy – Activating European Citizens’ Trust in Times of Crises and Polarization”.

The final conference of the ActEU project will take place in Brussels on 5 February 2026. Click here for more information and to register.

Economic deprivation reduces political trust [DE/EN] ● Henrik Serup Christensen and Janette Huttunen Multi-level democracy and political trust in Europe: The role of the subnational level [DE/EN] ● Felix-Christopher von Nostitz Out of step? The EU’s difficult election dance [DE/EN] ● Alex Hartland, Daniela Braun, Giuseppe Carteny, Rosa M. Navarrete, and Ann-Kathrin Reinl What’s trust got to do with it? Political trust, polarized opinions and climate protest in Europe [DE/EN] ● Louisa Parks From seats to sentiments: What Austria teaches us about trust and representation in a multi-level Europe [DE/EN] ● Ermela Gianna, Matilde Ceron, and Zoe Lefkofridi

Pictures: Flags: Bundesministerium für europäische und internationale Angelegenheiten [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons; portraits Ermela Gianna, Matide Ceron, Zoe Lefkofridi: private [all rights reserved].