Models of Direct Democracy Around the World: What Can Be Learned from Switzerland and Iceland

While many countries are dealing with a crisis of trust in political institutions and a growing sense of alienation among citizens, two small countries in Europe offer a completely different model. Switzerland and Iceland, different from each other in history, culture, and population size, implement different forms of direct democracy that give citizens real influence on policy shaping. The accumulated experience of these countries teaches that direct democracy is not just a utopian idea, but a system that works in practice and produces measurable results.

Switzerland: The Global Laboratory for Direct Democracy

Switzerland is considered the world's leading model for implementing direct democracy, with a tradition spanning more than 170 years. The Swiss system does not replace representative democracy but complements it, allowing citizens to participate directly in decision-making on central issues.

The Federal Citizens' Initiative

One of the central tools in Swiss democracy is the federal citizens' initiative. Any group of citizens that manages to collect 100,000 signatures within 18 months can bring a proposal for constitutional change to a national vote. Since 1891, hundreds of such initiatives have been raised, and some have led to significant changes in Swiss policy.

The data shows that between 1891 and 2026, more than 230 citizens' initiatives were raised for federal vote. Although the approval rate of initiatives is relatively low (only about 10%), the very submission of the initiative forces the government and parliament to address the issue and sometimes to propose alternative solutions.

Referendum as a Control Mechanism

In addition to citizens' initiatives, the Swiss system includes mandatory and optional referendums. Every constitutional change must pass a referendum, and every law passed in parliament can be put to a referendum if 50,000 citizens sign a petition within 100 days. This mechanism serves as a kind of emergency brake, allowing citizens to stop legislation that does not reflect their will.

In 2024 alone, four rounds of national voting were held in Switzerland that included 13 different issues, ranging from pension reform to new energy policy. The average participation rate in referendums stands at about 45%, significantly higher than the participation rate in parliamentary elections in many countries.

Cantonal Democracy

Beyond the federal level, each of Switzerland's 26 cantons (districts) maintains its own direct democratic system. In some of the smaller cantons, "Landsgemeinde" is still held - an annual assembly where all citizens gather in the town square to vote by raised hand on laws and budgets. This is a living remnant of the oldest form of democracy, which continues to exist even in the digital age.

Iceland: Democratic Innovation in the 21st Century

If Switzerland represents a long tradition of direct democracy, Iceland offers a model of democratic innovation born out of crisis. The global economic crisis that occurred in 2008, which brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy, became a catalyst for groundbreaking democratic experiments.

A Constitution Written by the People

Following the crisis, Iceland initiated an unprecedented process for writing a new constitution. Instead of appointing a committee of experts or politicians, 25 ordinary citizens were selected by lottery from 522 candidates who submitted applications. The citizens' assembly worked for four months, during which all discussions were broadcast live and the public was invited to respond and suggest proposals through social networks.

The Icelandic process demonstrated how digital technology can be used to involve citizens in complex processes. More than 3,600 comments were received from the public, and many of them were incorporated into the final document. Although the constitution was not ultimately adopted due to political opposition, the process itself became a model that other countries are trying to learn from.

Participatory Budget in Reykjavik

Reykjavik, the capital of Iceland, has been operating since 2012 one of the most advanced participatory budgeting systems in the world. Through an online platform called "Better Reykjavik," city residents can propose ideas for improving the city, discuss them, and vote. The ideas that receive the most support are transferred for discussion in the city council, with a commitment to respond to every proposal that passes the support threshold.

By 2026, more than 70% of Reykjavik residents have used the platform at least once, and hundreds of ideas that were raised through it have been implemented, including infrastructure improvement projects, creation of new public spaces, and changes in municipal policy.

What Can Other Countries Learn from Switzerland and Iceland?

The experience of Switzerland and Iceland provides important insights for countries seeking to expand their citizens' participation in decision-making.

Gradualness and Building Trust

The Swiss model demonstrates that direct democracy is not built in one day. The system in Switzerland developed over decades, with continuous learning and adjustments. Countries that want to implement similar mechanisms should start on a small scale (at the local or municipal level) and build public trust before expanding the mechanism.

Civic Education as a Necessary Condition

In Switzerland, civic education is a central part of the curriculum. Citizens learn from a young age how to read legislative proposals, understand the implications of different decisions, and participate in informed public discussion. Without such an educational foundation, there is a risk that direct democracy will be used as a tool for manipulation.

Careful Integration of Technology

Iceland is an example of how digital technology can make citizen participation accessible, but also demonstrates the risks. Questions regarding data security, digital identification, and equal access to technology must be addressed before widespread implementation of online voting.

Balance Between Efficiency and Participation

One of the central challenges in direct democracy revolves around the question of how many decisions should be put to public vote. Switzerland has found a balance where central issues go to the people's decision, while everyday decisions remain in the hands of the elected government. An excess of referendums may lead to a decline in participation.

Limitations and Challenges of Direct Democracy

Despite the relative successes achieved in Switzerland and Iceland in implementing direct democracy, they too face challenges that are important to recognize.

The Influence of Money

Studies conducted in Switzerland show that well-funded campaign advertising affects referendum results. Groups with resources can invest in advertising to try to convince citizens to vote in a certain direction, which raises questions about equality of influence among different citizens.

Complexity of Issues

Some of the issues raised for public vote are very complex, such as international trade agreements, pension reforms, energy policy, etc. There is a legitimate debate about whether the general public is capable of understanding all the implications of every decision.

Protection of Minorities

Direct democracy can lead to a situation of majority tyranny. In Switzerland, some votes concerning minority rights have sparked international criticism. The model requires constitutional protection mechanisms to ensure that basic rights are not violated even if the majority supports it.

Direct Democracy in the Digital Age

In an era where technology enables instant communication with millions of people, the lessons from Switzerland and Iceland's methods gain new meaning. The digital tools available today can enable citizen participation on a scale that was not possible before.

Digital platforms can combine the depth and tradition of the Swiss model with the accessibility and innovation of the Icelandic model. Smart platforms can provide citizens with comprehensive information on issues up for vote, enable structured discussion, and ensure that every voice is heard.

However, technology alone is not enough. The experience of the two countries we mentioned teaches that effective direct democracy requires a political culture of respect, willingness to compromise, and commitment to the process even when the result is not to our liking.

The Next Step in Direct Democracy in Israel

The lessons from Switzerland and Iceland point to a clear direction: the future of direct democracy is digital. Currently, there are only platforms for point votes or for submitting proposals to local authorities. JustSocial offers a broader vision: continuous direct democracy.

Our idea is to create a state social network where citizens not only vote once every few years or respond to specific proposals, but regularly express their opinions, needs, and priorities. This information becomes data that decision-makers can rely on, not as a substitute for professional judgment, but as an additional layer of citizen feedback in real time.

Switzerland has proven that citizens are capable of deciding on complex issues when given the right tools and information. Iceland has shown how technology can enable accessible participation for all citizens.

The JustSocial movement aspires for citizens to influence decision-making in the country, not just on election day, but every day.

Interested in helping and taking action? Contact us or express support for our activity.

Summary

Switzerland and Iceland prove that direct democracy is not a distant dream but a reality that can work. The Swiss model shows how an established system can function for generations, while the Icelandic experiment demonstrates how democratic innovation can be born out of crisis. Both countries offer important lessons about returning a sense of control (even if partial) to citizens.

Every country can adopt elements from these models and adapt them to the local political culture. It is important to recognize that citizens want and can participate in shaping their future. When given the appropriate tools, they do so responsibly and wisely.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can direct democracy work in large countries?

The Swiss model operates in a country of 8.7 million residents, and Iceland's digital platforms prove that the approach to citizen participation can be expanded to larger populations as well. Success of direct democracy depends mainly on system design and institutional support.

How many votes are held in Switzerland each year?

At the federal level, four voting rounds are held per year, each including several issues. In addition, each canton (district) and local authority hold their own votes, so a Swiss citizen may vote on an average of 10-15 issues per year.

What happened to the constitution written by Icelandic citizens?

The constitution was approved in a referendum in 2012 with 67% support from voters, but was not ratified by parliament due to political opposition. The issue remains on the public agenda, and the process itself has become a model for academic research and a source of inspiration for other countries.

Is it safe to vote online?

Switzerland tried to launch online voting in elections but froze the pilot in 2019 due to security concerns. Iceland uses online platforms for proposals and discussions, but binding votes are still conducted traditionally. The technology is developing, but public trust has not yet been finally gained.

What prevents a situation of majority tyranny in direct democracy?

In Switzerland, there are constitutional protection mechanisms, judicial review, and commitment to basic rights that cannot be changed. In addition, Swiss political culture emphasizes compromise and consensus, which moderates extreme decisions.