ISSN 0080 – 6757 © 2006 The Author(s) Journal compilation © 2006 Nordic Political Science Association 386 Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 29 – No. 4, 2006 The Determinants of Political Knowledge in Comparative Perspective Kimmo Grönlund* and Henry Milner Political knowledge is a powerful predictor of political participation. Moreover, what citizens know about the political system and its actors is a central aspect of informed voting. This article investigates how and why political knowledge varies between citizens. The analysis is compara- tive and based on data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. At the micro level, the results confirm results from national surveys – specifically that education explains what citizens know about politics. It is found in a contextualized analysis, however, that the effect of education varies with the country’s degree of economic redistribution. In more egalitarian countries, political knowledge is less contingent on education attained than in more inegalitarian countries. Similarly, education seems to have a stronger effect in countries with majoritarian electoral systems compared to countries with proportional systems. The political knowledge of the citizenry is a key aspect of democracy. Dem- ocratic theorists from John Stuart Mill to Robert Dahl have stressed the importance of political information in democratic decision making. Since representative democracy is based on the delegation of power from citizens to representatives, the defining moment is at the time of elections: for democracy to function properly, electors need to have sufficient knowledge of the political system and the political actors in order to cast a meaningful vote. If they are to ensure that political parties and leaders are accountable for their actions, voters need information to evaluate their performance. They need to be able to compare parties’ commitments and manifestos in a prospective manner against their own political preferences and, in retro- spect, to know enough about the parties’ record to give some weight to the credibility of their commitments (Manin et al. 1999, 44 – 6). Even though contemporary democratic political systems are egalitarian in principle (i.e. they are based on universal suffrage where every citizen has a vote), practice is less egalitarian since ‘citizens are differently endowed with resources that can be used for political activity and influence’ (Verba et al. * Kimmo Grönlund, Åbo Akademi University, Social Science Research Institute, PO Box 311, FIN-65101 Vasa, Finland. E-mail: kimmo.gronlund@abo.fi