Shadow Representation: Making Claims to Represent Better Than the Official Representative

This article advances knowledge on the diverse ways contemporary political representation is being performed. It identifies a particular kind of claim-making, shadow representation, whereby an individual or group makes claims to represent better than the officially authorised spokesperson or group. Shadow representation is enacted outside or alongside authorised spaces of representation by diverse actors such as civil society groups, lobbyists, political challengers, and former incumbents. The article conceptualises shadow representation in broad terms, and then examines its enactment in the electoral realm. The empirical analysis centres on two Australian cases in which defeated electoral candidates continue to make representative claims post-election. In both instances the shadow representatives construct a neglected constituency, and make claims to rectify representative deficiencies in the elected official. Their claim-making occurs between elections, and draws legitimacy from their strong community and voter support–two features that set them apart from the traditional political challenger focused on ousting an incumbent in an election. The article reflects on the democratic implications of shadow representation in electoral democracy: it potentially boosts the public scrutiny and accountability of elected officials, but it can also be used to destabilise the legitimacy of electoral procedures and their outcomes.