Demand of direct democracy

The growing demand for referendum challenges the traditional model of representative democracy. In this paper we study under which conditions voters prefer a system of representative democracy to direct democracy. In direct democracies voters choose a policy among two alternatives, under uncertainty about which policy better fits the realized state of the world; in representative democracies voters select a candidate who, once elected, chooses a policy having observed which is the realized state of the world. Voters and politicians' payoffs depend on a common component which is positive only if the policy fits the state of the world, and on a private ideological bias towards one of the policies. In direct democracies voters are uncertain about the future state of the world, while in representative democracies they are uncertain about the degree of ideological bias of the candidates, even if they know towards which policy each candidate is biased. We show that representative democracy is preferred if (i) the majority of voters are pragmatic (the common component prevails), and (ii) society is ideologically polarized, meaning that the majority of voters are ideological (the private component prevails), but the median voter is pragmatic. Direct democracy is the preferred instrument for collective choices in societies in which the majority of voters and the median voter are ideological, implying that the majority of voters have the same ideological bias, as, for instance, it occurs when the populist rhetoric of people against the elite succeeds.     

Demand for redistribution,support for the welfare state,and party identification in Austria

This paper describes subjective wage inequality and the demand for redistribution in Austria using individuals’ estimates of occupational wages from the International Social Survey Program. Although these estimates differ widely across individuals, the data clearly show that most individuals would like to decrease wage inequality, relative to the level of inequality which they perceive to exist. The empirical analysis also shows that the demand for redistribution is strongly associated not only with variables describing self-interested motives for redistribution, but also with perceptions of and social norms with respect to inequality. Further, the demand for redistribution is a strong predictor for whether an individual is supportive of redistribution by the state. On the other hand, however, I find almost no evidence for an empirical association between the demand for redistribution and individuals’ party identification.     

Positional concern and low demand for redistribution of the poor

The two observations that (1) some low-income citizens demand low redistribution and (2) as income inequality becomes more severe a larger proportion of citizens make less demand for redistribution (Kelly and Enns (2010)) are counter-intuitive because people oppose redistribution that could be beneficial to them. Understanding the main driving factor that leads to the economic conservatism of the poor is crucial: it guides how policymakers should design redistribution. I show that positional concern can be one of these main factors. When citizens care about their relative position on consumption and their labor productivity is slightly perturbed when a new tax policy is implemented, only middle-income citizens may vote for redistribution. Compared with the prospect of upward mobility hypothesis, I provide a testable prediction for the relationship between economic inequality and the economic conservatism of the poor. If positional concern is the main driving factor, policymakers should focus on increasing the low-income citizens’ standard of living to the middle class; and if the prospect of upward mobility is the main factor then they should focus on minimizing income gaps.     

Judicial review and the power of the executive and legislative branches

The legal system can affect what policies a government can implement. In particular, when there is separation of powers, the strength of the judiciary to review and overturn actions of the executive and legislative branches can affect such things as how much redistribution these policy-making branches can do. Surprisingly, having judicial review helps the policy-making branches—the stronger is the judiciary, the more redistribution they are able to do. This occurs because the policy-making branches must make promises on and off the equilibrium path to individuals in order to make redistribution possible. However, in many circumstances, the government wants to renege on these promises, either to do more redistribution than promised or to not carry out severe threats against any individuals who lied. Judicial review can prevent reneging on these promises, thus making them credible.We develop this in the context of an optimal income tax model with a finite number of individuals where the government knows the exact distribution of types but not which individual is of which type. In this finite model, the government can detect misrevelation by even a single individual so that an individual׳s taxes can depend not just on one׳s own actions but also on others’ actions. Piketty (JET, 1993) showed that the government could implement any full-information Pareto optimal allocation if the government could commit to its announcements, even to infeasible allocations in circumstances after some individuals misreveal. We derive the sequential equilibrium allocations when individuals reveal their types by simple announcements when feasibility on and off the equilibrium path is imposed. Increasing the degree of judicial review expands the set of achievable allocations on the full-information utility possibility frontier. We also relate the different possible legal rules to different solution concepts in game theory.     

Demand-supply coevolution with multiple increasing returns: Policy analysis for unlocking and system transitions

Currently, there is much concern about how to make a transition away from environmentally unsustainable activities to sustainable ones, notably in agriculture, energy and transport sectors. The success of such a transition depends on whether one is capable of escaping the lock-in of the dominant, unsustainable technology, which is usually due to multiple lock-in factors. Here, we present a formal model to study the likelihood of market lock-in in the presence of multiple increasing returns. The proposed framework describes coevolving populations of boundedly rational consumers and innovating firms. On the demand side, we focus attention on the interdependence of consumer preferences. We examine the impact of alternative demand side specifications on the direction of innovative activities of firms. On the supply side, a technological trajectory arises from the interplay of incremental innovation, search for a new product design and marketing activities. Our framework provides a general and complete account of increasing returns on supply and demand sides, as well as their synergetic interactions. The model is used to study a number of policy instruments aimed at escaping lock-in.     

Endogenous market regulation in a signaling model of lobby formation

This paper aims at explaining industry protection in a context in which the government cannot observe the state of market demand. We develop an asymmetric information model and use the tools of contract theory in order to understand (1) how the level of industry protection is endogenously determined, and (2) why some industries decide to engage in large lobbying costs to become politically active. Our model offers plausible explanations to phenomena such as the “loser’s paradox”, where weak industries receive the most protection although strong industries are the ones that spend more resources on lobbying activities. The model also allows for an analysis of the influence that lobbying costs have on the decision to organize actively as a lobby.     

Inequality in democracies: Testing the classic democratic theory of redistribution

The classic democratic theory of redistribution claims that an increase in the mean-to-median (MM) income ratio causes a majority coalition in the electorate to collectively demand more redistribution. The functional dependence of redistribution on the MM income ratio is tested in parametric and nonparametric regression frameworks using an OECD panel dataset. While the parametric regression model is found to be misspecified rendering subsequent inference invalid, the robust nonparametric regression model fails to uncover evidence that the MM income ratio is relevant for predicting redistribution.     

Is money where the fun ends? Material interests and individuals’ preference for direct democracy

Are people’s attitudes towards referendums as a decision-making procedure predominantly driven by their material self-interest, or do individuals also value direct democracy as such, regardless of the material payoffs associated with anticipated policy outcomes? To answer this question, we use a survey data set that offers information on respondents’ support for referendums as a procedure to decide on tax policy, their income levels, socio-economic characteristics, and, most importantly, their expectation about the majority’s support for higher taxes. We find that the support of low-income individuals for referendums increases substantially if they expect a clear population majority in favor of more redistribution. Conversely, individuals with a high income who expect a majority in favor of higher taxes do not reject referendums more strongly than individuals with an average income who share these expectations.     

Mass media and public policy

If more informed voters receive favorable policies, then mass media should influence policy because it provides most of the information people use in voting. This paper uses a simple model to analyze the effect of mass media provision of news on a number of policy issues: redistribution, the size of the government sector, rents and corruption, the effectiveness of lobby groups and political business cycles. It is easy to deal with such a wide range of issues because existing models of political competition often include informed and uniformed voters. Modelling mass media simply endogenizes who is informed and who is not. The paper also discusses empirical evidence and point to areas for future research.     

Manipulation through political endorsements

We study elections with three candidates under plurality voting. A candidate is a Condorcet loser if the majority of the voters place that candidate at the bottom of their preference rankings. We first show that a Condorcet loser might win the election in a three-way race. Next we introduce to the model an endorser who has private information about the true probability distribution of the preferences of the voters. Observable endorsements facilitate coordination among voters who may otherwise split their votes and lead to the victory of the Condorcet loser. When the endorser has an ideological bias towards one of the candidates, the coordination impact of endorsements remains unaltered, moreover the endorser successfully manipulates the outcome of the election in favor of his bias, even if his ideological bias is known by the voters. The results are true for any endorsement cost and any magnitude of bias as long as the electorate is large enough.     

Modelling Heterogeneous Preferences for Income Redistribution–An Application of Continuous and Discrete Distributions

This paper investigates observable and unobservable heterogeneity in individuals’ preferences for redistribution—differentiating the desired overall volume of redistribution and who should receive benefits, subsidies, or transfers. We use data from a discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted in the field and based on a representative sample of the German voting‐age population. Applying random parameters and latent class models, our results show that latent and potentially discontinuously distributed factors must be accounted for, as they heavily impact the interpretation of the findings. We find considerable heterogeneity in redistribution preferences, clearly identifying three distinct subgroups. While all groups are in favor of redistribution, they differ regarding the preferred allocation of the redistributive budget.     

Impact of electoral competition,swing voters and interest groups on equilibrium policy platforms: Exploring the strategic forces at work

This paper constructs a stylized model of election between two opportunistic candidates who can influence equilibrium policy platforms in exchange for monetary contributions provided by two distinct lobby groups. Two key features are embedded which give rise to a dual uncertainty in the model: the existence of partisan spread across voter groups as well as the embezzlement of campaign funds received by the electoral candidates from the interest groups. We derive and compare the equilibrium platforms of the two office-seeking candidates in three scenarios: none of the above uncertainties exist (benchmark case), only uncertainty about voters’ preferences exist (swing-voter case), and both the uncertainties exist (swing voters and lobby groups case). We find that an opportunistic candidate’s swing-voter tax platform is always lower than the benchmark tax platform. Additionally, the equilibrium tax choice of electoral contenders in the swing voters and opposing lobby groups case is found to be greater than the tax level chosen under the swing-voter case if the lobby group advocating a greater level of tax is sufficiently well-organized such that it outweighs the relative swing-voter effect in that group. Furthermore, we find that when an electoral candidate transitions from being highly corrupt to becoming relatively more honest, the equilibrium level of public good provision adjusts in conformity with the well-organized group’s economic preferences. Finally, if the strength of relative lobbying effect is weaker, a lower partisan bias within that group induces an electoral candidate to choose a tax platform closer to that group’s policy bliss point.     

Persistent media bias

The news media plays an essential role in society, but surveys indicate that the public views the media as biased. This paper presents a theory of media bias that originates with private information obtained by journalists through their investigations and persists despite profit-maximizing news organizations and rivalry from other news organizations. Bias has two effects on the demand for news. First, rational individuals are more skeptical of potentially biased news and thus rely less on it in their decision-making. This skepticism reduces demand and leads the news organization to set a lower price for its publication the greater is the bias it tolerates. Lower quality news thus commands a lower price. Second, bias makes certain stories more likely than others. Given their private information, journalists may bias their stories if their career prospects can be advanced by being published on the front page. News organizations can control bias by restricting the discretion allowed to journalists, but granting discretion and tolerating bias can increase profits if it allows journalists to be hired at a lower wage. Bias is not driven from the market by a rival news organization nor by a news organization with an opposing bias, and the profits of a high-bias news organization can be higher than the profits of a low bias one. Moreover, bias can be greater with competition than with a monopoly news organization. If individuals collectively choose regulation in place of their individual decision-making, bias increases the expected stringency of regulation.     

Mobility and Redistributive Politics

There is widespread concern that greater mobility of individuals can undermine any attempt to redistribute income at the local level. In this paper we derive the equilibrium level of redistribution when both the rich and the poor are imperfectly mobile and when each jurisdiction chooses its redistributive policy by majority voting. This leads to a fundamental interaction whereby the policy choices of jurisdictions determine whom they attract and where whom they attract determines their policy choices. Our main findings are twofold. First, we show that greater mobility of the poor can increase the equilibrium amount of redistribution. Second, we find that some jurisdictions can be in equilibrium on the "wrong" side of their Laffer curve. The reason is that the poor are in a majority in these jurisdictions and they are opposed to a potentially Pareto-improving tax reduction because it would attract the rich and shift the majority. The analysis also reveals how the interplay between policy choices and membership leads to multiple equilibria.     

Optimal Income Taxation and Public Good Provision with Endogenous Interest Groups

This paper studies public goods provision when agents differ in earning abilities as well as preferences. Heterogeneity in skills makes redistribution desirable and generates an equity-efficiency trade-off. If tax revenues are devoted to a public good, this trade-off is affected in such a way that income transfers are less desirable. High-skilled individuals thus have an incentive to exaggerate their preferences for public goods. Analogously, low-skilled individuals lobby against public good provision. A requirement of collective incentive compatibility eliminates these biases. It implies that income transfers are increased whenever a public good is provided and are decreased otherwise.     

Voting for Redistribution under Desert‐Sensitive Altruism*

We endow individuals who differ in skills and tastes for working, with altruistic preferences for redistribution in a voting model where a unidimensional redistributive parameter is chosen by majority voting in a direct democracy. When altruistic preferences are desert‐sensitive (i.e., when there is a reluctance to redistribute from the hard‐working to the lazy), we show that lower levels of redistribution emerge in political equilibrium. We provide empirical evidence that preferences for redistribution are not purely selfish, and that desert‐sensitive motivations play a significant role. We estimate that preferences for redistribution are significantly more desert‐sensitive in the US than in Europe.     

Collective vs. individual lobbying

This paper presents a menu-auction model in which firms lobby the government to make an environmental regulation less burdensome. In this lobbying game, industrial interests are opposed by an environmental interest group. We compare political outcomes under two institutional arrangements. In the first, firms must join an organization that represents the interests of the industry. In the second, firms would lobby the government individually. The two arrangements result in strikingly different equilibrium outcomes. Only a small fraction of firms join the lobby group under collective lobbying, but all firms participate in lobbying activities when there is no such group. Thus, an attempt by firms to solve the apparent collective action problem through coordination would effectively backfire. The reason is that coordination among firms would increase the leverage available to the government, to demand high political contributions. We also evaluate the desirability of the two lobbying regimes from the private perspective of individual firms, and from the perspective of society as a whole. This permits us to evaluate possible restrictions on lobbying activities.     

Sensitivity of ‘optimal’ commodity tax rates to alternative demand functional forms: An econometric case study of India

This study investigates, on a nine commodity disaggregation of Indian budget data (NSS, 28th round), the sensitivity of ‘optimal’ commodity tax rates to alternative demand systems. LES and RNLPS. ‘Optimality’ is used here in the very special sense of being conditional on observed expenditure and fixed consumer prices. The alternative sets of tax rates agree at low levels of ‘inequality aversion’ but disagree widely at ‘Rawlsian’ levels. LES is heavily rejected in favour of its one-parameter generalisation, RNLPS. The results suggest that LES price elasticities should not be used in ‘optimal’ tax calculations. The ‘optimal’ tax rates imply only a modest redistribution.     

Endogenous Lobby Formation and Endogenous Environmental Protection with Unilateral Tariff Reduction

This paper studies how one country’s decision to liberalize trade affects the political economic structure that determines environmental policy in another country. By constructing a political economy model in which the formation of lobby groups and environmental policy are endogenously determined, we show that unilateral tariff reductions by a large country importing a polluting good will generate a lobby group with a relatively lower cost of organization in a small country exporting that good. A formulated lobby demands an inefficient environmental policy, and hence, the small country’s environmental regulations become less efficient. Then, we show that when a lobby already exists, unilateral tariff reductions result in the formation of a rival lobby and consequently make the small country’s environmental policy more efficient.     

Protection for Sale: The case of oligopolistic competition and interdependent sectors

In Grossman‐Helpman's (1994) canonical “Protection for Sale” (PFS) model, political competition among industry lobbies is driven purely by their interests as consumers. This paper introduces demand linkages and oligopolistic competition into the PFS framework to address the rivalry among lobbies stemming from product substitutability. It shows that increased substitutability weakens the interest groups' incentives to lobby and reduces tariff distortions. This may explain why empirical tests of PFS find surprisingly little impact of lobbies on the government's trade policy decision. The paper also analyzes endogenous lobby formation, suggesting that demand linkages may adversely affect the industry decision to organize.