Non-consequentialist voting

Standard theory assumes that voters’ preferences over actions (voting) are induced by their preferences over electoral outcomes (policies, candidates). But voters may also have non-consequentialist (NC) motivations: they may care about how they vote even if it does not affect the outcome. When the likelihood of being pivotal is small, NC motivations can dominate voting behavior. To examine the prevalence of NC motivations, we design an experiment that exogenously varies the probability of being pivotal yet holds constant other features of the decision environment. We find a significant effect, consistent with at least 12.5 percent of subjects being motivated by NC concerns.     

The Cournot-Bertrand model and the degree of product differentiation

We consider a duopoly model with a Cournot-type firm and a Bertrand-type firm. Both survive and the equilibrium is stable when there is sufficient product differentiation. With no differentiation, only the Cournot-type firm survives, and the outcome is perfectly competitive.     

Dynamic properties of a Cournot–Bertrand duopoly game with differentiated products

In this paper we consider a Cournot–Bertrand duopoly model with linear demand and cost functions and with product differentiation. We propose a dynamic framework for the study of the stability properties of this kind of mixed oligopoly game, a rather neglected topic in the existing literature despite its relevance. In particular, in this paper we highlight the role of best response dynamics and of an adaptive adjustment mechanism for the stability of the equilibrium.     

Ambiguity and perceived coordination in a global game

In a global game, larger ambiguity is shown to decrease the amount of coordination each player perceives. Consequently, small uncertainty tends to select the Pareto dominated equilibrium of the game without uncertainty. Implications for models of financial crises are drawn.     

PRIZES VERSUS WAGES WITH ENVY AND PRIDE*

We show that if agents are risk‐neutral, prizes outperform wages if and only if there is sufficient pride and envy relative to the noisiness of performance. If agents are risk‐averse, prizes are a necessary supplement to wages (as bonuses).     

From private to public common agency

This note establishes that two propositions in the theory of private common agency by Laussel and Le Breton (J. Econ. Theory 100 (2001) 93) extend to a larger class of games, in which each principal's gross monetary payoff does not depend exclusively on the quantities she receives. A new result is offered to demonstrate that Proposition 4.3 is robust to the introduction of negative externalities. An existing result is reinterpreted to show that Proposition 4.2 is robust to the introduction of positive externalities.     

Knightian games and robustness to ambiguity

This paper introduces a notion of robustness to ambiguous beliefs for Bayesian Nash equilibria. An equilibrium is robust if the corresponding strategies remain approximately optimal for a class of games with ambiguous beliefs that results from an appropriately defined perturbation of the belief structure of the original non-ambiguous belief game. The robustness definition is based on a novel definition of equilibrium for games with ambiguous beliefs that requires equilibrium strategies to be approximate best responses for all measures that define a player's belief. Conditions are derived under which robustness is characterized by a newly defined strategic continuity property, which can be verified without reference to perturbations and corresponding ambiguous belief games.     

Condorcet Jury Theorem: An example in which informative voting is rational but leads to inefficient information aggregation

Recent research on the Condorcet Jury Theorem has proven that informative voting (that is, voting according to one’s signal) is not necessarily rational. With two alternatives, rational voting typically leads to the election of the correct alternative, in spite of the fact that not all voters vote informatively. We prove that with three alternatives, there are cases in which informative voting is rational and yet leads to the election of a wrong alternative.     

An efficient solution to the informed principal problem

In this paper I study mechanism design by an informed principal. I show that generically this problem has an ex-post efficient solution. In the equilibrium mechanism, the informed principal appropriates all expected social surplus, with each type of her getting all expected social surplus conditional on that type. This outcome is supported as a perfect sequential equilibrium of the informed principal game when the joint probability distribution from which the agents’ types are drawn satisfies two conditions: the well-known condition of Cremer and McLean and Identifiability condition introduced by Kosenok and Severinov [Individually rational, budget-balanced mechanisms and allocation of surplus, J. Econ. Theory (2002), forthcoming]. Conversely, these conditions are necessary for an ex-post efficient outcome to be attainable in an equilibrium of the informed principal game. Under these conditions only our equilibrium outcome constitutes a neutral optimum, i.e. cannot be eliminated by any reasonable concept of blocking [R. Myerson, Mechanism design by an informed principal, Econometrica 51 (1983) 1767-1797]. Identifiability and Cremer-McLean conditions are generic when there are at least three agents, and none of them has more types than the number of type profiles of the other agents.     

A NOTE ON NEGATIVE ELECTORAL ADVERTISING: DENIGRATING CHARACTER VS. PORTRAYING EXTREMISM

In this expository note, we extend the model of Harrington and Hess (1996) by incorporating valence advertising. There is a two‐candidate electoral contest. Candidates inherit a certain position indicating their ideological platform in an unidimensional policy space. They also inherit a certain valence index which is a comprehensive term for personal traits that are desirable to all voters such as integrity. The candidates can subsequently influence these using negative advertising with regard to both ideological and valence factors. We find that when the available resources are sufficiently small and certain reasonable assumptions are fulfilled, the candidate with the higher initial valence index will run a relatively personal campaign while the candidate with the lower initial valence index will run an ideological campaign.     

The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain

In this paper we test the hypothesis that municipalities aligned with upper-tier grantor governments (i.e., controlled by the same party) will receive more grants than those that are unaligned. We use a rich Spanish database, which provides information on grants received by nearly 900 municipalities during the period 1993-2003 from three different upper-tier governments (i.e., Central, Regional and Upper-local). Since three elections were held at each tier during this period, we have enough within-municipality variation in partisan alignment to provide differences-in-differences estimates of the effects of alignment on the amount of grants coming from each source. Moreover, the fact that a municipality may simultaneously receive grants from aligned and unaligned grantors allows us to use a triple-differences estimator, which consists of estimating the effects of changing alignment status on the change in grants coming from the aligned grantors relative to the change in grants coming from the unaligned ones. The results suggest that partisan alignment has a sizeable positive effect on the amount of grants received by municipalities. For example, with majority governments at the two layers, aligned municipalities receive over 40% more grants than unaligned ones.     

Partially Binding Platforms: Campaign Promises vis‐à‐vis Cost of Betrayal

This study examines and models the effects of partially binding campaign platforms in a political competition. Here, a candidate who implements a policy that differs from the platform must pay a cost of betrayal, which increases with the size of the discrepancy. I also analyse endogenous decisions by citizens to run for an election. In particular, the model is able to show two implications that previous frameworks have had difficulty with. First, candidates with different characteristics have different probabilities of winning an election. Second, even knowing that he/she will lose an election, a candidate will still run, hoping to make an opponent's policy approach his/her own policy.     

The swing voter's curse with adversarial preferences

We analyze voting behavior in a large electorate in which voters have adversarial state-contingent preferences with incomplete information about the state of the world. We show that one type of voter can suffer from the swing voter's curse à la Feddersen and Pesendorfer [The swing voter's curse, Amer. Econ. Rev. 86 (1996) 408-424], and go on to characterize the symmetric Nash equilibria of this model under different parameter values. We prove that unlike settings with nonadversarial preferences, there are equilibria in which in one state of the world, a minority-preferred candidate almost surely wins the election and thus the election may fail to correctly aggregate information. Indeed, we show that the fraction of the electorate dissatisfied with the result can be as large as .     

The fragility of information aggregation in large elections

In a common-values election where voters receive a signal about which candidate is superior, suppose there is a small amount of uncertainty about the conditional likelihood of the signal?s outcome, given the correct candidate. Once this uncertainty is resolved, the signal is i.i.d. across agents. Information can then fail to aggregate. The candidate less likely to be correct given agents? signals can be elected with probability near 1 in a large electorate even if the distribution of signal likelihoods is arbitrarily near to a classical model where agents are certain that a particular likelihood obtains given that a specific candidate is correct.     

Electoral goals and center-state transfers: A theoretical model and empirical evidence from India

We construct a model of redistributive politics where the central government is opportunistic and uses its discretion to make transfers to state governments on the basis of political considerations. These considerations are the alignment between the incumbent parties at the central and state levels and whether a state is a swing state or not. A testable prediction from the model is that a state that is both swing and aligned with the central government is especially likely to receive higher transfers. We test this prediction using Indian data for 14 states from 1974–75 to 1996–97. We find that a state which is both aligned and swing in the last state election is estimated to receive 16% higher transfers than a state which is unaligned and non-swing.