Electoral competition and the party politics of public investments

When do political parties propose long-term investments? Electoral competitiveness should be a key variable explaining parties’ investment priorities: parties can be less responsive to voters’ short-term priorities and overcome time inconsistencies when they are more likely to win the next election. The article distinguishes the characteristics of three types of investments in education, environmental protection and technology and infrastructure, gathered from the Comparative Manifesto Project. It finds a linear positive relationship between parties’ probability of entering office and the proportion of manifestoes allocated to statements about technology and infrastructure. In contrast, statements about education are highest at high levels of electoral competitiveness, as parties propose more education to attract voters, while statements about the environment are affected by parties’ ideology on the left-right axis rather than by electoral competitiveness. Power-sharing institutions help parties to overcome time inconsistency problems, reducing the impact of electoral competition on investments.

Does electoral competitiveness increase the government health expenditure in EAs?

<p>Previous studies on the public health expenditure focus on the presence of multiparty elections in electoral autocracies (EAs). Most of elections in EAs often are unfair because those are for the victory of dictators. Multiparty elections <i>per se</i> do not capture the impact of characteristics during elections such as the electoral competitiveness in EAs. Some EAs pay health expenditure less than others even though electoral competitiveness is high. I analyze the effect of electoral competitiveness on the government health expenditure with the balanced panel data of 20 EAs from 2001 to 2017. There are two rival arguments on how electoral competitiveness affect the expenditure according to previous studies; (a) a high level of electoral competitiveness stands for a difficulty of dictatorial winning in elections. Autocrats, hence, gather various demands including health issues from voters, and can increase the government health expenditure; (b) Autocrats pursue the victory in elections. Pork and personal benefits to voters rather than programmed policies are helpful for the victory. Therefore, there is no incentive for autocrats to provide government health policy to voters when the level of electoral competitiveness is high. Empirical findings demonstrate that electoral competitiveness in EAs lead the decrease of government health expenditure. This paper concludes that electoral competitiveness does not increase the public health expenditure; the higher level of competitiveness in autocracies does not mean that voters can exert their power to autocrats to realize policies.</p>

Political competitiveness and the private–public structure of public expenditure: a model and empirics for the Indian States

Studies of government size usually try to identify the factors that explain what parts of economic activity are brought within the public sector and what parts are left strictly in private hands. Modern governments are now so large that the question of what determines the private/public composition, or privateness, of public expenditure is of comparable importance for understanding the role of government in society. In this paper, we use a model of the composition of public budgets to uncover the importance of electoral competitiveness and other factors in the evolution of the privateness of public expenditure across the Indian states. These states vary widely in their socioeconomic characteristics while sharing a common political heritage based on parliamentary government. New measures of public expenditure on private targetable goods and of electoral competitiveness at the Indian state level accompany the paper along with a primer on Indian public finance accounting practices in an Online Appendix. The empirical analysis shows that the degree of privateness in India’s more developed states falls substantially with greater political competition and with rising incomes, while in the less developed states it responds more weakly to these key factors and in some cases even inversely.

Understanding Michigan's Electoral Competitiveness: Swing Counties 1976-2018

ABSTRACT Considerable media attention was given to the so-called “pivot counties” in the U.S. and in Michigan that flipped from supporting Barack Obama twice to voting for Donald Trump in 2016. We first summarize theories of voting behavior and speculate about why Michigan has been consistently competitive over the years. We explore 40 years' worth of county-level presidential and gubernatorial election results in Michigan to determine how frequently counties have flipped across a large number of elections. We find that a number of Michigan counties frequently flip between elections, but the number of competitive Michigan counties has substantially declined in recent decades. Turnout in larger counties can affect election outcomes, and large counties that swing have been key bellwethers in past elections, and should be a major focus of research on future elections in Michigan.

Sharing Economy and Government

We compared sharing economy development in 90 countries to demonstrate that higher qualities of government are associated with greater sharing economy growth. To explain this finding, we assumed that sharing economy benefits are enjoyed by the public, whereas its costs are chiefly borne by market incumbents. In considering these competing interests, policymakers tend to favor the latter as single-industry interests that can be more easily organized to influence policymaking. We then hypothesized that an electorally competitive, depoliticized, and effective government may tilt the balance against the entrenched market incumbents, leading to the growth of sharing economy industries. Overall, we found some support for this hypothesis. We especially found that electoral competitiveness strongly impacted sharing economy development and that this impact was significantly greater in a country with a depoliticized bureaucracy and effective government.

A General Approach to Measuring Electoral Competitiveness for Parties and Governments

We develop a general approach to measuring electoral competitiveness for parties and governments, which is distinct from existing approaches in two ways. First, it allows us to estimate the actual probabilityof re-electing the incumbent into office, which lies closer to the theoretical concept of interest than most widely used proxies. Second, it incorporates both pre-electoral competitiveness—that is, the uncertainty about the outcome of the upcoming election—and post-electoral competitiveness—that is, the uncertainty concerning who will form the government given a certain election result. The approach can be applied to, and compared across, a multitude of institutional settings and is particularly advantageous in analyses of multiparty democracies. To demonstrate its full potential, we first apply the approach on 1,700 local government elections in Sweden. Three advantages over existing approaches are documented: Our election probability measure shows substantial variation over the election cycle, it can be accurately measured for a single party as well as a government, and it is more capable of predicting re-election into office than any previous measure of electoral competitiveness. A second application on 400 national elections in 34 democracies shows that the approach also works well in a more challenging cross-national setting.