IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i19p14310-d1249533.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proxy Voting for Future Generations: A Laboratory Experiment Using the General Public

Author

Listed:
  • Kentaro Miyake

    (Miyake Trust Co., 2-4233-2 Ishikawa, Mito-shi 310-0905, Ibaraki, Japan)

  • Yoichi Hizen

    (School of Economics and Management, Kochi University of Technology, 2-22 Eikokuji-cho, Kochi-shi 780-8515, Kochi, Japan
    Research Institute for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology, 2-22 Eikokuji-cho, Kochi-shi 780-8515, Kochi, Japan)

  • Tatsuyoshi Saijo

    (Institute for International Academic Research, Kyoto University of Advanced Science, 18 Gotandacho, Yamanouchi, Ukyo-ku, Kyoto-shi 615-8577, Kyoto, Japan)

Abstract

To realize policies that benefit the youth and future generations, discussions are being held on how to give the votes of children who are currently ineligible to vote, and even future unborn generations, to their parents or voters of the present generation to vote as their proxies. To examine the effect of proxy voting on future-friendly choices, we conducted a laboratory experiment with the general public, including parents. Participants were assigned the roles of present and future generations, and the present-generation participants voted on allocating payoffs between generations. Proxy votes for future-generation participants were granted to some present-generation participants. We found that proxy voting did not increase the proportion of votes for future-friendly choices compared to the case without proxy votes, which is consistent with previous studies involving university students. We also observed that the older the participants, the more likely they were to vote for future-friendly choices. Once age was controlled for, parents were less likely than non-parents to vote for future-friendly choices. From a consequentialist perspective, these results suggest that we should add a twist to proxy voting, examine non-proxy voting methods, or explore other measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Kentaro Miyake & Yoichi Hizen & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2023. "Proxy Voting for Future Generations: A Laboratory Experiment Using the General Public," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14310-:d:1249533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14310/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14310/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    3. Yoshio Kamijo & Yoichi Hizen & Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Teruyuki Tamura, 2019. "Voting on Behalf of a Future Generation: A Laboratory Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Oliver P. Hauser & David G. Rand & Alexander Peysakhovich & Martin A. Nowak, 2014. "Cooperating with the future," Nature, Nature, vol. 511(7508), pages 220-223, July.
    5. Shun Katsuki & Yoichi Hizen, 2020. "Does Voting Solve the Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-15, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pankaj Koirala & Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Koji Kotani, 2021. "Deliberative Forms of Democracy and Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Hizen, Yoichi & Kamijo, Yoshio & Tamura, Teruyuki, 2023. "Votes for excluded minorities and the voting behavior of the existing majority: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 348-361.
    4. Paetzel, Fabian & Traub, Stefan, 2017. "Skewness-adjusted social preferences: Experimental evidence on the relation between inequality, elite behavior, and economic efficiency," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 130-139.
    5. Robert Böhm & Özgür Gürerk & Thomas Lauer, 2020. "Nudging Climate Change Mitigation: A Laboratory Experiment with Inter-Generational Public Goods," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Rebekka Kesberg & Stefan Pfattheicher, 2019. "Democracy matters: a psychological perspective on the beneficial impact of democratic punishment systems in social dilemmas," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Esther Blanco & Tobias Haller & James M. Walker, 2016. "Provision of public goods: Unconditional and conditional donations from outsiders," Working Papers 2016-16, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck, revised Nov 2016.
    8. KAMEI Kenju, 2022. "Self-regulatory Resources and Institutional Formation: A first experimental test," Discussion papers 22084, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    9. Konstantin Chatziathanasiou & Svenja Hippel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2020. "Do rights to resistance discipline the elites? An experiment on the threat of overthrow," Munich Papers in Political Economy 08, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    10. Aurelie Ouss & Alexander Peysakhovich, 2015. "When Punishment Doesn't Pay: "Cold Glow" and Decisions to Punish," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(3).
    11. Shun Katsuki & Yoichi Hizen, 2020. "Does Voting Solve the Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-15, August.
    12. Keiichiro Kobayashi & Asako Chiba, 2020. "Intergenerational Bubbles of Beliefs for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Michinori Uwasu & Yusuke Kishita & Keishiro Hara & Yutaka Nomaguchi, 2020. "Citizen-Participatory Scenario Design Methodology with Future Design Approach: A Case Study of Visioning of a Low-Carbon Society in Suita City, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Yoshio Komijo & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "Imaginary future generations: A deliberative approach for intergenerational sustainability dilemma," Working Papers SDES-2021-12, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Nov 2021.
    15. Klaudijo Klaser & Lorenzo Sacconi & Marco Faillo, 2021. "John Rawls and compliance to climate change agreements: insights from a laboratory experiment," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 531-551, September.
    16. Wolf, Stephan & Dron, Cameron, 2020. "The effect of an experimental veil of ignorance on intergenerational resource sharing: empirical evidence from a sequential multi-person dictator game," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. Konstantin Chatziathanasiou & Svenja Hippel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2022. "Does the Threat of Overthrow Discipline the Elites? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 289-320.
    18. Kölle, Felix, 2022. "Governance and competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    19. Felix Koelle & Thomas Lauer, 2018. "Cooperation, Discounting, and the Effects of Delayed Costs and Benefits," Discussion Papers 2018-10, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    20. Goeschl, Timo & Kettner, Sara Elisa & Lohse, Johannes & Schwieren, Christiane, 2020. "How much can we learn about voluntary climate action from behavior in public goods games?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14310-:d:1249533. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.