IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/42549.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

More can be Less: Hyper Plurality of Candidates, the Rationality of Electoral Choice and Need for Electoral Reform in India

Author

Listed:
  • Bhattacharya, Kaushik
  • Mitra, Subrata

Abstract

A large number of candidates have become a regular feature of Indian elections. Given the regulatory concerns the problem has evoked, the paper reviews the process of candidate entry in select developed countries. The review reveals the presence of diverse approaches, ruling out the necessity for extreme options like debarring fringe candidates – a course suggested by several Indian expert groups. Among various policy options, India had largely relied on electoral deposit. Our results suggest that an increase in deposit had a significant negative impact on candidate entry in India. However, for an effective deterrence, India needs to continue to keep deposits at a very high level compared to the current international benchmark, discriminating political participation of genuinely underprivileged groups. In contrast, the current level of signature requirement, a relatively unused policy tool in India, was found to be too low and could be easily increased further in order to be effective. We argue that given the high variation and lack of stability in candidate structure across regions and over time, a local approach on signature requirement -- as in the US -- could be an effective deterrent in India. Accordingly, we suggest that the Election Commission of India (ECI) should not only have the power to determine the deposit before each election, it should also have the power to change the minimum signature requirement across constituencies (subject to some standard checks and balances).

Suggested Citation

  • Bhattacharya, Kaushik & Mitra, Subrata, 2012. "More can be Less: Hyper Plurality of Candidates, the Rationality of Electoral Choice and Need for Electoral Reform in India," MPRA Paper 42549, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42549/1/MPRA_paper_42549.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carles Boix, 1999. "Setting the rules of the game: The choice of electoral systems in advanced democracies," Economics Working Papers 367, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    2. Chhibber, Pradeep & Kollman, Ken, 1998. "Party Aggregation and the Number of Parties in India and the United States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(2), pages 329-342, June.
    3. Dutta, Bhaskar & Jackson, Matthew O & Le Breton, Michel, 2001. "Strategic Candidacy and Voting Procedures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1013-1037, July.
    4. N. Jayaram & Surendra K. Gupta & A.P. Barnabas & Sachchidananda & P.S. Pachauri & M.L. Khattar & B.N. Sampath & H. R. Khanna, 1985. "India," India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, , vol. 41(1), pages 177-179, January.
    5. Boix, Carles, 1999. "Setting the Rules of the Game: The Choice of Electoral Systems in Advanced Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 609-624, September.
    6. Stratmann, Thomas, 2005. "Ballot access restrictions and candidate entry in elections," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 59-71, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kaushik, Bhattacharya & Subrata K, Mitra, 2013. "Hyper-Plurality of Candidates, Effectiveness of Democratic Representation and Regulation of Candidate Entry in India," MPRA Paper 46024, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Kaushik, Bhattacharya & Subrata K, Mitra, 2013. "Hyper-Plurality of Candidates, Effectiveness of Democratic Representation and Regulation of Candidate Entry in India," MPRA Paper 46024, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Timothy Besley & Torsten Persson, 2011. "Pillars of Prosperity: The Political Economics of Development Clusters," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9624.
    3. Carlos Scartascini & Mariano Tommasi & Ernesto Stein, 2010. "Veto Players and Policy Trade-Offs- An Intertemporal Approach to Study the Effects of Political Institutions on Policy," Research Department Publications 4660, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    4. André Blais & Jean-François Laslier & François Poinas & Karine Straeten, 2015. "Citizens’ preferences about voting rules: self-interest, ideology, and sincerity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 423-442, September.
    5. Paola Profeta & Eleanor Woodhouse, 2018. "Do Electoral Rules Matter for Female Representation?," Working Papers 121, "Carlo F. Dondena" Centre for Research on Social Dynamics (DONDENA), Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi.
    6. Isa Camyar & Bahar Ulupinar, 2019. "Electoral systems and the economy: a firm-level analysis," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 1-30, March.
    7. Carlos Scartascini & Mariano Tommasi, 2012. "The Making of Policy: Institutionalized or Not?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 787-801, October.
    8. Konstantinos Matakos & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2015. "Strategic electoral rule choice under uncertainty," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 329-350, March.
    9. Gerard Alexander, 2001. "Institutions, Path Dependence, and Democratic Consolidation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 13(3), pages 249-269, July.
    10. Jeremiah O. Arowosegbe, 2020. "Academics and Election Administration in Nigeria," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1009-1032, October.
    11. Tridimas, George, 2011. "Cleisthenes’ Choice: The Emergence of Direct Democracy in Ancient Athens," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 39-59.
    12. Izaskun Zuazu, 2022. "Electoral systems and income inequality: a tale of political equality," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 793-819, August.
    13. Selim Ergun, 2010. "From plurality rule to proportional representation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 373-408, November.
    14. Massimiliano Vatiero, 2017. "On The (Political) Origin Of ‘Corporate Governance’ Species," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 393-409, April.
    15. Satya R. Chakravarty & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami & Rupayan Pal, 2020. "On the probability ratio index as a measure of electoral competition," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-6, December.
    16. Aidt, T.S. & Jensen, P.S., 2012. "From Open to Secret Ballot: Vote Buying and Modernization," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1221, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    17. Alexander S Kirshner, 2018. "Nonideal democratic authority," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 17(3), pages 257-276, August.
    18. Bol, Damien & Blais, André & Coulombe, Maxime & Laslier, Jean-François & Pilet, Jean-Benoit, 2023. "Choosing an electoral rule: Values and self-interest in the lab," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    19. Alan de Bromhead & Barry Eichengreen & Kevin H. O'Rourke, 2012. "Right-Wing Political Extremism in the Great Depression," NBER Working Papers 17871, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Kathryn Hochstetler, 2012. "Civil society and the regulatory state of the South: A commentary," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), pages 362-370, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Candidate Entry; Electoral Regulation; Electoral Deposits; Signature Requirements; Indian Elections; Independent Candidates;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:42549. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.