IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v131y2021i636p1849-1882..html

Vote Trading in Power-Sharing Systems: A Laboratory Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolas Tsakas
  • Dimitrios Xefteris
  • Nicholas Ziros

Abstract

Vote trading in power-sharing systems—i.e., systems in which a voter’s utility with respect to the election’s outcome is proportional to the vote share of her favourite party—is, in theory, welfare improving. However, trading votes for money in majoritarian systems may have detrimental welfare effects, especially when voters’ preference intensities are similar (Casella et al., 2012). We use a laboratory experiment to test the effect of vote trading in each of these popular electoral systems on voter welfare and find strong evidence in support of the above intuitions: vote trading in power-sharing systems boosts aggregate welfare across all considered specifications, but it is not welfare improving in majoritarian systems. Importantly, and contrary to theoretical predictions, a substantial share of subjects consistently loses from vote trading even in power-sharing systems, indicating that its welfare effects are not unambiguous.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolas Tsakas & Dimitrios Xefteris & Nicholas Ziros, 2021. "Vote Trading in Power-Sharing Systems: A Laboratory Investigation," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(636), pages 1849-1882.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:636:p:1849-1882.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueaa105
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Maxim Senkov & Arseniy Samsonov, 2024. "Should Politicians be Informed? Targeted Benefits and Heterogeneous Voters," Papers 2401.04273, arXiv.org.
    2. Dimitrios Xefteris & Nicholas Ziros, 2024. "The “invisible hand” of vote markets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(1), pages 153-165, February.
    3. Matthew I. Jones, 2024. "Equilibria and Group Welfare in Vote Trading Systems," Papers 2406.09536, arXiv.org.
    4. Bol, Damien & Matakos, Konstantinos & Troumpounis, Orestis & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2019. "Electoral rules, strategic entry and polarization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

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

    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:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:636:p:1849-1882.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.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.