IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v20y1976i2p255-278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rational Theories of Participation

Author

Listed:
  • Louise G. White

    (School of Government and Public Administration American University)

Abstract

In assessing the usefulness of economic models for political analysis, it is necessary to begin by defining the elements in the models. The present study looks at various ways to define “utility†or the goals of political activity, and how to operationalize the difference between private and public goals. Only when these are made precise can economic models be useful in predicting when and why people will act on their interests in politics. Some research is presented to explore the merits of different definitions of utility. The conclusion drawn is that economic models are most useful when they work with limited and clearly specified definitions of goals for political activity. In this way they can perform a predictive and diagnostic function. At the same time, it is likely that substantive changes in our collective life will have to emerge from other models of human behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Louise G. White, 1976. "Rational Theories of Participation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 20(2), pages 255-278, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:20:y:1976:i:2:p:255-278
    DOI: 10.1177/002200277602000204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002200277602000204
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/002200277602000204?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Musgrave, Richard A, 1969. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Theory of Public Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 797-806, September.
    2. Dahl, Robert A., 1967. "The City in the Future of Democracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 953-970, December.
    3. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135-135.
    4. Riker, William H. & Ordeshook, Peter C., 1968. "A Theory of the Calculus of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 25-42, March.
    5. Jeffrey Richelson, 1973. "A note on collective goods and the theory of political entrepreneurship," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 73-75, September.
    6. Riker, William H. & Ordeshook, Peter C., 1968. "A Theory of the Calculus of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 25-42, March.
    7. Wilson, James Q. & Banfield, Edward C., 1964. "Public-Regardingness as a Value Premise in Voting Behavior," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(4), pages 876-887, December.
    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. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    2. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    3. Lirong Xia, 2020. "How Likely Are Large Elections Tied?," Papers 2011.03791, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    4. Ming Li & Dipjyoti Majumdar, 2010. "A Psychologically Based Model of Voter Turnout," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(5), pages 979-1002, October.
    5. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    6. Alastair Smith & Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Tom LaGatta, 2017. "Group incentives and rational voting1," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(2), pages 299-326, April.
    7. Battaglini, Marco, 2005. "Sequential voting with abstention," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 445-463, May.
    8. Assar Lindbeck & Jörgen Weibull, 1987. "Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 273-297, January.
    9. Francesca Acacia & Maria Cubel Sanchez, 2014. "Strategic voting and happiness," Chapters,in: A Handbook of Alternative Theories of Public Economics, chapter 7, pages 160-176 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Orla Doyle & Patrick Paul Walsh, 2005. "Did political constraints bind during transition? Evidence from Czech elections 1990 - 2002," Trinity Economics Papers 2000515, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    11. Alessandro Morselli, 2021. "Individual decisions and collective choices in the history of economic thought," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 77-96,97-11.
    12. Saito, Hiroharu, 2022. "Loss aversion for the value of voting rights: WTA/WTP ratios for a ballot," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    13. Alacevich, Caterina & Zejcirovic, Dijana, 2020. "Does violence against civilians depress voter turnout? Evidence from Bosnia and Herzegovina," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 841-865.
    14. Hessami, Zohal & Resnjanskij, Sven, 2019. "Complex ballot propositions, individual voting behavior, and status quo bias," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 82-101.
    15. Stefano Bartolini, 2000. "Collusion, Competition and Democracy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(1), pages 33-65, January.
    16. Orla Doyle & Patrick Paul Walsh, 2007. "Did political constraints bind during transition?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 15, pages 575-601, July.
    17. Eric M. Uslaner, 1975. "Book Review: The Economic Theory of Representative Government," Public Finance Review, , vol. 3(3), pages 291-296, July.
    18. João Amaro de Matos & Pedro Barros, 2004. "Social Norms and the Paradox of Elections’ Turnout," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(1), pages 239-255, October.
    19. Francesca Acacia & Maria Cubel Sanchez, 2014. "Strategic voting and happiness," Chapters, in: Francesco Forte & Ram Mudambi & Pietro Maria Navarra (ed.), A Handbook of Alternative Theories of Public Economics, chapter 7, pages 160-176, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Hortala-Vallve, Rafael & Esteve-Volart, Berta, 2011. "Voter turnout and electoral competition in a multidimensional policy space," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 376-384, June.

    More about this item

    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:sae:jocore:v:20:y:1976:i:2:p:255-278. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.