IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/pm6ya_v1.html

Productive Policy Competition and Asymmetric Extremism

Author

Listed:
  • Hirsch, Alexander V.

Abstract

Viable policies must be developed by individuals and groups with the expertise and willingness to do so. We develop a model in which competing policy-motivated developers differ in their intrinsic ideological extremism and ability at crafting high quality policies. The unique equilibrium exhibits unequal participation, inefficiently unpredictable and extreme policies and outcomes, wasted effort, and an apparent advantage for extreme policies. While asymmetries between the developers always reduce observable competition, they can nevertheless benefit the decisionmaker. This contrasts starkly with the classic all-pay contest -- where the decisionmaker is always harmed by asymmetries due to the discouragement effect -- and results from the developers' policy motivations. I also introduce and solve a broader class of generalized policy contests that nests both the policy-development model and the all-pay contest, and develop new methods for solving asymmetric contests with spillovers. Broadly, my analysis provides a novel rationale for why extreme actors may dominate policymaking that is rooted in the nature of policy development, and highlights the difficulty in assessing the normative implications of such dominance.

Suggested Citation

  • Hirsch, Alexander V., 2026. "Productive Policy Competition and Asymmetric Extremism," SocArXiv pm6ya_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:pm6ya_v1
    DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/pm6ya_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6a9b38319ae274964e8f75ee/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31235/osf.io/pm6ya_v1?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. Balart, Pau & Casas, Agustin & Troumpounis, Orestis, 2022. "Technological change, campaign spending and polarization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Tirole, Jean, 1997. "Formal and Real Authority in Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(1), pages 1-29, February.
    3. Ashworth, Scott & Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan, 2009. "Elections with platform and valence competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 191-216, September.
    4. Kirkegaard, René, 2012. "Favoritism in asymmetric contests: Head starts and handicaps," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 226-248.
    5. Aragones, Enriqueta & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2002. "Mixed Equilibrium in a Downsian Model with a Favored Candidate," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 131-161, March.
    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. Denter, Philipp, 2021. "Valence, complementarities, and political polarization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 39-57.
    2. Raghul S. Venkatesh, 2020. "Political activism and polarization," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1530-1558, September.
    3. Fabian Gouret & Stéphane Rossignol, 2019. "Intensity valence," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(1), pages 63-112, June.
    4. Michael K Miller, 2011. "Seizing the mantle of change: Modeling candidate quality as effectiveness instead of valence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 52-68, January.
    5. Denter, Philipp, 2020. "Campaign contests," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Caselli, Francesco & Morelli, Massimo & Moreno de Barreda, Inés & Cunningham, Tom, 2012. "Signalling, Incumbency Advantage, and Optimal Reelection Thresholds," CEPR Discussion Papers 8832, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Paul Redmond, 2017. "Incumbent-challenger and open-seat elections in a spatial model of political competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 170(1), pages 79-97, January.
    8. Drouvelis, Michalis & Saporiti, Alejandro & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2014. "Political motivations and electoral competition: Equilibrium analysis and experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 86-115.
    9. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2023. "Generalized medians and electoral competition with valence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 35(1), pages 58-71, January.
    10. Drouvelis, Michalis & Saporiti, Alejandro & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2014. "Political motivations and electoral competition: Equilibrium analysis and experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 86-115.
    11. Eguia, Jon X. & Giovannoni, Francesco, 2019. "Tactical Extremism," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 282-286, February.
    12. Chad Kendall & Tommaso Nannicini & Francesco Trebbi, 2015. "How Do Voters Respond to Information? Evidence from a Randomized Campaign," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 322-353, January.
    13. Caselli, Francesco & Cunningham, Tom & Morelli, Massimo & Moreno de Barreda, Inés, 2012. "Signalling, incumbency advantage, and optimal reelection rules," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121757, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Livio Di Lonardo, 2017. "Valence uncertainty and the nature of the candidate pool in elections," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(2), pages 327-350, April.
    15. Ole-Andreas Elvik Naess, 2025. "Polarization and cultural divergence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 37(3), pages 209-231, July.
    16. Aragonès, Enriqueta & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2025. "Ideological consistency and valence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 160-182.
    17. Aragonès, Enriqueta & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2017. "Voters' private valuation of candidates' quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 121-130.
    18. Gallego, Maria & Schofield, Norman, 2017. "Modeling the effect of campaign advertising on US presidential elections when differences across states matter," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 160-181.
    19. Hummel, Patrick, 2012. "Deliberative democracy and electoral competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 646-667.
    20. Tomer Blumkin & Volker Grossmann, 2010. "May increased partisanship lead to convergence of parties’ policy platforms?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 547-569, December.

    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:osf:socarx:pm6ya_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://socarxiv.org .

    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.