IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jcecon/v51y2023i2p457-476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leaping into the dark: A model of policy gambles

Author

Listed:
  • Anand, Kartik
  • Gai, Prasanna
  • König, Philipp J.

Abstract

We examine why rational voters support risky “policy gambles” over a safe status quo, even when such policies are detrimental to welfare. In a model of electoral competition, investors finance domestic projects in exchange for a stake in future output, while voters receive the remaining output. Government policy influences the riskiness of projects’ output. However, when investors invest, the incumbent cannot pre-commit to retain the status quo policy into the future. Instead, future policy is determined subsequently in an election where voters can increase their expected output by voting for policy gambles. Our analysis highlights how investors’ self-fulfilling beliefs interact with the distribution of output in abandoning the status quo. We argue that institutions that foster political consensus can eliminate the gamble equilibrium and raise welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp J., 2023. "Leaping into the dark: A model of policy gambles," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 457-476.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jcecon:v:51:y:2023:i:2:p:457-476
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jce.2022.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147596722000877
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jce.2022.12.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fausto Panunzi & Nicola Pavoni & Guido Tabellini, 2020. "Economic Shocks and Populism: The Political Implications of Reference-Dependent Preferences," CESifo Working Paper Series 8539, CESifo.
    2. Dewatripont, Mathias & Roland, Gerard, 1995. "The Design of Reform Packages under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1207-1223, December.
    3. Baccini, Leonardo & Weymouth, Stephen, 2021. "Gone For Good: Deindustrialization, White Voter Backlash, and US Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 550-567, May.
    4. Anderson, Christopher J. & Guillory, Christine A., 1997. "Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 66-81, March.
    5. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    6. Roberto Chang, 2010. "Elections, Capital Flows, and Politico-economic Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1759-1777, September.
    7. Callander, Steven, 2011. "Searching for Good Policies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(4), pages 643-662, November.
    8. Alessandra Bonfiglioli & Gino Gancia, 2013. "Uncertainty, Electoral Incentives and Political Myopia," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 373-400, May.
    9. Callander, Steven, 2008. "A Theory of Policy Expertise," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 3(2), pages 123-140, July.
    10. Alesina, Alberto & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1170-1188, December.
    11. Thiemo Fetzer, 2019. "Did Austerity Cause Brexit?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3849-3886, November.
    12. Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 2004. "The Politician and the Judge: Accountability in Government," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
    13. Shepsle, Kenneth A., 1972. "The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 555-568, June.
    14. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    15. Steven Callander & Patrick Hummel, 2014. "Preemptive Policy Experimentation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1509-1528, July.
    16. Steven Callander, 2011. "Searching and Learning by Trial and Error," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2277-2308, October.
    17. Mark M. Berger & Michael C. Munger & Richard F. Potthoff, 2000. "The Downsian Model Predicts Divergence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 228-240, April.
    18. Fernandez, Raquel & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Resistance to Reform: Status Quo Bias in the Presence of Individual-Specific Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1146-1155, 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. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp Johann, 2020. "Leaping into the dark: A theory of policy gambles," Discussion Papers 07/2020, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    2. Andreas Bernecker & Pierre C. Boyer & Christina Gathmann, 2021. "The Role of Electoral Incentives for Policy Innovation: Evidence from the US Welfare Reform," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 26-57, May.
    3. Guido Merzoni & Federico Trombetta, 2016. "The cost of doing the right thing. A model of populism with rent-seeking politicians and the economic crisis," DISEIS - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo dis1602, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo (DISEIS).
    4. Micael Castanheira & Gaëtan Nicodème & Paola Profeta, 2012. "On the political economics of tax reforms: survey and empirical assessment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(4), pages 598-624, August.
    5. Micael Castanheira & Gaëtan Nicodème & Paola Profeta, 2012. "On the political economics of tax reforms: survey and empirical assessment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(4), pages 598-624, August.
    6. Alessandra Bonfiglioli & Rosario Crinò & Gino Gancia, 2022. "Economic uncertainty and structural reforms: Evidence from stock market volatility," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), pages 467-504, May.
    7. Thomas Tobias & Heß Moritz & Wagner Gert G., 2017. "Reluctant to Reform? A Note on Risk-Loving Politicians and Bureaucrats," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 68(3), pages 167-179, December.
    8. Bernecker, Andreas & Boyer, Pierre C. & Gathmann, Christina, 2015. "Trial and Error? Reelection Concerns and Policy Experimentation during the U.S. Welfare Reform," IZA Discussion Papers 9113, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Gerard Rpland, 2001. "The Political Economy of Transition," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 413, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    10. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2013. "Rational Ignorance, Elections, and Reform," MPRA Paper 68638, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Dec 2015.
    11. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2018. "Rational ignorance, populism, and reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 119-135.
    12. Jiahua Che & Giovanni Facchini, 2004. "Dual Track Liberalization: With and Without Losers," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2004-669, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    13. Agnello, Luca & Castro, Vitor & Jalles, João Tovar & Sousa, Ricardo M., 2015. "What determines the likelihood of structural reforms?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 129-145.
    14. Alessandra Bonfiglioli & Gino Gancia, 2013. "Uncertainty, Electoral Incentives and Political Myopia," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 373-400, May.
    15. Ernesto Dal Bó & Pedro Dal Bó & Erik Eyster, 2018. "The Demand for Bad Policy when Voters Underappreciate Equilibrium Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(2), pages 964-998.
    16. Gabriel Leon, 2013. "Bad Apples: Political Paralysis and the Quality of Politicians," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(3), pages 433-447, June.
    17. Sumon Majumdar & Sharun W. Mukand, 2004. "Policy Gambles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1207-1222, September.
    18. Pierre C. Boyer & Brian Roberson & Christoph Esslinger, 2024. "Public Debt and the Political Economy of Reforms," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 459-491, August.
    19. Zanardi, Maurizio & Facchini, Giovanni & Conconi, Paola, 2011. "Policymakers? Horizon and Trade Reforms," CEPR Discussion Papers 8251, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Hofer, Katharina E. & Marti, Christian & Bütler, Monika, 2017. "Ready to reform: How popular initiatives can be successful," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 16-39.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy uncertainty; Electoral competition; Multiple equilibria; Political consensus;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    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:eee:jcecon:v:51:y:2023:i:2:p:457-476. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622864 .

    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.