IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nip/nipewp/07-2017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Procedural Fairness and Economic Voting

Author

Listed:

Abstract

What accounts for the instability of economic voting? Contextual factors assumed so far to affect this relationship include the degree of control over the economy exerted by governments, their partisan-ideological composition, or even voters’ experience with democratic elections. In this paper, we provide an alternative account. Based on a vast literature originating in social and organizational psychology, we propose the existence of a process-outcome interaction: short-term outcomes matter, but the weight voters assign to them depends on the extent to which governance is perceived to adhere to principles of procedural fairness. Based on data on twenty years of elections in the OECD countries, we show that the strength of the relationship between GDP growth and the share of the vote for the incumbent parties does depends on the perceived procedural fairness in governance. We conduct extensive robustness tests, including the use of alternative indicators of fairness and survey data.

Suggested Citation

  • Pedro C. Magalhães & Luís Aguiar-Conraria, 2017. "Procedural Fairness and Economic Voting," NIPE Working Papers 07/2017, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
  • Handle: RePEc:nip:nipewp:07/2017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nipe.eeg.uminho.pt/Uploads/WP_2017/NIPE%20WP_07_2017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Zoido-Lobaton, Pablo, 1999. "Governance matters," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2196, The World Bank.
    2. Toke S. Aidt, 2009. "Corruption, institutions, and economic development," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 25(2), pages 271-291, Summer.
    3. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2005. "Beyond outcomes: measuring procedural utility," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 90-111, January.
    4. Margit Tavits, 2007. "Clarity of Responsibility and Corruption," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 218-229, January.
    5. Lorenzo Pellegrini & Reyer Gerlagh, 2004. "Corruption's Effect on Growth and its Transmission Channels," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 429-456, August.
    6. Jakob Svensson, 2005. "Eight Questions about Corruption," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 19-42, Summer.
    7. Swank, O H, 1993. "Popularity Functions Based on the Partisan Theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 339-356, April.
    8. Bruno Frey & Matthias Benz & Alois Stutzer, 2004. "Introducing Procedural Utility: Not Only What, but Also How Matters," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 160(3), pages 377-401, September.
    9. Christopher Carman, 2010. "The Process is the Reality: Perceptions of Procedural Fairness and Participatory Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 731-751, October.
    10. Klašnja, Marko & Tucker, Joshua A. & Deegan-Krause, Kevin, 2016. "Pocketbook vs. Sociotropic Corruption Voting," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 67-94, January.
    11. Nobuo Akai & Yusaku Horiuchi & Masayo Sakata, 2005. "Short-run and Long-run Effects of Corruption on Economic Growth: Evidence from State-Level Cross-Section Data for the United States," International and Development Economics Working Papers idec05-5, International and Development Economics.
    12. Beck, Nathaniel & Katz, Jonathan N., 1995. "What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 634-647, September.
    13. Michael Lewis-Beck & Mary Stegmaier, 2013. "The VP-function revisited: a survey of the literature on vote and popularity functions after over 40 years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 367-385, December.
    14. Duch,Raymond M. & Stevenson,Randolph T., 2008. "The Economic Vote," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521707404, October.
    15. Christopher Carman, 2010. "The Process is the Reality: Perceptions of Procedural Fairness and Participatory Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 731-751, October.
    16. Schwindt-Bayer,Leslie A. & Tavits,Margit, 2016. "Clarity of Responsibility, Accountability, and Corruption," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107127647, October.
    17. Wilson, Sven E. & Butler, Daniel M., 2007. "A Lot More to Do: The Sensitivity of Time-Series Cross-Section Analyses to Simple Alternative Specifications," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 101-123, April.
    18. Duch,Raymond M. & Stevenson,Randolph T., 2008. "The Economic Vote," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521881029, October.
    19. Royed, Terry J. & Leyden, Kevin M. & Borrelli, Stephen A., 2000. "Is ‘Clarity of Responsibility’ Important for Economic Voting? Revisiting Powell and Whitten's Hypothesis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 669-698, October.
    20. Bornier Jean Magnan de & Norpoth H. & Lewis-Beck M.S. & Lafay J.D., 1991. "Economics and Politics The calculus of support," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 2(4), pages 579-581, December.
    21. Stefan Krause & Fabio Méndez, 2009. "Corruption And Elections: An Empirical Study For A Cross‐Section Of Countries," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 179-200, July.
    22. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, June.
    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. Luís Aguiar-Conraria & Pedro C. Magalhães, 2018. "Procedural Fairness, the Economy, and Support for Political Authorities (Forthcoming at Political Psychology (submitted pre-print version))," NIPE Working Papers 05/2018, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    2. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2016. "Voting and Popularity," CREMA Working Paper Series 2016-08, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    3. Ruth Dassonneville & Michael S. Lewis-Beck, 2018. "Growth, Inequality, and Party Support: Valence and Positional Economic Voting," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1803, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    4. Ruth Dassonneville & Michael S. Lewis-Beck, 2018. "Growth, inequality, and party support: Valence and positional economic voting," Working Papers. Collection A: Public economics, governance and decentralization 1804, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    5. E Goulas & C Kallandranis & A Zervoyianni, 2019. "Voting Behaviour and the Economy: Evidence from Greece," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 24(1), pages 35-58, March.
    6. Bienvenido Ortega & Antonio Casquero & Jesús Sanjuán, 2016. "Corruption and Convergence in Human Development: Evidence from 69 Countries During 1990–2012," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 691-719, June.
    7. Arnesen, Sveinung, 2012. "Forecasting Norwegian elections: Out of work and out of office," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 789-796.
    8. John Maloney & Andrew Pickering, "undated". "Voting and the macroeconomy: separating trend from cycle," Discussion Papers 11/14, Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Kodila Tedika, Oasis, 2012. "Consequences De La Corruption : Panorama Empirique [Consequences of Corruption : Empirical survey]," MPRA Paper 41482, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Turhan Kaymak & Eralp Bektas, 2015. "Corruption in Emerging Markets: A Multidimensional Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 785-805, December.
    11. Linda Gonçalves Veiga, 2013. "Voting functions in the EU-15," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 411-428, December.
    12. Eugen Dimant & Guglielmo Tosato, 2018. "Causes And Effects Of Corruption: What Has Past Decade'S Empirical Research Taught Us? A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 335-356, April.
    13. Marcus Box & Karl Gratzer & Xiang Lin, 2023. "Self-employment, corruption, and property rights: a comparative analysis of European and CEE economies," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-29, January.
    14. Martin Okolikj & Stephen Quinlan, 2016. "Context Matters: Economic Voting in the 2009 and 2014 European Parliament Elections," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 145-166.
    15. Craigwell, Roland & Wright, Allan S, 2011. "Foreign Direct Investment and Corruption in Developing Economies: Evidence form Linear and Non-Linear Panel Causality Tests," MPRA Paper 40933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Abel Bojar, 2015. "Biting the Hand that Feeds: Reconsidering Partisanship in an Age of Permanent Austerity," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 91, European Institute, LSE.
    17. Michael Lewis-Beck & Mary Stegmaier, 2013. "The VP-function revisited: a survey of the literature on vote and popularity functions after over 40 years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 367-385, December.
    18. Julio F Carrión & Stuart J Kaufman, 2018. "Public opinion and the end of apartheid," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 97-113, June.
    19. Catherine E. De Vries & Sara B. Hobolt, 2012. "When dimensions collide: The electoral success of issue entrepreneurs," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 246-268, June.
    20. Joshua A Strayhorn, 2019. "Plausible deniability," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(4), pages 600-625, October.

    More about this item

    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:nip:nipewp:07/2017. 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: NIPE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nipampt.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.