IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uts/ecowps/2021-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Waste Your Vote? Informal Voting in Compulsory Elections in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Eamon McGinn

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Shiko Maruyama

    (University of Technology Sydney)

Abstract

In Australia, where voting is compulsory, around 5% of votes are informal, not counting toward the outcome. Between 2004�2016, 32% of electorates reported more informal votes than votes in the margin between the winner and runner-up. Using exogenous changes in electorate boundaries, we test two hypotheses from the literature. We find the pivotal voter theory unsupported, except that better-educated voters respond to the margin more strategically. However, we do find that more candidates cause more informal votes. This choice-overload effect is observed regardless of voters� education, indicating the role of time and effort cost rather than just cognitive ability.

Suggested Citation

  • Eamon McGinn & Shiko Maruyama, 2021. "Why Waste Your Vote? Informal Voting in Compulsory Elections in Australia," Working Paper Series 2021/02, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    • Handle: RePEc:uts:ecowps:2021/02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/article/downloads/InformalVoting20210504.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carson, Jamie L. & Engstrom, Erik J. & Roberts, Jason M., 2007. "Candidate Quality, the Personal Vote, and the Incumbency Advantage in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(2), pages 289-301, May.
    2. Hill, Andrew J. & Jones, Daniel B., 2017. "Does partisan affiliation impact the distribution of spending? Evidence from state governments’ expenditures on education," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 58-77.
    3. Lee, David S., 2008. "Randomized experiments from non-random selection in U.S. House elections," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 675-697, February.
    4. Per Pettersson-Lidbom, 2008. "Do Parties Matter for Economic Outcomes? A Regression-Discontinuity Approach," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(5), pages 1037-1056, September.
    5. Scott W. Desposato & John R. Petrocik, 2003. "The Variable Incumbency Advantage: New Voters, Redistricting, and the Personal Vote," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 18-32, January.
    6. Ho, Daniel E. & Imai, Kosuke & King, Gary & Stuart, Elizabeth A., 2007. "Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 199-236, July.
    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. repec:ces:ifodic:v:14:y:2016:i:1:p:19204333 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Joo, Hailey Hayeon & Lee, Jungmin, 2018. "Encountering female politicians," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 88-122.
    3. Gerald Carlino & Nicholas Zarra & Robert Inman & Thorsten Drautzburg, 2019. "Fiscal Policy in Monetary Unions: State Partisanship and its Macroeconomic Effects," 2019 Meeting Papers 434, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2011. "Competing on Good Politicians," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 79-99, February.
    5. Quaresima Federico & Santolini Raffaella & Fiorillo Fabio, 2020. "Political affiliation in post-parliamentary careers in Italian public enterprises," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 35-64, April.
    6. Kaisa Kotakorpi & Panu Poutvaara & Marko Tervio, 2013. "Returns to office in national and local politics," Discussion Papers 86, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    7. David S. Lee & Thomas Lemieux, 2010. "Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 281-355, June.
    8. Joaquín Artés & Ignacio Jurado, 2018. "Government fragmentation and fiscal deficits: a regression discontinuity approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 367-391, June.
    9. Ari Hyytinen & Jaakko Meriläinen & Tuukka Saarimaa & Otto Toivanen & Janne Tukiainen, 2018. "When does regression discontinuity design work? Evidence from random election outcomes," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(2), pages 1019-1051, July.
    10. repec:pri:cepsud:180rothstein is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Matias D. Cattaneo & Nicolas Idrobo & Rocio Titiunik, 2019. "A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations," Papers 1911.09511, arXiv.org.
    12. Fernando Aragón & Ricardo Pique, 2020. "Better the devil you know? Reelected politicians and policy outcomes under no term limits," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 1-16, January.
    13. Mauricio Villamizar‐Villegas & Freddy A. Pinzon‐Puerto & Maria Alejandra Ruiz‐Sanchez, 2022. "A comprehensive history of regression discontinuity designs: An empirical survey of the last 60 years," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1130-1178, September.
    14. Lopes da Fonseca, Mariana, 2015. "Identifying the source of incumbency advantage through an electoral reform," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 239, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    15. Christa N. Brunnschweiler & Samuel Kwabena Obeng, 2020. "Rewarding Allegiance: Political Alignment and Fiscal Outcomes in Local Government," University of East Anglia School of Economics Working Paper Series 2020-05, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    16. Benoît Le Maux & Kristýna Dostálová & Fabio Padovano, 2020. "Ideology or voters? A quasi-experimental test of why left-wing governments spend more," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 17-48, January.
    17. Bhalotra, Sonia & Clots-Figueras, Irma & Iyer, Lakshmi, 2021. "Religion and abortion: The role of politician identity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    18. Meriläinen, Jaakko, 2013. "Do Single-Party and Coalition Governments Differ in their Economic Outcomes? Evidence from Finnish Municipalities," Working Papers 51, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Benoît LE MAUX & Kristýna DOSTÁLOVÁ & Antti MOISIO, 2017. "Do political parties matter? Endogenous fragmentation, partisanship, and local public expenditures in Finland," Economics Working Paper from Condorcet Center for political Economy at CREM-CNRS 2017-02-ccr, Condorcet Center for political Economy.
    20. Jekaterina Kuliomina, 2016. "Does Election of an Additional Female Councilor Increase Women's Candidacy in the Future?," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp559, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    21. Peter Egger & Marko Koethenbuerger, 2010. "Government Spending and Legislative Organization: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Germany," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 200-212, October.
    22. Brollo, Fernanda & Troiano, Ugo, 2016. "What happens when a woman wins an election? Evidence from close races in Brazil," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 28-45.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    informal voting; voter participation; pivotal voter model; redistricting; choice overload; compulsory voting; difference in differences; Australia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    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:uts:ecowps:2021/02. 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: Duncan Ford (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edutsau.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.