Margin of victory vs. opportunity-cost of time as voting motivators in the Biobio Region

Acuña, Andrés (2014): Margin of victory vs. opportunity-cost of time as voting motivators in the Biobio Region.

Abstract

The apathy for electoral and political participation in Latin America shows an increasing trend that deserves the scholar community's attention. In this sense, this paper models the voter registration decision in a mandatory voting system that includes the margin of victory as a potential motivator of voter enrollment. The empirical test is focused on the Biobio region, Chile, during the period 2003-2011. The results indicate that voter enrollment is negatively influenced by the margin of victory only if the model is separately regressed for presidential and mayoral elections. Marginal effects from W2LT regressions are lower in mayoral than in presidential elections, which indicates that the electorate participates depending on what is the political office in question. The citizen participation and racial effects are larger for men than women, which could reorient the design of public policy aimed to encourage the civic involvement of male indigenous population. Finally, the discrepancy between the W2LT results from two distant periods suggests a structural change in the Biobio's electorate during the last decade.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: electoral participation; margin of victory; random effects Tobit model; voting behavior; Latin America; Chile
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2 - Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C24 - Truncated and Censored Models ; Switching Regression Models ; Threshold Regression Models; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D72 - Political Processes: Rent-Seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development > O10 - General

References

Acuña, A. A. (2013a). Voter enrollment decision under a compulsory voting rule: A simple model and some policy implications. Departamento de Economia y Finanzas, Universidad del Bio-Bio, Chile. Unpublished manuscript.

Acuña, A. A. (2013b). The voter registration decision under a compulsory voting system: Evidence from Chilean youth vote. Departamento de Economia y Finanzas, Universidad del Bio-Bio. Unpublished manuscript.

Barzel, Y. & Silberberg, E. (1973). Is the act of voting rational? Public Choice, 16(1), 51–58.

Brandon, E. (2012). Why older citizens are more likely to vote. In U.S. News Money, March 19. Washington, D.C.

Corvalan, A. & Cox, P. (2013). Class-biased electoral participation: The youth vote in Chile. Latin American Politics and Society, 55(3), 47–68.

Endersby, J. W. & Krieckhaus, J. T. (2008). Turnout around the globe: The influence of electoral institutions on national voter participation, 1972–2000. Electoral Studies, 27, 601–610.

Ferejohn, J. A. & Fiorina, M. P. (1974). The paradox of not voting: A decision theoretic analysis. American Political Science Review, 68, 525–536.

Frey, B. S. (1971). Why do high income people participate more in politics. Public Choice, 11(1), 101–105.

Kramer, G. H. (1983). The ecological fallacy revisited: Aggregate- versus individual-level findings on economics and elections, and sociotropic voting. The American Political Science Review, 77(1), 92–111.

Krasa, S. & Polborn, M. K. (2009). Is mandatory voting better than voluntary voting? Games and Economic Behavior, 66, 275–291.

Lichtman, A. J. (1974). Correlation, regression, and the ecological fallacy: A critique. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 4(3), 417–433.

Matsusaka, J. G. & Palda, F. (1993). The Downsian voter meets the ecological fallacy. Public Choice, 77(4), 855–878.

May, R. M. & Martin, B. (1975). Voting models incorporating interactions between voters. Public Choice, 22, 37–53.

Ministerio de Desarrollo Social (2011). Libro de Codigos Encuesta CASEN 2011: Base de datos tradicional. Gobierno de Chile, Santiago. Serie Documentos Metodologicos No.3.

Ministerio de Planificacion (2003). Manual de usuario Encuesta CASEN 2003. Gobierno de Chile, Santiago.

Ministerio de Planificacion (2006). Manual de usuario Encuesta CASEN 2006. Gobierno de Chile, Santiago.

Ministerio de Planificacion (2009). Manual de usuario Encuesta CASEN 2009. Gobierno de Chile, Santiago.

OECD (2011). OECD regional typology. Directorate for Public Governance and Territorial Development.

Papke, L. E. & Wooldridge, J. M. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(K) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11, 619–632.

Settle, R. F. & Abrams, B. A. (1976). The determinants of voter participation: A more general model. Public Choice, 27(1), 81–89.

Silberman, J. & Durden, G. (1975). The rational behavior theory of voter participation: Evidence from congressional elections. Public Choice, 23(1), 101–108.

Stigler, G. J. (1972). Economic competition and political competition. Public Choice, 13(1), 91–106.

Tollison, R., Crain, M., & Pautler, P. (1975). Information and voting: An empirical note. Public Choice, 24, 43–49.

Tollison, R. D. & Willett, T. D. (1973). Some simple economics of voting and not voting. Public Choice, 16, 59–71.

Toro, S. (2007). La inscripcion electoral de los jovenes en Chile. Factores de incidencia y aproximaciones al debate. In Centro de Estudios Publicos (Ed.), Modernizacion del Regimen Electoral Chileno (pp. 101–122). Santiago, Chile: CEP.

Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, USA: The MIT Press.