Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal最新文献_第8页

The New International Economic Order, Utopian Realism, and the Recovery of an Alternative Vision for Global Governance 国际经济新秩序、乌托邦现实主义和全球治理替代愿景的复苏

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-09-05 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3448694

Giuliana Chamedes

引用次数: 0

From Fat to Obese: Political Dynasties after the 2019 Midterm Elections 从胖到胖:2019年中期选举后的政治王朝

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3449201

R. Mendoza, Leonardo M. Jaminola, Jurel K. Yap

引用次数: 9

Climate Change Preferences and Values 气候变化偏好和价值观

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3446417

Kim Conrad

{"title":"Climate Change Preferences and Values","authors":"Kim Conrad","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3446417","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3446417","url":null,"abstract":"This research examines the role of fundamental beliefs in the environment, anthropocentrism, and the economy in public preferences toward policies aimed at mitigating the risks of climate change as well as the heterogeneity in those beliefs. We argue that citizens hold multiple considerations toward policies related to global warming and that rather than making policy choices more difficult leading to attitudinal ambivalence, these various beliefs reduce the response variability around individual preferences. Further, we argue that individuals with more knowledge about the causes and consequences of global warming should have more variance around their policy preferences. The analysis of a national telephone survey related to climate change reveals that 1) many people are generally supportive of policies to reduce the risks of global warming 2) the amount of support varies according to specific policy proposals 3) policy preferences are mostly of function of beliefs toward the environment and the economy and subjective risk perceptions and 4) the variation around individual policy preferences decreases among individuals that simultaneously hold competing values and expectations toward the environment, the economy, and human dominance over nature. These results indicate that multiple considerations do not necessarily lead to ambivalence among public preferences for policies to reduce the risks of climate change. In addition, the results show that individuals with more knowledge about the causes and consequences of climate change are generally more supportive of policies to limit the risks of global warming, but also have more variation around those preferences.","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125029534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Victorian Voting: The Origins of Party Orientation and Class Alignment 维多利亚时代的投票:政党取向和阶级结盟的起源

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-30 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3112208

Torun Dewan, Jaakko Meriläinen, Janne Tukiainen

引用次数: 11

Wait-and-See or Step In? Dynamics of Interventions 观望还是介入?干预的动态

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-27 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3243123

Dana Foarta, Takuo Sugaya

引用次数: 5

Ground Truth Validation of Survey Estimates of Split-Ticket Voting with Cast Vote Records Data 基于投票记录数据的分票投票调查估计的地面真实性验证

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-26 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3443722

A. Agadjanian, Jonathan Robinson

{"title":"Ground Truth Validation of Survey Estimates of Split-Ticket Voting with Cast Vote Records Data","authors":"A. Agadjanian, Jonathan Robinson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3443722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3443722","url":null,"abstract":"From signaling trends in nationalization and partisanship to clarifying preferences for divided government, split-ticket voting has received copious attention in political science. Important insights often rely on survey data, as they do among practitioners searching for persuadable voters. Yet it is unknown whether surveys accurately capture this behavior. We take advantage of a novel source of data to validate survey-based estimates of split-ticket voting. Cast vote records in South Carolina (2010-18) and Maryland (2016-18) provide anonymized individual level choices in all races on the ballot for every voter in each election, serving as the ground truth. We collect an array of public and private survey data to execute the comparison and calculate survey error. Despite expectations about partisan consistency pressures leading to survey underestimates, we find that surveys generally come close to the true split-ticket voting rates in our set of races. Accuracy varies, but notably is more consistent for split-ticket voting in a given dyad of national races (e.g., President vs. U.S. House) than in one with state races, as the former is often of greater interest in research and practice.","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133899029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Cooking for Bureaucrats: Why the Policy of Food Reformulation is Hard to Stomach 为官僚做饭:为什么食品配方改革政策令人难以接受

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-16 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3852609

J. Appleton

{"title":"Cooking for Bureaucrats: Why the Policy of Food Reformulation is Hard to Stomach","authors":"J. Appleton","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3852609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3852609","url":null,"abstract":"Under the UK government’s policy of \"reformulation\", food products are subject to government targets for the reduction of salt, sugar, and calories. This empowers Public Health England to monitor and regulate the composition of virtually every part of the prepared food supply, including both ready-meals and supermarket biscuits and the recipes of cafés and restaurants. It represents the largest extension of state control over the British diet since rationing. The reformulation scheme is highly bureaucratic. Since 2017, there have been 220 different active salt and sugar targets. Proposals for new calorie reduction targets include a baffling range of food products, which most people would not consider unhealthy. Many of the targets are surreal, with the guideline for sugar content in nut butters being less than that naturally occurring in cashew nuts. Reformulation has been driven less by nutritional science than by the concerns of an out-of-touch state bureaucracy. <br><br>Food reformulation is an irrational bureaucratic standard, which will detach the food market from the tastes, preferences, and nutritional goals of consumers. Food products will end up being designed, not primarily to please the public, but to meet the arbitrary targets set by health bureaucrats.","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114126755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Targeted Testing for Bias in Order Assignment, with an Application to Texas Election Ballots 针对顺序分配偏差的定向测试，应用于德克萨斯州选举选票

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-12 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3436471

Sheridan Grant, M. Perlman, D. Grant

引用次数: 2

Categorical Cognition and Outcome Efficiency in Impact Investing Decisions 影响投资决策的范畴认知与结果效率

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-06 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3236194

Matthew K. O. Lee, A. Adbi, Jasjit Singh

{"title":"Categorical Cognition and Outcome Efficiency in Impact Investing Decisions","authors":"Matthew K. O. Lee, A. Adbi, Jasjit Singh","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3236194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3236194","url":null,"abstract":"Research Summary The emerging practice of “impact investing” optimizes both financial and social outcomes, and thus promises to support hybrid organizations that simultaneously pursue financial and social goals. We argue, however, that impact investing decisions may be prone to behavioral factors that limit their outcome efficiency. In a portfolio allocation task designed to reflect the essential features of an impact investing decision, we find across a range of scenarios that individuals systematically fail to choose investment portfolios that achieve financial and social outcomes efficiently and thereby waste opportunities for value creation. We further show in online and in‐person experiments that outcome inefficiency is related to “categorical cognition”: suppression of categorical labels on investment options increases efficiency. Managerial Summary The “impact investing” approach promises to encourage greater financial investments in hybrid organizations that pursue a combination of financial and social goals. We experimentally demonstrate a challenge of this approach: People struggle to identify portfolios of investments that simultaneously optimize across financial and social outcomes. This is partly due to “categorical cognition”: a natural tendency to view investments in terms of known categories rather than the actual outcomes they produce. Our experiments show that removing the labels “for‐profit company,” “charity,” and “social enterprise” from investment options—thus making it more difficult to think about them categorically—increases outcome‐efficient allocations. We therefore show that realizing the full potential of impact investing will require that investors transcend conventional thinking about business and charity as separate domains.","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"113971207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 39

Campaign Contests 运动竞赛

Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal Pub Date : 2019-08-05 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3495106

Philipp Denter

{"title":"Campaign Contests","authors":"Philipp Denter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3495106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3495106","url":null,"abstract":"I develop a formal model of political campaigns in which candidates choose how to distribute their resources over two different policy issues. I assume that campaigning on an issue has two simultaneous effects, both rooted in social and cognitive psychology: It increases the perceived quality of the advertising candidate in that issue and it makes the issue more salient, thereby increasing the issue's perceived importance to the voters. Whether a candidate can increase his vote share during the contest depends on the interplay of strategic issue selection, which depends on candidates' comparative advantages, and the aggregate resource allocation to the issues. The aggregate resource allocation---or campaign agenda---depends on an issue's importance, the firmness of voters' conviction regarding candidates' relative quality, and the divisiveness of this issue. A candidate increases his vote share during the campaign contest if he has a comparative advantage on the issue that receives more aggregate spending. Consequently, the contest may be biased in one candidate's favor and an a priori less popular candidate might be the actual odds on favorite. I show that a relatively unimportant issue might receive most aggregate spending and thus could decide the election.<br>","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133934842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 7