Do local leaders prioritize the poor: Identifying the distributive preference of village politicians in India

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Electoral Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-13 DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102743
Mark Schneider , Neelanjan Sircar
{"title":"Do local leaders prioritize the poor: Identifying the distributive preference of village politicians in India","authors":"Mark Schneider ,&nbsp;Neelanjan Sircar","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We investigate the distributive preferences of elected leaders in local democracies, who are tasked with ”everyday assistance” and personally know their constituents. In this setting, economic distribution is driven more by leader preferences and less by efficiency concerns, as in the lower information setting typically described in the literature. In local democracy, we argue voters can explicitly select leaders who prefer to distribute to a broad group of supporters, who further conform to norms of targeting the most needy among supporters. In this article, we develop a novel behavioral measure that isolates leaders’ distributive preferences from direct electoral benefit, which we implement in villages across the Indian state of Rajasthan. We find elected leaders prefer to distribute 94% more to supporters and 17% more to supporters one standard deviation below the mean village wealth. This suggests local elections are consistent with significant distribution to the poor, albeit with political biases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 102743"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379424000015","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We investigate the distributive preferences of elected leaders in local democracies, who are tasked with ”everyday assistance” and personally know their constituents. In this setting, economic distribution is driven more by leader preferences and less by efficiency concerns, as in the lower information setting typically described in the literature. In local democracy, we argue voters can explicitly select leaders who prefer to distribute to a broad group of supporters, who further conform to norms of targeting the most needy among supporters. In this article, we develop a novel behavioral measure that isolates leaders’ distributive preferences from direct electoral benefit, which we implement in villages across the Indian state of Rajasthan. We find elected leaders prefer to distribute 94% more to supporters and 17% more to supporters one standard deviation below the mean village wealth. This suggests local elections are consistent with significant distribution to the poor, albeit with political biases.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
地方领导人是否优先考虑穷人:识别印度乡村政治家的分配偏好
我们研究了地方民主政体中民选领导人的分配偏好,他们的任务是 "日常协助 "并亲自了解选民。在这种情况下,经济分配更多地受到领导者偏好的驱动,而较少受到效率考虑的驱动,这与文献中通常描述的低信息环境相同。我们认为,在地方民主中,选民可以明确地选择倾向于向广大支持者分配的领导者,而这些领导者会进一步遵守针对支持者中最贫困者的规范。在本文中,我们开发了一种新的行为测量方法,将领导人的分配偏好与直接选举利益分离开来,并在印度拉贾斯坦邦的村庄中实施。我们发现,当选领导人倾向于向支持者多分配 94% 的利益,而向低于村庄平均财富一个标准差的支持者多分配 17% 的利益。这表明,尽管存在政治偏差,但地方选举与向贫困人口进行重大分配是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Electoral Studies
Electoral Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Electoral Studies is an international journal covering all aspects of voting, the central act in the democratic process. Political scientists, economists, sociologists, game theorists, geographers, contemporary historians and lawyers have common, and overlapping, interests in what causes voters to act as they do, and the consequences. Electoral Studies provides a forum for these diverse approaches. It publishes fully refereed papers, both theoretical and empirical, on such topics as relationships between votes and seats, and between election outcomes and politicians reactions; historical, sociological, or geographical correlates of voting behaviour; rational choice analysis of political acts, and critiques of such analyses.
期刊最新文献
Wishful thinking in mass–elite electoral expectations Do voters hold the president’s party accountable for local economic conditions? Do open lists increase turnout? Probably not, but they increase rates of voter error: New evidence from Spain The myth of compensatory effects: How party organisation shapes women's representation in dual-candidacy mixed electoral systems Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1