Skip to main content
Log in

Mixed Motives: An Empirical Analysis of ILO Roll-Call Voting

  • Published:
Constitutional Political Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this empirical paper, we look at individual voting behaviour of government delegates to the International Labour Organization (ILO). We distinguish between the instrumental motive for voting, which consists in the chance that one's vote may turn the balance in favour of one's preferred outcome, and non-instrumental motives, such as a desire for good reputation. Empirically, the two can be identified because two alternatives, abstaining and not participating in the vote, do not differ in their instrumental value, but are likely to differ with respect to reputation aspects. The model is estimated by a multinomial logit with country-specific unobserved heterogeneity, using roll-call votes on the final passage of ILO conventions from 1977 to 1995. The hypothesis that voting is only instrumental is clearly rejected by the data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlof, G. A. (1980) “A Theory of Social Custom, of Which Unemployment May Be One Consequence.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 94: 749-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A., Limongi, F., and Przeworski, A. (1996) “Classisfying Political Regimes.” Studies in Comparative International Development 31: 2-36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R., and Keohane, R. O. (1985/86) “Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions.” World Politics 38: 226-254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolomei de la Cruz, H., von Potobsky, G., Swepston, L. (1996) The International Labor Organization. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, T., Clarke, G., Groff, A., Keefer, P., and Walsh, P. (2000) New Tools and New Tests in Comparative Political Economy: The Database of Political Institutions, World Bank Policy Research Paper No. 2283, Washington D.C.

  • Bernheim, B. D. (1994) “A Theory of Conformity.” Journal of Political Economy 102: 841-877.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, G., and Hamlin, A. (1998) “Expressive Voting and Electoral Equilibrium.” Public Choice 95: 149-175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. K., Deardorff, A. V., and Stern, R. M. (1998) “Trade and Labor Standards.” Open Economies Review 9: 171-194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, J. S., and Ridder, G. (1991) “Pooling States in the Multinomial Logit Model.” Journal of Econometrics 47: 267-272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, M., and Sikkink, K. (1998) “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52: 887-917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghebali, V.-Y. (1989) The International Labour Organization. Dordrecht: Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, E. B. (1962) “System and Process in the International Labor Organization, A Statistical Afterthought.” World Politics 14: 322-352.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Labour Organization (ILO) (1993) The Role of the ILO in Technical Cooperation. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. (1984) After Hegemony, Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. Y., and Russett, B. (1996) “The New Politics of Voting Alignments in the United Nations General Assembly.” International Organization 50: 629-652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchgässner, G., and Pommerehne, W. W. (1993) “Low-Cost Decisions as a Challenge to Public Choice.” Public Choice 77: 105-115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A. (1996) Observations on International Labor Standards and Trade. NBERWorking Paper No. 5632, Cambridge, MA.

  • Kruglak, G. (1989) “Tripartism and the ILO.” In: Forsythe, D. P. (ed.) The United Nations in the World Political Economy, Essays in Honour of Leon Gordenker. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuran, T. (1995) Private Truths, Public Lies, The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landelius, T. (1965) Workers, Employers and Governments. A Comparative Study of Delegations and Groups at the International Labour Conference 1919–1964. Stockholm: Norstedt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, S. D. (1996) “How Do Senators Vote? Disentangling the Role of Voter Preferences, Party Affiliation, and Senator Ideology.” American Economic Review 86: 425-441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddala, G. S. (1983) Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maupin, F. (1987) “La reforme de l'Organisation Internationale du Travail.” Annuaire franÇ ais de Droit international 33: 478-497.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, J. (1966) “The International Labour Organization.” In: Luard, E. (ed.) The Evolution of International Organizations. London: Thames and Hudson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myrdal, H.-G. (1994) “The ILO in the Crossfire: Would it Survive the Social Clause?” In: Sengenberger, W., and Campbell, D. (eds.) International Labour Standards and Economic Interdependence. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen van, P., Kaiser, U., and Laisney, F. (2003) “The Performance of German Firms in the Business-Related Service Sector: A Dynamic Analysis.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics (forthcoming).

  • Noury, A. G., and Roland, G. (2002) “More Power to the European Parliament?” Economic Policy 35: 281-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, S. (1984) “Constituent Interest and Congressional Voting.” Journal of Law and Economics 27: 181-210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2000) “Voting As Communicating.” Review of Economic Studies 67: 169-191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, K. T., and Rosenthal, H. (1991) “Patterns of Congressional Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 35: 228-278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, K. T., and Rosenthal, H. (1997) “Congress. A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting.” New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, L. E., and Munger, M. C. (1990) “Shirking, Representation, and Congressional Behavior: Voting on the 1983 Amendment to the Social Security Act.” Public Choice 67: 11-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W. H., and Ordeshook, P. C. (1968) “A Theory of the Calculus of Voting.” American Political Science Review 62: 25-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, L. S., and Sanders, M. S. (2000) “Legislator Turnout and the Calculus of Voting: The Determinants of Abstention in the U.S. Congress.” Public Choice 103: 259-270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scapple, K. (1998) “Is Consensus Necessary for Effective Environmental Treaties?” Journal of Environment and Development 7: 364-386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, J. M. Jr., and Groseclose, T. (2000) “Estimating Party Influence in Congressional Roll-Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 44: 187-205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, T. N. (1998) “Trade and Human Rights.” In: Deardorff, A. V., and Stern, R. M. (eds.) Representation of Constituent Interests in the Design and Implementation of U.S. Trade Policies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, S. (1997) “Simulation-Based Estimation.” Journal of Economic Literature 35: 2006-2039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Summers, R., and Heston, A. (1991) “The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950–1988” Quarterly Journal of Economics 106: 327-369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyran, J.-R. (2003) “Voting When Money and Morals Conflict. An Experimental Test of Expressive Voting.” Journal of Public Economics (forthcoming).

  • Van Soest, A., Fontein, P., and Euwals, R. (1996) “Earnings Capacity and Labour Market Participation.” CentER Discussion Papers No. 9657, Tilburg.

  • Vaubel, R. (1996) “Constitutional Safeguards Against Centralization in Federal States: An International Cross-Section Analysis.” Constitutional Political Economy 7: 79-102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voeten, E. (2000) “Clashes in the Assembly.” International Organization 54: 185-215.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boockmann, B. Mixed Motives: An Empirical Analysis of ILO Roll-Call Voting. Constitutional Political Economy 14, 263–285 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:COPE.0000003858.95210.a7

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:COPE.0000003858.95210.a7

Navigation