Skip to main content
Log in

Abstention in Daylight: Strategic Calculus of Voting in the European Parliament

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As in large elections, substantialabstention is frequently observed inlegislative assemblies. This paper analyzesroll call votes from the third and fourthlegislatures (1989–1999) of the EuropeanParliament to test predictions from threetypes of theories of abstention: (1)decision-theoretic approach of RationalChoice theory, (2) game-theoretic approachof Rational Choice theory, and (3) theSwing Voter’s Curse theory. The resultsindicate that closeness significantlydecreases the rate of abstention. Thefindings also show that an increase in theprobability of being in the majorityincreases turnout. Overall, findings aresupportive of the decision-theoreticapproach of Rational Choice theory butnot of the game-theoretic approach toabstention or the Swing Voter’s Cursetheory.

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

  • Aldrich, J.H. (1993). Rational choice and turnout. American Journal of Political Science 37: 246–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L. and Noll, R. (1991). How to vote, whether to vote: Strategies for voting and abstaining on congressional roll calls. Political Behavior 13: 97–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, G. and Rothschild, M. (1981). A note on the probability of casting a decisive vote. Journal of Economic Theory 25: 152–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, R., Jacobs, F. and Shackleton, M. (1995). The European Parliament. Cartermill International.

  • Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feddersen, T.J. and Pesendorfer, W. (1996). The Swing Voter’s Curse. American Economic Review 86: 408–424.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Forgette, R. and Sala, B. (1999). Conditional party government and member turnout on Senate recorded votes, 1873–1935. Journal of Politics 61: 467–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W.H. (1996). Econometric analysis. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

  • Hix, S., Raunio, T. and Scully, R. (1999). An institutional theory of behaviour in the European Parliament. EPRG Working Paper, No. 1.

  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 263–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lott, J.R. Jr. (1990). Attendance rate, political shirking, and the effect of post-elective office employment. Economic Inquiry 38: 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myerson, R.B. (1994). Population uncertainty and Poisson games. CMSEMS Discussion paper No. 1120 R. Northwestern University.

  • Noury, A.G. (2002). Ideology, nationality and Euro-parliamentarians. European Union Politics 3: 33–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noury, A.G. and Roland, G. (2002). More power to the European Parliament? Economic Policy 35: 281–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palfrey, T.R. and Rosenthal, H. (1983). A strategic calculus of voting. Public Choice 41: 7–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palfrey, T.R. and Rosenthal, H. (1985). Voter participation and strategic uncertainty. American Political Science Review 79: 62–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, K.T. and Rosenthal, H. (1997). Congress: A political-economic history of roll call voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabin, M. and Thaler, R. (2001). Anomalies: Risk aversion. Journal of Economic Perspectives 15: 219–232.

    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. and Sanders, M. (2000a). Legislator turnout and the calculus of voting: The determinants of abstention in the U.S. Congress. Public Choice 103: 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, L. and Sanders M. (2000b). Modeling legislator decision-making: An historical perspective. Unpublished paper.

  • Scully, M.R. (1997). Policy influence and participation in the European Parliament. Legislative Studies Quarterly 12: 233–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests of aggregation bias. Journal of American Statistical Association 57: 500–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zupan, M. (1991). Local benefit-seeking and national policymaking: Democrats vs. republicans in the legislature. Public Choice 68: 245–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Noury, A.G. Abstention in Daylight: Strategic Calculus of Voting in the European Parliament. Public Choice 121, 179–211 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-004-9221-8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-004-9221-8

Keywords

Navigation