Hugh-Jones, David (2009) Constitutions and Policy Comparisons. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 21 (1). pp. 25-61. DOI https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629808097283
Hugh-Jones, David (2009) Constitutions and Policy Comparisons. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 21 (1). pp. 25-61. DOI https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629808097283
Hugh-Jones, David (2009) Constitutions and Policy Comparisons. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 21 (1). pp. 25-61. DOI https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629808097283
Abstract
<jats:p> Voters in democracies can learn from the experience of neighbouring states: about policy in a direct democracy (`policy experimentation'), about the quality of their politicians in a representative democracy (`yardstick competition'). Learning between states creates spillovers from policy choice, and also from constitutional choice. I model these spillovers in a simple principal-agent framework, and show that voter welfare may be maximized by a mixture of representative and direct democratic states. Because of this, empirical work examining voter welfare under direct democracy may need to be reinterpreted. Also, I show that the optimal mix of constitutions cannot always be achieved in a constitutional choice equilibrium involving many states. </jats:p>
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Uncontrolled Keywords: | constitutional choice; direct democracy; policy experimentation; yardstick competition |
Subjects: | J Political Science > JZ International relations |
Divisions: | Faculty of Social Sciences > Government, Department of |
SWORD Depositor: | Unnamed user with email elements@essex.ac.uk |
Depositing User: | Unnamed user with email elements@essex.ac.uk |
Date Deposited: | 11 May 2012 11:36 |
Last Modified: | 06 Jan 2022 14:37 |
URI: | http://repository.essex.ac.uk/id/eprint/5778 |
Available files
Filename: SSRN-id1010708.pdf