Voteconomics

Why do individuals vote when a single ballot seems unlikely to change an election's outcome? At first glance, the act of voting might appear as a drop in the vast ocean of democracy, an irrational gesture when weighed against the odds. Yet, voting remains the cornerstone of democratic societies, a testament to the collective power of individual choices. Through microeconomics, we reconsider what it means to cast a vote as we explore utility and behavioural economics.

Is voting even worth pursuing?

Voter Apathy is a real phenomenon, with many individuals globally echoing the sentiment “We don’t care who wins the election,” as expressed by an anonymous interviewee on CNBC (2020). This attitude aligns with the Paradox of Voting proposed by Downs (1957), who noted that the act of voting could seem irrational given the negligible probability of a single vote swaying electoral outcomes.

If your vote affects an election outcome only when it breaks a tie, then ideally, you should abstain from voting and realise the outcome, rather than voting and realising the same outcome. Instead of browsing general election manifestos or

before paying postage fees to vote, a higher utility can be gained from doing something enjoyable like watching a movie. In a rational choice framework, the utility of voting would often be outweighed by the costs, such as the time and effort to register and vote, especially given the minuscule probability of a single vote determining the outcome of an election.

Is voting even worth pursuing?

Even though the benefits of voting appear to be outweighed by the costs, behavioural economics steps in, shedding light on why individuals defy the odds and head to the polls.

The Paradox of Voting assumes that your vote increases your utility only when it plays a pivotal role in the election outcome. However, Riker and Ordeshook’s (1968) critique distinguish between utility that is derived from your vote when it is pivotal, and utility that is derived from your vote independent of the election outcome. A person could derive utility from voting for all sorts of reasons.

Some people gain satisfaction from exercising this fundamental right to support the democratic process even when the probability of their vote swaying the election is minuscule. Cognitive bias can make casting a ballot feel like a monumental gesture, perhaps more significant than it truly is. This would mean one derives utility simply from voting and not the outcome.

In addition to viewing voting as a fundamental right, there are notable psychological factors that contribute to people's engagement in this exercise.

The herding effect describes the tendency of individuals to imitate the voting behaviour of those around them. When your social circle is buzzing with election fever, the collective enthusiasm for voting can exert a subtle yet undeniable influence, nudging you to follow suit and participate in the democratic process. It is akin to finding yourself in a room where everyone is applauding a captivating performance - a gentle reminder that joining in can be both socially expected and personally rewarding.

This explains why voter turnout differs across groups or regions, as individuals are reluctant to go against the behavioural patterns in the group. For example, the diagram below shows the different proportion of voters by age group.

Similarly, this explains why voting blocs are common in certain communities or regions. Political scientists Laird and White (2024) concluded, voting for Democrats has been a behavioural norm in Black communities due to social pressure. Similarly, the “Red Wall” is a term used to describe traditional Labour-voting regions in the UK, as individuals are reluctant to go against the behavioural patterns within their community.

Rather than voting with the crowd, some people base their motivations on salience. It is the issue-centric approach behind choosing to vote, simplifying the complex decision-making process by spotlighting a policy or concern that deeply resonates with them.

But what if this pursuit of salience falls short, and one must choose between candidates that do not align with their key preferences? Loss aversion suggests that individuals tend to place greater weight on avoiding losses than on acquiring equivalent gains.

Suppose that we have 2 politicians; Bill and Phil:

• Bill is perceived by a voter as having policies detrimental to the community.
• Phil is seen as less favourable, but still raises some concerns.
• The voter experiences loss aversion, fearing the negative consequences of Bill winning.
• Despite reservations about Phil, the voter reluctantly votes for Phill to avoid the perceived losses associated with Bill winning.

In this context, people may be motivated to vote by the fear of Bill winning the election and implementing his detrimental policies. Hence leading them to vote solely driven by the loss aversion principle—an inclination to dodge undesirable outcomes at all costs.

Given these insights: What does it mean to cast a vote?

Voting is the act of expressing your preference in a democratic system, thus from a behavioural economic perspective, voting can be understood as an intricate decision-making process influenced by various cognitive biases, social factors, and incentives. By understanding these factors, we can better appreciate the significance of our individual choices.

Despite the Paradox of Voting raising the question of why you should bother voting at all; global voter turnout rates can range from 50% to over 80% (V-Dem, 2023), indicating that most people desire to vote. Although on the face of it, one vote may not directly change the outcome of an election, each ballot cumulatively contributes to the shaping of society’s future direction - just because you were not the first raindrop to flood the river, that does not mean you did not play a part in deepening its currents.

Alongside your vote, you could persuade three of your flatmates to vote for a particular politician in a general election. This is more effective than simply voting yourself, and it is certainly a more economical use of your time.

References

Clifford, C. (2020) ‘I don’t plan to vote ever again’: The psychology of why so many people don’t vote, even in 2020, CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/30/why-people-choose-not-to-vote.html

Downs, A. (1970) An economic theory of democracy : Downs, Anthony : Free download, borrow, and streaming, Internet Archive. Available at: https://archive.org/details/economictheoryof00down

Leonhardt, D. (2024) How peer pressure affects voting, The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/briefing/2024-black-voting.html

Riker, W.H. and Ordeshook, P.C. (2014) A theory of the calculus of voting*: American Political Science Review, Cambridge Core. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/1953324.

The British Election Study (2021) Age and voting behaviour at the 2019 general election, Age and voting behaviour at the 2019 General Election. Available at: https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/age-and-voting-behaviour-at-the-2019-general-election/

V-Dem. (2023) Voter turnout, Our World in Data. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/voter-turnout