Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Abstract

The impact of federal policies often depends on fixed regional differences (economic, historical, geographical). Certain regions can therefore be seen as permanently benefiting from the federation and others as losing. We show that this distorts voting behaviour in two ways. First, voters strategically elect federal representatives that are extremely protective of regional interests. Second, they suboptimally invest in locally funded goods. This distortion is U-shaped in expected federal benefits. Lastly, we do not observe the usual race to be included in the federal coalition, which would reduce the distortion. We test these predictions on national and European Parliamentary elections since 1990, and find that extreme voting is indeed U-shaped: winning and losing states distort more than those in the middle. We conclude that federal political structures foment political polarisation, especially when federal decisions require large consensus. Loosening the ties between representatives and their constituency may mitigate this problem.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherBSE Working Papers
Pages1-68
Number of pages68
Publication statusPublished - 5 Jan 2021

Publication series

NameBSE Working Paper
No.1157

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

  • Federalism
  • Strategic Delegation
  • Political Extremism
  • Euroscepticism
  • Populism
  • Distorted Public Provision
  • EU Elections
  • Suboptimal Political Equilibrium

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Does the winner take it all? redistributive policies and political extremism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this