Public Choice

, Volume 171, Issue 1–2, pp 99–117 | Cite as

The effect of a reduction in the opening hours of polling stations on turnout

Article

Abstract

In recent years, scholars and policymakers alike have discussed potential causes and consequences of low voter turnout. Election administration laws may provide means to encourage turnout that are of low cost and easily implementable. In this paper, I provide a policy evaluation of a change in an election administration law. Specifically, I estimate the causal effect of a reduction in the opening hours of polling stations on turnout. To this end, I make use of a policy change in a German state that cut the number of opening hours of polling stations. Using political units from an adjacent state with the same election dates and effectively the same election system as a control group in a difference-in-differences design, I find that reducing the opening hours of polling stations significantly reduces voter turnout.

Keywords

Turnout Polling stations Difference-in-differences Policy evaluation Natural experiment 

JEL Classification

C21 C23 D71 D72 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank the editor and three anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments and suggestions.

Supplementary material

11127_2016_399_MOESM1_ESM.doc (84 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 84 kb)

References

  1. Abraham, H. J. (1955). Compulsory voting. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ade, F. (2014). Do constitutions matter? Evidence from a natural experiment at the municipality level. Public Choice, 160(3–4), 367–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen, J. J., Fiva, J. H., & Natvik, G. J. (2014). Voting when the stakes are high. Journal of Public Economics, 110, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angrist, J., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ansolabehere, S., & Konisky, D. M. (2006). The introduction of voter registration and its effect on turnout. Political Analysis, 14(1), 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bechtel, M. M., & Hainmueller, J. (2011). How lasting is voter gratitude? An analysis of the short- and long-term electoral returns to beneficial Policy. American Journal of Political Science, 55(4), 851–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). How much should we trust difference-in-difference estimates. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 249–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burden, B. C., & Neiheisel, J. R. (2013). Election administration and the pure effect of voter registration on turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cameron, A. C., & Miller, D. L. (2015). A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. Journal of Human Resources, 50(2), 317–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Card, D., & Krueger, A. B. (1994). Minimum wages and employment: a case study of the fast-food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. American Economic Review, 84(4), 772–793.Google Scholar
  11. Charles, K. K., & Stephens, M. (2013). Employment, wages, and voter turnout. American Economic Journal, 5(4), 111–143.Google Scholar
  12. Dean, W. (1965). The changing shape of the American political universe. American Political Science Review, 59(1), 7–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dhillon, A., & Peralta, S. (2002). Economic theories of voter turnout. Economic Journal, 112, 332–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Donald, S. G., & Lang, K. (2007). Inference with difference-in-differences and other panel data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(2), 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  16. Driscoll, J., & Kraay, A. (1998). Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 549–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dropp, K. A. (2012). Polling place hours and voter turnout. New York: Mimeo.Google Scholar
  18. Egger, P. H., & Radulescu, D. M. (2012). Family policy and the number of children: Evidence from a natural experiment. European Journal of Political Economy, 28, 524–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fiva, J. H., & Folke, O. (2016). Mechanical and psychological effects of electoral reform. British Journal of Political Science, 46, 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fowler, A. (2013). Electoral and policy consequences of voter turnout: Evidence from compulsory voting in Australia. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 8, 159–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Franklin, M. N. (2001). Electoral Participation. In R. G. Niemi & H. F. Weisberg (Eds.), Controversies in voting behavior (4th ed., pp. 83–99). Washington: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  22. Funk, P. (2010). Social incentives and voter turnout: Evidence from the Swiss mail ballot system. Journal of the European Economic Association, 8(5), 1077–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garmann, S. (2016). Concurrent elections and turnout: Causal estimates from a German quasi-experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 126, 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Geys, B. (2006). Explaining voter turnout: A review of aggregate-level research. Electoral Studies, 25, 637–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ghosal, S., & Lockwood, B. (2009). Costly voting when both information and preferences differ: Is turnout too high or too low? Social Choice and Welfare, 33, 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gronke, P., Galanes-Rosenbaum, E., & Miller, P. A. (2007). Early voting and turnout. PS, 40(4), 639–645.Google Scholar
  27. Hodler, R., Luechinger, S., & Stutzer, A. (2015). The effects of voting costs on the democratic process and public finances. American Economic Journal, 7(1), 141–171.Google Scholar
  28. Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust standard errors for panel data sets with cross-sectional dependence. Stata Journal, 7, 281–312.Google Scholar
  29. Jaitman, L. (2013). The causal effect of compulsory voting laws on turnout: Does skill matter? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 92, 1–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kobach, K. W. (1993). Recent developments in Swiss direct democracy. Electoral Studies, 12(4), 342–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krasa, S., & Polborn, M. (2009). Is mandatory voting better than voluntary voting? Games and Economic Behavior, 66, 275–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lijphart, A. (1997). Unequal participation: Democracy’s unresolved dilemma. American Political Science Review, 91(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lo Prete, A. & Revelli, F. (2014). Voter turnout and city performance, Working papers 10, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.Google Scholar
  34. Matsusaka, J. G. (1995). Explaining voter turnout patterns: an information theory. Public Choice, 84, 91–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mattila, M. (2003). Why bother? Determinants of turnout in the European elections, Electoral Studies, 22, 449–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Montalvo, J. G. (2011). Voting after the bombings: A natural experiment on the effect of terrorist attacks on democratic elections. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(4), 1146–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morton, R. B., Muller, D., Page, L., & Torgler, B. (2015). Exit polls, turnout, and bandwagon voting: Evidence from a natural experiment. European Economic Review, 77, 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Potrafke, N. & Roesel, F. (2016). Opening hours of polling stations and voter turnout: evidence from a natural experiment, CESifo Working Paper No. 6036.Google Scholar
  39. Rubin, D. B. (1980). Discussion of “Randomization analysis of experimental data in the Fisher randomization test”. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 591–593.Google Scholar
  40. Spencer, D. M., & Markovits, Z. S. (2010). Long lines at polling stations? Observations from an Election Day field study, Election Law Journal, 9(1), 3–17.Google Scholar
  41. Wooldridge, J. M. (2004). On the robustness of fixed effects and related estimators in correlated random coefficient panel data models, cemmap Working Paper CWP04/04.Google Scholar
  42. Wooldridge, J. M. (2006). Cluster-sample methods in applied econometrics: an extended analysis, Working Paper, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  43. Ziebarth, N. (2010). Estimating price elasticities of convalescent care programmes. Economic Journal, 120, 816–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair for Public Finance and Economic PolicyUniversity of BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations