Voters are deterred from casting a vote and more likely to vote strategically if their preferred choice is less competitive in their electoral district. We use 2019 Canadian Election Study data to show that respondents’ answers to a “how likely are you to vote” question depend on their estimate of their preferred party's local chances of winning, relative to other parties. This deterrent effect on turnout from the competitiveness of a voter's preferred party is concentrated among certain parties (NDP, Green, People's Party of Canada). Under first-past-the-post (FPTP), voters with particular policy perspectives are systematically deterred from voting, relative to other voters. Furthermore, we find that despite supporters of all parties having an incentive to vote strategically if their party is outside the top two in the district, strategic voting is heavily concentrated among voters who prefer parties other than the nationally most competitive two parties.
Canada is in the midst of a housing crisis that threatens the economic well-being of younger generations. One of the key barriers to ensuring the growth of the housing supply is local opposition to development, often called NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard). We use a pre-registered study on a nationally representative sample of adult Canadians to explore the values-based correlates of NIMBYism and opposition to local housing development, as well as opposition to public policies designed to increase the housing stock. We also evaluate whether values moderate the relative importance of housing characteristics (e.g., build size, proximity, affordable vs. market-rate housing) on support for local development using a conjoint experiment. We find that nativism and traditionalism are generally associated with opposition to housing development, while free-market attitudes and egalitarianism are associated with support, but the latter two value dimensions differ in their support for policy depending on the role of the state. We also show that Canadians are less supportive of rental developments and those that feature larger build sizes (e.g., high rise apartments) and that are more proximate to their own homes, but are more supportive of affordable (vs. market-rate) housing. The latter finding is concentrated among those with low levels of traditionalism, nativism, free-market support, and high levels of egalitarianism. Taken together, our results suggest a complicated and nuanced relationship between core values and attitudes toward housing, but one thing is abundantly clear: values matter.
Voters are deterred from casting a vote and more likely to vote strategically if their preferred choice is less competitive in the electoral district. We use 2019 Canadian Election Study data and find that respondents' answers to a 'How Likely are you to Vote' question depends on their estimate of their preferred party's local chances of winning, relative to other parties. We find this effect much more strongly among voters who believe voting is a "choice" rather than a "duty". Noting that this likely-to-vote measure is a more valid measurement of variation in propensity to turn out to vote than reported vote, we estimate that nearly 200,000 eligible voters in Canada in 2019 would have been "Certain to Vote" if they thought their preferred party was likely to win the district but were in fact not in that "Certain" category because they estimated their preferred party had less chance of winning than another party. The effect is much stronger when voters rank their party third or fourth in the district, rather than second. This deterrent effect on turnout from the competitiveness of voter's preferred party is concentrated among certain parties (NDP, Green, Peopyle's Party of Canada), meaning that voters with particular policy perspectives are systematically deterred from voting, relative to other voters. Furthermore, we find that strategic voting is also heavily concentrated among voters who prefer parties outside the nationally most competitive two parties.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.