Objectives The purpose of this study is to show that social distancing is a public good under the COVID-19 pandemic. Study design We apply economic theory to analyze a cross-sectional survey. Methods Economic theory is complemented with empirical evidence. An online survey of those aged 30-49 in Japan (n=2,177) was conducted between April 28 - May 7. Respondents were selected by quota sampling with regard to age group, gender and prefecture of residence. Our main figure shows the proportion of people who increased/did not change/decreased social distancing, relative to the level of altruism and sensitivity to public shaming. The results of OLS and logit models are shown in Supplementary Materials. Results Social distancing is a public good under the COVID-19 pandemic, for which the free-rider problem is particularly severe. Altruism and social norms are crucial factors in overcoming this problem. Using an original survey, we show that people with higher altruistic concerns and sensitivity to shaming are more likely to follow social-distancing measures. Conclusions Altruism and social norms are important for reducing the economic cost of the pandemic.

This article argues that the LDP manufactured its parliamentary dominance in postwar Japan by strategically altering specific facets of the electoral system. More generally, I demonstrate that intraparty politics play a crucial role in determining when and how electoral rules are changed. Despite widespread evidence that the LDP would win more seats under an SMP electoral formula, party leaders were repeatedly blocked from replacing the postwar MMD-SNTV system by intraparty incumbents, who feared that such a change would harm their individual reelection prospects. However, party leaders had greater leeway in altering rules that generated fewer intraparty conflicts. Between 1960 and1990, the LDP implemented approximately fifty changes to campaign regulations, most of which were aimed at enhancing the incumbency advantage of all rank-and-file MPs. Statistical tests confirm that absent pro-incumbent revisions to the electoral code, the LDP would have succumbed to declining public popularity and lost its majority at least a decade earlier.

No abstract

The postwar electoral dominance of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was founded on (1) strong incumbency advantage, which insulated its legislators from declining party popularity, and (2) the malapportionment of districts, which overvalued the electoral clout of the party's rural base. The LDP's demise in 2009 was due to the reversal of both factors, each of which was related to electoral reforms in the 1990s. First, I demonstrate that elections are becoming more “nationalized,” due to the growing weight that voters attach to the attractiveness of party leaders. Past performance has become a poorer predictor of incumbent reelection, giving way to large partisan swings that are increasingly correlated across districts. Second, malapportionment was reduced by almost half in 1994, meaning that rural votes are now worth fewer seats. As a result, parties that can attract swing voters nationally are better positioned for victory than those with a narrow regional base.