2000•American Economic ReviewRequires access

Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels

Pranab Bardhan, Dilip Mookherjee

Open publisher page 1,074 citations

Abstract

135 Despite the importance of this issue, not much systematic research appears to have been devoted to assessing the relative susceptibility of national and local governments to interestgroup capture. Here we describe a model of two-party electoral competition with “probabilistic” voting behavior and lobbying by specialinterest groups based on David Baron (1994) and Gene Grossman and Elhanan Helpman (1996) that helps identify determinants of relative capture at different levels of government. These include relative levels of voter awareness and interest-group cohesiveness, electoral uncertainty, electoral competition, heterogeneity of districts with respect to inequality, and the electoral system. While some of these uphold the traditional Madisonian presumption, others are likely to create a tendency for lower capture at the local level, so the net effect is theoretically ambiguous. This suggests that the extent of relative capture may be context-specific and needs to be assessed empirically.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

135 Despite the importance of this issue, not much systematic research appears to have been devoted to assessing the relative susceptibility of national and local governments to interestgroup capture. Here we describe a model of two-party electoral competition with “probabilistic” voting behavior and lobbying by specialinterest groups based on David Baron (1994) and Gene Grossman and Elhanan Helpman (1996) that helps identify determinants of relative capture at different levels of government. These include relative levels of voter awareness and interest-group cohesiveness, electoral uncertainty, electoral competition, heterogeneity of districts with respect to inequality, and the electoral system. While some of these uphold the traditional Madisonian presumption, others are likely to create a tendency for lower capture at the local level, so the net effect is theoretically ambiguous. This suggests that the extent of relative capture may be context-specific and needs to be assessed empirically.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1074 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

135 Despite the importance of this issue, not much systematic research appears to have been devoted to assessing the relative susceptibility of national and local governments to interestgroup capture. Here we describe a model of two-party electoral competition with “probabilistic” voting behavior and lobbying by specialinterest groups based on David Baron (1994) and Gene Grossman and Elhanan Helpman (1996) that helps identify determinants of relative capture at different levels of government. These include relative levels of voter awareness and interest-group cohesiveness, electoral uncertainty, electoral competition, heterogeneity of districts with respect to inequality, and the electoral system. While some of these uphold the traditional Madisonian presumption, others are likely to create a tendency for lower capture at the local level, so the net effect is theoretically ambiguous. This suggests that the extent of relative capture may be context-specific and needs to be assessed empirically.

Key concepts: Corporate governance, Economics, Public economics, Finance

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels — Research Paper | ScholarLens