The political economy of paternalism

Kai A. Konrad
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-024-01168-y
IF: 1.78
2024-05-23
Public Choice
Abstract:Some citizens place a high value on making decisions for themselves. Other citizens are happy to delegate decisions to a government agency. Such differences in political attitudes to paternalism can be explained in a strict rational-choice model with citizens' heterogeneous tastes in the economic sphere. Citizens with more eccentric tastes and with high decision-making abilities tend to favor a libertarian regime. If majority preferences matter, heterogeneity in economic preferences and analytical abilities can also explain whether the political regime is more paternalist or more libertarian. As decision-making skills are a learnable capability, the strategic complementarity of individuals' investments in analytical skills in the context of political regime outcomes suggests a feedback mechanism that can cause multiple expectations equilibria. Both a libertarian regime or a paternalist regime can emerge.
economics,political science
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper discusses the issue of paternalism in political economy. The author points out that some citizens tend to make decisions for themselves while others are willing to delegate decision-making power to the government. This difference in attitudes towards paternalism can be explained through a rigorous rational choice model that incorporates heterogeneous economic tastes. The paper suggests that citizens with more unique tastes and higher decision-making abilities are more inclined towards liberal systems. If the preferences of the majority are influential, then the differences in economic preferences and analytical abilities can also explain why government systems tend to be more paternalistic or liberal. The paper also mentions that decision-making skills are learnable abilities and the expected future political system will influence citizens' decisions to invest in these skills. In societies where the majority determines how paternalistic the political system should be, individual investments in analytical skills become strategically complementary, which may result in multiple equilibrium states of political system choices, that is, the formation of both paternalistic and liberal systems. The author also discusses various explanations in the existing literature regarding citizens' attitudes towards paternalism and proposes a theory that focuses on the trade-off between two types of information asymmetry: one being that individual taste differences are given more consideration in free societies, and the other being that government can exploit economies of scale in risk assessment through regulatory measures. The paper concludes by analyzing how citizens make choices between acquiring decision-making abilities, costs, and political systems, and explores how these choices shape the form of the political system. In summary, this paper attempts to address the question of why citizens have preferences for autonomy or non-autonomy in economic decision-making, and how these differences shape more paternalistic or liberal political systems.