Suchergebnisse

Abstract.Is there a conflict between the principles of representation by population and the representation of communities of interest? In Canada, the legal requirement to design electoral districts based on pre-existing regions and communities of interest has produced large discrepancies in district populations. Several authors claim that this situation has a deleterious effect on the representational experiences of those citizens living in more populous districts. This paper examines whether the population of an electoral district affects the quality of political representation in that district. We first present survey data characterizing the relationship between constituency population and citizens' reported satisfaction with democracy and contact with politicians and parties. We then present audit experimental evidence from Canada demonstrating that the helpfulness of politicians towards citizens is not conditioned on constituency population. Our data indicate that constituency population has no clear impact on the quality of representational experiences in Canada, suggesting that it is possible to ensure the effective representation of communities of interest without harming the overall quality of Canadian democracy.Résumé.Y a-t-il un conflit entre les principes de représentation par personne et de représentation de communautés d'intérêts? Au Canada, des écarts importants entre la population de certaines circonscriptions électorales résultent de l'obligation légale de les délimiter en tenant compte des régions et des communautés d'intérêts préexistantes. Plusieurs auteurs soutiennent que cette situation entraîne des effets néfastes sur la représentation vécue par les citoyens qui habitent les circonscriptions les plus populeuses. Dans cet article, nous vérifions si la taille de la population influence la qualité de la représentation politique dans une circonscription électorale. Nous présentons d'abord des données d'enquête sur la relation entre la taille de la population d'une circonscription et (i) la satisfaction des citoyens à l'égard de la démocratie, (ii) leurs contacts avec les politiciens et (iii) les communications qu'ils reçoivent des politiciens et des partis. Puis, nous présentons des données d'une expérience menée au Canada qui indiquent que la propension des politiciens à aider les citoyens n'est pas influencée par la taille de la population de leur circonscription. Nos résultats indiquent que la taille de la population d'une circonscription n'a pas d'effet clair sur la qualité de la représentation au Canada, suggérant ainsi qu'il est possible d'assurer la représentation efficace des communautés d'intérêts sans nécessairement nuire à la qualité globale de la démocratie canadienne.

Abstract
As governments increasingly adopt algorithms and artificial intelligence (AAI), we still know comparatively little about citizens' support for algorithmic government. In this paper, we analyze how many and what kind of reasons for government use of AAI citizens support. We use a sample of 17,000 respondents from 16 OECD countries and find that opinions on algorithmic government are divided. A narrow majority of people (55.6%) support a majority of reasons for using algorithmic government, and this is relatively consistent across countries. Results from multilevel models suggest that most of the cross-country variation is explained by individual-level characteristics, including age, education, gender, and income. Older and more educated respondents are more accepting of algorithmic government, while female and low-income respondents are less supportive. Finally, we classify the reasons for using algorithmic government into two types, "fairness" and "efficiency," and find that support for them varies based on individuals' political attitudes.

Canada's centennial anniversary in 1967 coincided with a period of transformative public policymaking. This period saw the establishment of the modern welfare state, as well as significant growth in the area of cultural diversity, including multiculturalism and bilingualism. Meanwhile, the rising commitment to the protection of individual and collective rights was captured in the project of a "just society." Tracing the past, present, and future of Canadian policymaking, Policy Transformation in Canada examines the country's current and most critical challenges: the renewal of the federation, managing diversity, Canada's relations with Indigenous peoples, the environment, intergenerational equity, global economic integration, and Canada's role in the world. Scrutinizing various public policy issues through the prism of Canada's sesquicentennial, the contributors consider the transformation of policy and present an accessible portrait of how the Canadian view of policymaking has been reshaped, and where it may be heading in the next fifty years.

Canada's centennial anniversary in 1967 coincided with a period of transformative public policymaking. This period saw the establishment of the modern welfare state, as well as significant growth in the area of cultural diversity, including multiculturalism and bilingualism. Meanwhile, the rising commitment to the protection of individual and collective rights was captured in the project of a "just society." Tracing the past, present, and future of Canadian policymaking, Policy Transformation in Canada examines the country's current and most critical challenges: the renewal of the federation, managing diversity, Canada's relations with Indigenous peoples, the environment, intergenerational equity, global economic integration, and Canada's role in the world. Scrutinizing various public policy issues through the prism of Canada's sesquicentennial, the contributors consider the transformation of policy and present an accessible portrait of how the Canadian view of policymaking has been reshaped, and where it may be heading in the next fifty years.

Does lawmaker behavior influence electoral outcomes? Observational studies cannot elucidate the effect of legislative proposals on electoral outcomes, since effects are confounded by unobserved differences in legislative and political skill. We take advantage of a unique natural experiment in the Canadian House of Commons that allows us to estimate how proposing legislation affects election outcomes. The right of noncabinet members to propose legislation is assigned by lottery. Comparing outcomes between those who were granted the right to propose and those who were not, we show that incumbents of the governing party enjoy a 2.7 percentage point bonus in vote total in the election following their winning the right to introduce a single piece of legislation, which translates to a 7% increase in the probability of winning. The causal effect results from higher likeability among constituents. These results demonstrate experimentally that what politicians do as lawmakers has a causal effect on electoral outcomes. Adapted from the source document.

"During the 2015 federal election, the Liberal Party pledged that, if elected, they would end the "first past the post" electoral system, where whichever candidate receives the most votes wins a riding even if they have not received a majority of all votes cast. After the Liberals assumed power, Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef followed up on their campaign promise by announcing a parliamentary committee to evaluate alternative electoral systems and to report their findings before the end of 2016. Challenging the idea that first past the post is obsolete, Should We Change How We Vote? urges Canadians to make sure they understand their electoral system before making drastic changes to it. The contributors to this volume assert that there is perhaps no institution more misunderstood and misrepresented than the Canadian electoral system - it is praised by some for ensuring broad regional representation in Ottawa, but criticized by others for allowing political parties with less than half the popular vote to assume more than half the seats in Parliament. They consider not only how the system works, but also its flaws and its advantages, and whether or not electoral reform is legitimate without a referendum. An essential guide to a crucial debate about the country's future, Should We Change How We Vote? asks if there are alternative reforms that would be easier to implement than a complete overhaul of the electoral system."--

AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on governments to engage in widespread cash transfers directly to citizens to help mitigate economic losses. Major and near-universal redistribution efforts have been deployed, but there is remarkably little understanding of where the mass public believes financial support is warranted. Using experimental evidence, we evaluate whether considerations related to deservingness, similarity, and prejudicial attitudes structure support for these transfers. A preregistered experiment found broad, generous, and nondiscriminatory support for direct cash transfers related to COVID-19 in Canada. The second study, accepted as a preregistered report, further probes these dynamics by comparing COVID-19-related outlays with nonemergency ones. We find that COVID-19-related spending was more universal as compared to a more generic cash allocation program. Given that the results were driven by the income of hypothetical recipients, we find broad support for disaster relief that is not means-tested or otherwise constrained by pre-disaster income.

Do gender stereotypes about agency affect how voters judge the governing performance of political executives? We explore this question using two conjoint experiments: one conducted in the United States and the other in Australia. Contrary to our expectations, we find no evidence in either experiment to suggest that female political executives (i.e., governors, premiers, and mayors) receive lower levels of credit than their male counterparts for positive governing performance. We do find evidence that female executives receive less blame than male executives for poor governing performance—but only in the U.S. case. Taken together, our findings suggest that the stereotype of male agency has only a limited effect on voters' retrospective judgments. Moreover, the results indicate that—when performance information is presented in unframed, factual terms—agentic stereotyping by voters does not, in itself, present a serious obstacle to the re-election of women in powerful executive positions.