In situations where an electoral boycott is feasible, both voters and party leaders
sometimes exhibit apparently irrational behavior. We argue that in some cases this
can be explained by a strategic rationale. To exemplify this claim we use an
empirical puzzle: the Polish accession referendum only passed the turnout threshold
because of people who voted `no'. This is puzzling, since these people could easily
have stayed at home without hurting the collective interest of their group.
Conventional wisdom argues that the `no'-campaign fought an uphill battle and made
tactical errors. In addition, voters were supposedly not aware of their strategic
situation. We argue that some of these people did not oppose enlargement, but the
terms of the negotiation process between the EU and Poland. Microeconometric
evidence depicts the common characteristics of these moderately Eurosceptic voters.
Moreover, a stylized game-theoretic model shows that Eurosceptic party leaders have
behaved in an optimal way that produced benefits for these voters. We deduce a mixed
equilibrium which fits the politicians' behavior best.
Albi, A.2004. `EU Accession Referendums in the CEE Countries: Implications
for the EU Treaty Amendment Procedure.'Centrum Europejskie Natolin Warshaw
.
http://www.natolin.edu.pl/pdf/zeszyty/NatolinZeszyt10_AnelliAlbi.pdf
(accessed 25 January 2008).
2.
Bailer, S.
and
G. Schneider.2005. `Nash versus Schelling: Legislative Bargaining with and
without Domestic Constraints.' In The European Union Decides: The
Empirical Relevance of Policy Making Models, eds
Robert Thomsen
,
Frans N. Stokman
,
Christopher A. Achen
and
Thomas König
, pp. 153-77. Cambridge
: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Bates, Robert H.
,
Avner Greif
,
Margaret Levi
,
Jean-Laurent Rosenthal
and
Barry R. Weingast .1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University
Press.
4.
Benoit, K.
and
M. Laver.2006. Party Policy in Modern Democracies.
London:
Routledge.
5.
Bielasiak, J.2002.
`Determinants of Public Opinion Differences on EU Accession in Poland
.' Europe-Asia Studies54: 1241-66.
6.
Boeri, T.
,
Guiseppe Bertola
,
Herbert Brücker
,
Fabrizio Coricelli
,
Juan Dolado
,
John Fitzgerald
,
Angel de la Fuente
,
Pietro Garibaldi
,
Gordon Hanson
,
Juan Jimeno
,
Richard Portes
,
Gilles Saint-Paul
and
Antonio Spilimbergo .2002. `Who's Afraid of the Big Enlargement? Economic and Social
Implications of the European Union's Prospective Eastern Expansion.'CEPR (Centre for Economic Policy Research)
Policy Papers No. 7.
7.
Carrubba, C.J.1997.
`Net Financial Transfers in the European Union: Who Gets What and Why
?' Journal of Politics59(2):
469-96.
8.
Cbos2003a.
`Poparcie Dla Integracji Polski z Unia Europejska Tydzien Przed Referendum
Akcesyjnym.'Centrum Badania Opinii Spolecznej BS/95/2003.
9.
Cbos2003b.
`Po Referendum Akcesyjnym.'Centrum Badania Opinii Spolecznej BS/126/2003.
10.
Downs, A.1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New
York: Harper.
11.
Doyle, O.
and
J. Fidrmuc.2006.
`Who Is in Favor of Enlargement? Determinants of Support for EU Membership
in the Candidate Countries' Referenda
. ' European Journal of Political Economy22(3):
520-43.
12.
Eurobarometer.2003.2. Public Opinion in the Candidate Countries.
GallupInternational Hungary, online versionhttp://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/cceb/2003/2003.2_full_report_final.pdf
(accessed 25 January 2008).
13.
Funk, P.2005.
`Theory and Evidence on the Role of Social Norms in Voting.'Mimeograph.
14.
Gabel, M.J.1998.
`Public Support for European Integration: An Empirical Test of Five
Theories
.' Journal of Politics60/2: 333-54.
15.
Green, D.P.
and
I. Shapiro.1994. Pathologies of Rational Choice: A Critique of Applications in
Political Science. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
16.
Hug, S.
and
T. König.2002.
`In View of Ratification: Governmental Preferences and Domestic Constraints
at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference.'International Organization56/2:
447-76.
17.
Hug, S.
and
P. Sciarini.2000.
`Referendums on European Integration: Do Institutions Matter in the Voter's
Decision
?' Comparative Political Studies33(1):
3-36.
18.
Jasiewicz, Krzysztof.2006. `Knocking on Europe's Door: Public Opinion on the EU Accession
Referendum in Poland.' In Public Opinion, Party Competition and the
European Union in Eastern Europe, eds
R. Rohrschneider
and
S. Whitefield.New York:
Houndmills.
19.
Jasiewicz, K.
and
A. Jasiewicz-Betkiewicz .2003.
`Poland
. ' European Journal of Political Research42: 1052-7.
20.
Jasiewicz, K.
and
A. Jasiewicz-Betkiewicz .2004.
`Poland
. ' European Journal of Political Research43: 1106-15.
21.
Jungerstam-Mulders, S.2006. `Party System Change in Post-Communist EU Member
States.' In Post-Communist EU Member States: Parties and Party
Systems , ed.
S. Jungerstam-Mulders
, pp. 233-50.
Aldershot
, UK:
Ashgate
.
22.
König, T.
and
T. Bräuninger.2004.
`Accession and Reform of the European Union: A Game-Theoretical Analysis of
Eastern Enlargement and the Constitutional Reform
.' European Union Politics5(4):
419-39.
23.
Kopecky, P.
and
C. Mudde.2002.
`The Two Sides of Euroscepticism
. ' European Union Politics3(3):
297-326.
24.
Lenz, Hartmut
,
Han Dorussen
and
Hugh Ward.2007.
`Public Commitment Strategies in Intergovernmental Negotiations on the EU
Constitutional Treaty
.' Review of International Organizations3: 1559-65.
25.
Lewis, P.G.2001.
`The "Third Wave" of Democracy in Eastern Europe - Comparative Perspectives
on Party Roles and Political Development
.' Party Politics7: 543-65.
26.
Lupia, A.
and
M.D. McCubbins.1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to
Know?New York: Cambridge University
Press.
27.
Markowski, R.
and
J.A. Tucker.2005.
`Pocketbooks, Politics, and Parties: The 2003 Polish Referendum on EU
Membership
.' Electoral Studies24: 409-33.
Palfrey, T.R.
and
H. Rosenthal.1985.
`Voter Participation and Strategic Uncertainty
.' American Political Science Review79(1):
62-78.
30.
Putnam, R.1988.
`Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-level Games
.' International Organization42: 427-60.
31.
Riker, W.H.
and
P.C. Ordeshook.1968.
`A Theory of the Calculus of Voting
.' American Political Science Review62(1):
25-43.
32.
Satz, D.
and
J. Ferejohn.1994.
`Rational Choice and Social Theory
. ' The Journal of Philosophy91(2):
71-87.
33.
Schelling, T.1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University
Press.
34.
Schmitt, H.
and
J.J.A. Thomassen .2000.
`Dynamic Representation.'European Union Politics1(3):
318-39.
35.
Schneider, G.
and
P.A. Weitsman.1996.
`The Punishment Trap - Integration Referendums as Popularity
Contests.'Comparative Political Studies28(4):
582-607.
36.
Szczerbiak, A.2001.
`Polish Public Opinion: Explaining Declining Support for EU
Membership
.' Journal of Common Market Studies39: 105-22.
37.
Szczerbiak, A.2004.
`History Trumps Government Unpopularity: The June 2003 Polish EU Accession
Referendum.'West European Politics27(4):
671-90.
38.
Szczerbiak, A.
and
P. Taggart.2004.
`The Politics of European Referendum Outcomes and Turnout: Two Models
.' West European Politics27(4):
557-83.
39.
Taggart, P.
and
A. Szczerbiak.2002. `The Party Politics of Euroscepticism in EU Member and
Candidate States.' Opposing Europe Research Network Working Paper No.
6.
40.
Tucker, J.A.
,
Alexander C. Pacek
and
Adam J. Berinsky .2002.
`Transitional Winners and Losers: Attitudes toward EU Membership in
Post-Communist Countries.'American Journal of Political Science46(3):
557-71.
41.
Tverdova, Y.V.
and
Christopher J. Anderson.2004.
`Choosing the West? Referendum Choices on EU Membership in East-central
Europe.'Electoral Studies23: 185-208.
42.
Uhlaner, C.J.1989.
`Rational Turnout - the Neglected Role of Groups
. 'American Journal of Political Science33(2):
390-422.
43.
Ziemer, K.
and
C.-Y. Matthes.2004. `Das Politische System Polens.' In Die Politischen
Systeme Osteuropas, ed.
W. Ismayr
, pp. 189-246. Opladen:
Leske und Budrich.
