Abstract

Much economic analysis derives policy recommendations based on social welfare criteria intended to model policymakers' preferences. Yet, little is known about policymakers' normative views suitable for this use. Our behavioural experiment elicits German legislators' welfare criteria.

When resolving preference conflicts across individuals, they place substantially more importance on least-favoured alternatives than on most-favoured alternatives, contrasting with common aggregation mechanisms and the equal weighting inherent in utilitarianism. When resolving preference conflicts within individuals, politicians choose inconsistently with behavioural economists' most common approach to welfare analysis with time-inconsistent preferences. In distribution, politicians largely support the same welfare criteria as the public.

Materials

Machine-Readable Metadata

This page includes Schema.org ScholarlyArticle JSON-LD and alternate links in the HTML head for Markdown, LaTeX source bundles, Word-source text, and plain text when available.