Small Business Resources, Business Advice and Forms from AllBusiness.com

It's the economy stupid: Macroeconomics and federal elections in Australia

By Crosby, Mark
Publication: Economic Record
Date: Friday, December 1 2000
HEADNOTE

In this paper we examine the impact of macroeconomic conditions on Federal electoral performance in 20th-century Australia. We find that the electorate penalizes a government for high inflation and high unemployment relative

to trend. Real GDP growth and real wage growth were not found to have a systematic relationship with incumbent vote share at the Federal level. We also examine the voteshare of the Federal incumbent in three electorates: the safe Liberal seat of Kooyong, the safe Labor seat of Melbourne Ports, and the swinging seat of Latrobe. We find some evidence that unemployment affects electoral outcomes in the swinging seat, but no macroeconomic variables affect outcomes in the safe seats.

I Introduction

There is a large theoretical and empirical literature which examines the effect of elections and of partisan politics on macroeconomic performance. The two seminal articles in the field are Nordhaus (1975) and Hibbs (1977). Nordhaus posited that incumbent governments would try and stimulate the economy before elections to enhance their electoral performance. As a result, the macroeconomy would exhibit political cycles. Hibbs (1977) recognized that governments of different persuasions have differing desired economic outcomes and so the 'type' of government would determine macroeconomic conditions. Nordhaus's model gives rise to `political business cycles', while Hibbs's is associated with partisan cycles. Empirical support for these models is mixed, with recent examples of some international evidence being Alesina and Roubini (1992), while Crosby, Brown and Malady (1997) provide some Australian evidence.

In addition, make sure to read these articles: