Animal Welfare, Ideology, and Political Labels: Evidence from California's Proposition 2 and Massachusetts's Question 3

This article explains incentives that individuals face when deciding whether to support legislation on farm-animal treatment. We analyze precinct- and town-level voting patterns in two successful referendum votes (California's Prop 2 and Massachusetts's Question 3) that restricted animal-h...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of agricultural and resource economics 2019-05, Vol.44 (2), p.246-266
Hauptverfasser: Bovay, John, Sumner, Daniel A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This article explains incentives that individuals face when deciding whether to support legislation on farm-animal treatment. We analyze precinct- and town-level voting patterns in two successful referendum votes (California's Prop 2 and Massachusetts's Question 3) that restricted animal-housing practices. In both cases, support for the referendum was positively correlated with support for the Democratic candidate for president and negatively correlated with employment in agriculture; support for Question 3 increased with income. We use our regression results to predict how voters in other U.S. states would have voted had they faced similar referendums in 2008 and 2016.
ISSN:1068-5502
2327-8285
DOI:10.22004/ag.econ.287970