Polity Atlas
Theory

Public choice theory

An approach that applies economic models of self-interested behaviour to voters, politicians and bureaucrats. Associated with Buchanan, Tullock, Downs and Olson; its findings on rent-seeking and rational ignorance are influential and disputed.

Compare
Source attached · not independently reviewedLast verified 2026-10-01 · revision 1 · 1 reviewersRevision historyЧитать на русском

Idea

Political actors are modelled like market actors: they pursue goals under constraints, so government failure deserves study alongside market failure.

Theory

Duncan Black and Kenneth Arrow laid social-choice foundations, Anthony Downs modelled party competition (1957), Mancur Olson showed that concentrated interests organise more easily than diffuse ones (1965), and Buchanan and Tullock's Calculus of Consent (1962) analysed constitutional rules. Tullock (1967) and Krueger (1974) developed the notion of rent-seeking. Buchanan received the 1986 Economic Sciences Prize for work on the contractual and constitutional bases of decision-making.

Real examples

  • Analyses of tariff and licensing lobbying as rent-seeking.
  • Studies of voter turnout and rational ignorance.
  • Proposals for constitutional limits on taxes and deficits drawing on constitutional political economy.

Critique

Green and Shapiro (1994) argued that many rational-choice applications in political science fail empirical tests or are unfalsifiable. Critics also say the self-interest assumption neglects ideas, norms and altruism, and may be self-fulfilling.

Results

Public choice reshaped how economists and political scientists analyse institutions, though how far its assumptions hold in practice is contested.

Related

Claims

EstablishedCLM-0215 · checked 2026-10-23

James Buchanan received the 1986 Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel for his development of the contractual and constitutional bases for the theory of economic and political decision-making.[1]

TheoryCLM-0216 · checked 2026-10-23

Public choice analyses political actors as pursuing their own interests under institutional constraints, and has produced models of party competition (Downs), constitutional choice (Buchanan and Tullock) and rent-seeking (Tullock, Krueger).[1][2][3][4][5]

DisputedCLM-0217 · checked 2026-10-23

How well rational-choice assumptions explain political behaviour is disputed; Green and Shapiro (1994) argued that many applications fail empirical tests, while proponents point to successes in predicting interest-group and electoral behaviour.[1][2]

Assess it in the Governance Explorer →

Revision history

  1. 2026-10-23rev 1 — Seed import