Abstract

The fact that people engage in collective action is one of the more puzzling aspects of political behavior. If one assumes that people rationally weigh benefits and costs, then analysis concludes that most people will choose inaction. Since we observe many more members of the public participate than predicted, there is a contradiction, often thought of as a paradox. We can, at least partially, solve the puzzle by acknowledging that people value relational goods. These are goods which cannot be acquired by a person in isolation, but which only exist by mutual agreement as part of a relationship with specific others; moreover, sharing the good provides part of the value. Friendship is a prime example of a relational good. Various pieces of empirical evidence support the view that relational goods account for much political participation. Moreover, understanding relational goods helps to clarify how and why group identity plays its substantial role in political behavior. Political participation is a form of collective action. The typical outcome is a public good. At the same time, each individual’s actions has a small to negligible probability of changing that outcome, even if collectively the actions are powerful. Why, then, would people take these actions? Many of the answers to this quandary, both those within a rational actor paradigm and those proceeding from sociology or psychology, end up assuming that people do so for reasons beyond making an actual difference in achieving the collective outcome. They may act from a sense of duty, or from the sheer enjoyment of the action, or out of habit. Empirical research has established some factors associated with higher participation. Notably, elites increase participation via a process labeled recruitment or mobilization, but exactly what this means for the individual citizen is under-specified. It is very difficult to argue plausibly that the public good of the outcome provides the reason for action. And the various private goods proposed as reasons end up generating ad hoc explanations.