Many technologies face disapproval from some portion of the general public due to perceived risks or externalities. Individuals can respond to these controversial technologies either as consumers by choosing favorable alternatives or as voters by supporting regulation. We examine the relationship between willingness to pay a premium for products that avoid a controversial technology and willingness to vote in favor of a ban or mandatory labeling, with a focus on how this relationship is influenced by income and perceived risks. In a survey regarding genetically modified (GM) food, we find that the majority of respondents make consumer and voter choices that can be explained by a standard utility maximization framework. However, certain respondent characteristics are correlated with inconsistent choice patterns. In particular, low‐income voters appear to be overly supportive of regulation relative to their private willingness to pay. Voters who are uncertain about the safety of GM food also tend to be more in favor of regulation than their consumer choices would imply.

中文翻译：

---

支付意愿与投票意愿：消费者和选民避免转基因食品

由于感知到的风险或外部性，许多技术面临部分公众的反对。个人可以通过选择有利的替代方案作为消费者或通过支持监管作为选民来回应这些有争议的技术。我们研究了为避免使用有争议的技术的产品支付溢价的意愿与投票赞成禁令或强制性标签的意愿之间的关系，重点关注收入和感知风险如何影响这种关系。在一项关于转基因 (GM) 食品的调查中，我们发现大多数受访者做出消费者和选民的选择，这可以用标准效用最大化框架来解释。然而，某些受访者特征与不一致的选择模式相关。特别是，相对于他们的私人支付意愿，低收入选民似乎过度支持监管。不确定转基因食品安全性的选民也往往更倾向于监管，而不是他们的消费者选择所暗示的。