Why do millions of eligible voters in India choose not to vote?

India, the nation which is often referred to as the world’s largest democracy , organised its 18th Lok Sabha elections in 2024 and as many as 968.8 million voters were registered to vote. This number was a significant increase from the statistics observed in 2019 wherein 912 million voters were registered. However, this increase did not facilitate a hike in voter turnout. Rather, the percentage of people voting came down to 65.79%—a fall from the record of 67.40% in 2019.

This fall was observed inspite of the multiple interventions orchestrated by the Election Commission of India (ECI) including the establishment of more polling centres and programmes like Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP). In fact, the voting rates in states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh stood at 56.19 per cent and 56.92 per cent amounting to the lowest turnouts. These numbers were a reflection of the complexity of the behavioural attitudes of voters and raised a range of questions. They were a  reflection of the fact that voter turnout is not merely dependent on facets like infrastructure or polling centres — other behavioural nudges play a role, too.

Understanding Behavioural Barriers

Principles of rational choice theories like the basic model, calculus voting model and minimax regret model build upon the rationality of the voting behavior.  They deduce that voters generally focus on the utilities and the outcomes of their actions, and usually prefer the action with the higher utility. However, behavioural economics reveals that cognitive biases significantly influence such decisions. One such bias is present bias, where individuals are willing to let go of the long-term benefits to escape any immediate inconveniences. The abstract sense of civic duty is outweighed by the efforts required to vote and the outcomes. 

This is further exacerbated with the challenges faced due to the structure of the voting systems. The design of the voting systems and its intermittent processes are found to cause cognitive overload and further disengagement from the electoral process. In fact, Indian voters are bombarded with political advertisements and campaigns during elections, with different forms of information, through sources like WhatsApp forwards, personalised SMS, and targeted phone calls. Additionally, there is another pan-India phenomenon which is plaguing the voter turnout i.e., urban apathy. The concept is a manifestation of the diminishing sense of civic engagement festering in the urban areas, which is a huge cause of concern.

However, inspite of these behavioural patterns and their associated causes there is a dearth of experimental research on how these instances can affect voter engagement. Thereby, the policies implemented often fail to produce the desired result.

Current Interventions and Their Limitations

As mentioned earlier, the ECI launched significant programs to address voter turnout in India. For instance, the Systematic Voters’ Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP) program utilised strategies like SMS reminders, election ambassadors, and local events to encourage voting. The program also encouraged social media influencers to promote their cause on social media platforms to exercise their right to vote as a symbol of civic pride, along with celebrity endorsements. Even food delivery platforms like Swiggy and Zomato were sending generic vote-day alerts.

These interventions were found to be effective in creating behavioural incentives to vote to exercise their civic duty, but they failed to address the individual-specific behavioural biases. The decision to vote is an amalgamation of various factors including personal views on democracy, profile of the candidates, political ideology etc. Urban apathy is one such concept with varied reasons, and its causes need to be identified and then solved accordingly.

They are also a culmination of the correlation of one’s own personality traits with the identification of the party, thereby affecting political behaviour as well. It is time that these facets are looked into and addressed while making policies to effectively deal with such concerns, while analyzing the repercussions of cognitive overload.

Innovative Behavioural Interventions

The fundamental equation of a political behavior establishes that preferences determine behavior. In order to moderate their preferences, a good option is to motivate people to plan for how, when, and where they will vote. People are more likely to accomplish their goals when they plan all the details. This idea is called implementation intention and increases your devotion to doing an action in behavioural psychology. A simple alert—including time and location details may increase the number of people who vote. This would create cognitive links between the intention and the expected outcome, with more chances of success.

Sending messages to non-voters after the election can also increase future election turnout. Regret messaging can be used to explain a high turnout in a particular constituency and tell non-voters they haven't been there. The premise is to use the psychological phenomenon of anticipated regret—the feeling of loss you feel in what you’ve missed. Regret messages remind non-voters to participate more in the upcoming elections by reminding them of the collective civic engagement in the past.

Also, it is necessary that India tries to understand the root causes of phenomena like urban apathy and voter disengagement. An in-depth analysis of such factors is necessary to understand the realities of the voter mindset so that effective policies may be construed accordingly.

Conclusion

These elections are the cornerstone of democracy and India being the world’s largest democracy should focus on the reasons behind such dampening statistics. Electoral apathy and disinterest should be a vital cause of concern. It should be duly understood that  increasing voter turnout in India is not  merely about improving the infrastructure but also about understanding behavioural factors that control electoral participation. We can achieve much more if India adopts personalised, evidence-based interventions to close the behavioural engagement gap. In a nation like India, even a modest increase through such initiatives can bring in significant changes.