On the eve of the 2012 presidential election, the Central Election Commission announced that election forecasts made by the Exchange of Future Events (Xfuture.org), an electronic exchange operated by National Chengchi University’s Center for Prediction Markets (CPM) and xPredict, fall within the scope of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Act (總統副總統選舉罷免法). As such, it instructed Xfuture to stop the forecasts the following day.
This was a questionable decision, from both an academic and a legal perspective. The commission must recognize the academic value of the predictions, it should not distort or misinterpret the law and neither should it confuse Xfuture election forecasts with opinion polls.
Xfuture is a futures exchange built upon a prediction markets mechanism. It is not an opinion poll: It is a predictive method used in the social sciences. The University of Iowa first created the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM) online futures market 26 years ago, and the concept has attracted the attention of the international academic world ever since. The Brookings Institute and the American Enterprise Institute in the US produce a joint special paper on prediction markets, and the University of Buckingham in the UK publishes the periodical Journal of Prediction Markets.
There are many exchanges around the world operated by major universities conducting prediction markets. In the US, for example, there are the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Virginia, to name a few. There are also privately operated prediction markets, such as the Hollywood Stock Exchange, the Microsoft Prediction Lab and those operated by Google and Hewlett-Packard, among others.
There is already a lot of academic research out there comparing the results obtained from the various prediction markets and those from opinion polls. Three authors from Iowa University, for example, compared their university’s prediction market with a total of 964 polls carried out by Gallup and the Harris Poll, as well as by major media outlets such as the New York Times, and how they fared in predicting the results of US presidential elections between 1988 and 2004. They found that the prediction markets had a 74 percent higher degree of accuracy than opinion polls.
In fact, when IEM ran a prediction of Taiwan’s 2000 presidential election, the first set of prediction market contract prices showed that Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), who later won the election, had a 55 percent chance of being elected compared with 38 percent for James Soong (宋楚瑜) and 28 percent for former vice president Lien Chan (連戰). The second set placed the respective values at 39 percent, 37.5 percent and 26 percent. In the end, the vote counts were 39.3 percent, 36.8 percent and 23.1 percent, respectively. The second set of predictions was virtually spot-on. That was people in the US predicting the outcome of a Taiwanese election: It was not an opinion poll.
In view of the strong capabilities of prediction markets, in 2008, 22 economists led by three Nobel prize winners published a paper in the renowned periodical Science entitled “The Promise of Prediction Markets.” The paper reiterated the predictive potential of the “wisdom of crowds,” and encouraged the use of this strong predictive capability to enhance the decision making ability of public and private institutions, thereby improving social welfare provision. It also recommended that these should be free of unnecessary government regulations or limitations.
Xfuture was established by the CPM. At present, it is the only prediction market exchange in the Chinese-speaking world. It deals with a broad range of topics, including politics, sports, finance, entertainment, fashion, science, social and international issues, with more than 180,000 people participating from more than 130 countries around the world, providing data to predict future events and trends to help with risk avoidance, including the risks of cross-strait political and economic exchanges.
Returning to the law, the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Act is very clear on what constitutes an opinion poll. An opinion poll must have an organizer or presider who oversees the surveying, a sampling method, a sample size, financial sources and an error value before it can be considered a poll. The people participating in prediction markets come from all over the world, so there is no organizer or presiding institution to speak of, nor sample size, and there is certainly no sampling method tying it all together. It is not, therefore, an opinion poll. The commission itself decided in 2004 that estimates of vote counts or vote percentages are not opinion polls.
Academics from overseas and in the CPM have already published a great deal of academic papers on prediction markets, comparing the differences between these and opinion polls. Also, Exchange of Future Events, a book published by Yuan-Liou Publishing, describes and evaluates in great depth how Xfuture works.
We hope that the commission will consider the academic and practical issues here, and get a better understanding of prediction markets. It should not retard progress in the country.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Development Studies.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with