IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aim/wpaimx/1518.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preference for Redistribution and Inequality Perception in China: Evidence from the CGSS 2006

Author

Listed:
  • Zhou Xun

    (Aix-Marseille University (Aix-Marseille School of Economics), CNRS & EHESS, GREQAM)

Abstract

In this paper I investigate the conditional correlation between preference for redistribution and the perceived role of "circumstances" and "effort" using the Chinese General Social Survey. I found very signi?cant correlations, thus validating the hypothesis of "sense of justice" for China. The migrant worker group who has dual identity (living/working in an urban area while being registered as a rural individual) is analysed in order to identify a discrimination effect (induced by the Chinese rural-urban segmentation policy) upon attitudes. However, being migrant is an endogenous variable to the attitude variables and the consistent estimate of this effect is much more important than the effect produced by a naïve estimate. The econometric model is a multivariate triangular LDV system with a binary endogenous explanatory variable estimated via a GHK simulator method. To implement the GHK calculations, I propose a parametric constraint to impose the positivity of the 3 × 3 correlation matrix. A generalisation for higher dimension cases is provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhou Xun, 2015. "Preference for Redistribution and Inequality Perception in China: Evidence from the CGSS 2006," AMSE Working Papers 1518, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    • Handle: RePEc:aim:wpaimx:1518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amse-aixmarseille.fr/sites/default/files/_dt/2012/wp_2015_-_nr_18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Afridi, Farzana & Li, Sherry Xin & Ren, Yufei, 2015. "Social identity and inequality: The impact of China's hukou system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 17-29.
    2. Thomas Piketty, 1995. "Social Mobility and Redistributive Politics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 551-584.
    3. Yi Chen & Frank A. Cowell, 2017. "Mobility in China," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 63(2), pages 203-218, June.
    4. Alesina, Alberto & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2005. "Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 897-931, June.
    5. Mourifié, Ismael & Méango, Romuald, 2014. "A note on the identification in two equations probit model with dummy endogenous regressor," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 360-363.
    6. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Belief in a Just World and Redistributive Politics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 699-746.
    7. Roland Benabou & Efe A. Ok, 2001. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 447-487.
    8. Fang, Cheng & Zhang, Xiaobo & Fan, Shenggen, 2002. "Emergence of urban poverty and inequality in China: evidence from household survey," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 430-443, December.
    9. Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-927, October.
    10. Fong, Christina, 2001. "Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 225-246, November.
    11. John Hendrickx, 2001. "Special restrictions in multinomial logistic regression," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 10(56).
    12. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    13. Ilja Neustadt, 2011. "Do Religious Beliefs Explain Preferences for Income Redistribution? Experimental Evidence," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 57(4), pages 623-652, December.
    14. Kanbur, Ravi & Zhang, Xiaobo, 1999. "Which Regional Inequality? The Evolution of Rural-Urban and Inland-Coastal Inequality in China from 1983 to 1995," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 686-701, December.
    15. Chesher, Andrew & Smolinski, Konrad, 2012. "IV models of ordered choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 33-48.
    16. Loukas Karabarbounis, 2011. "One Dollar, One Vote," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(553), pages 621-651, June.
    17. Demurger, Sylvie & Sachs, Jeffrey D. & Woo, Wing Thye & BAO, Shuming & Chang, Gene, 2002. "The relative contributions of location and preferential policies in China's regional development: being in the right place and having the right incentives," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 444-465, December.
    18. Scheve, Kenneth & Stasavage, David, 2006. "Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 255-286, July.
    19. Andrew CLARK & Emanuela D'ANGELO, 2010. "Upward Social Mobility, Well-being and;Political Preferences: Evidence from the;BHPS," Working Papers 338, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    20. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    21. Alesina, Alberto & Giuliano, Paola, 2009. "Preferences for Redistribution," IZA Discussion Papers 4056, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    22. Wilde, Joachim, 2000. "Identification of multiple equation probit models with endogenous dummy regressors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 309-312, December.
    23. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2003. "Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(3), pages 278-294, September.
    24. Freedman, David A. & Sekhon, Jasjeet S., 2010. "Endogeneity in Probit Response Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 138-150, April.
    25. Sen, Amartya, 1999. "Commodities and Capabilities," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195650389.
    26. Khan, Azizur Rahman & Riskin, Carl, 2001. "Inequality and Poverty in China in the Age of Globalization," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195136494.
    27. Romer, Thomas, 1975. "Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 163-185, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Belguise, Margot & Huang, Yuchen & Mo, Zhexun, 2023. "Non-Meritocrats or Conformist Meritocrats? A Redistribution Experiment in China and France," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1476, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    2. Peihua Deng & Ronnie Schöb, 2022. "Group-Specific Redistribution, Inequality, and Subjective Well-Being in China," CESifo Working Paper Series 9847, CESifo.
    3. Belguise, Margot & Huang, Yuchen & Mo, Zhexun, 2023. "Non-Meritocrats or Conformist Meritocrats? A Redistribution Experiment in China and France," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2308, CEPREMAP.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhou Xun, 2015. "Preference for Redistribution and Inequality Perception in China: Evidence from the CGSS 2006," Working Papers halshs-01143131, HAL.
    2. Pfarr Christian & Ulrich Volker, 2011. "Discrete-Choice-Experimente zur Ermittlung der Präferenzen für Umverteilung," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 62(3), pages 232-262, December.
    3. Neher, Frank, 2012. "Preferences for redistribution around the world," Discussion Papers 2012/2, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    4. Neher, Frank, 2012. "Preferences for Redistribution around the World," Working Papers 26/2012, Universidade Portucalense, Centro de Investigação em Gestão e Economia (CIGE).
    5. Pfarr, Christian, 2012. "Meltzer-Richard and social mobility hypothesis: revisiting the income-redistribution nexus using German choice data," MPRA Paper 43325, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Andreas Georgiadis & Alan Manning, 2012. "Spend it like Beckham? Inequality and redistribution in the UK, 1983–2004," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 537-563, June.
    7. Cervellati, Matteo & Esteban, Joan & Kranich, Laurence, 2010. "Work values, endogenous sentiments redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 612-627, October.
    8. Elvire Guillaud, 2013. "Preferences for redistribution: an empirical analysis over 33 countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 11(1), pages 57-78, March.
    9. Kuhn, Andreas, 2011. "In the eye of the beholder: Subjective inequality measures and individuals' assessment of market justice," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 625-641.
    10. Cruces, Guillermo & Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Tetaz, Martin, 2013. "Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 100-112.
    11. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09hacc56d41 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Elvire Guillaud, 2011. "Preferences for redistribution : an empirical analysis," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00594072, HAL.
    13. Neustadt, Ilja & Zweifel, Peter, 2011. "Income redistribution: how to divide the pie?," MPRA Paper 35427, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Javier Olivera, 2015. "Preferences for redistribution in Europe," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Eiji Yamamura, 2021. "Information of income position and its impact on perceived tax burden and preference for redistribution: An Internet Survey Experiment," Papers 2106.11537, arXiv.org.
    16. Ilja Neustadt & Peter Zweifel, 2010. "Is the Welfare State Sustainable? Experimental Evidence on Citizens’ Preferences for Redistribution," SOI - Working Papers 1003, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    17. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09hacc56d41 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09iak4384sp is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Großer, Jens & Reuben, Ernesto, 2013. "Redistribution and market efficiency: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 39-52.
    20. Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay & Joan Esteban, 2007. "Redistributive Taxation and PublicExpenditures," STICERD - Distributional Analysis Research Programme Papers 95, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    21. Alberto Alesina & Guido Cozzi & Noemi Mantovan, 2012. "The Evolution of Ideology, Fairness and Redistribution," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(565), pages 1244-1261, December.
    22. Elvire Guillaud, 2008. "Preferences for redistribution: a European comparative analysis," PSE Working Papers halshs-00586260, HAL.
    23. Alston, Lee J. & Melo, Marcus Andre & Mueller, Bernardo & Pereira, Carlos, 2013. "Changing social contracts: Beliefs and dissipative inclusion in Brazil," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 48-65.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    preference for redistribution; inequality perceptions; conditional correlation; Hukou and migrant worker; binary endogenous; GHK simulator;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C36 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • D19 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Other
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aim:wpaimx:1518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gregory Cornu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/amseafr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.