IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/econom/v91y2024i361p320-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When populists deliver on their promises: the electoral effects of a large cash transfer programme in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Gromadzki
  • Katarzyna Sałach
  • Michał Brzeziński

Abstract

We estimate the effects of the introduction of a large cash transfer programme on support for the ruling populist party in Poland. We exploit the variation at the municipal level in the annual cash transfer amount received per capita, and use a difference‐in‐differences research design to study the electoral effects of the transfer. Our results show that a cash transfer amount of $100 per capita translated into an increase in the vote share for the ruling party of nearly two percentage points. One‐third of additional votes came from new voters coming off the sidelines, and the remaining electoral gains were due to voters who had previously voted for other parties. The effects of the programme are persistent, as we see no decrease in the magnitude of effects seven years after the introduction.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Gromadzki & Katarzyna Sałach & Michał Brzeziński, 2024. "When populists deliver on their promises: the electoral effects of a large cash transfer programme in Poland," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(361), pages 320-345, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:econom:v:91:y:2024:i:361:p:320-345
    DOI: 10.1111/ecca.12505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12505
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ecca.12505?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gromadzki, Jan, 2023. "Labor Supply Effects of a Universal Cash Transfer," IZA Discussion Papers 16186, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Healy, Andrew J. & Persson, Mikael & Snowberg, Erik, 2017. "Digging into the Pocketbook: Evidence on Economic Voting from Income Registry Data Matched to a Voter Survey," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(4), pages 771-785, November.
    3. Ana L. De La O, 2013. "Do Conditional Cash Transfers Affect Electoral Behavior? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Mexico," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Toumas Pekkarinen & Kjell Salvanes & Matti Sarvimäki, 2021. "The Making of Social Democracy: The Economic and Electoral Consequences of Norway's 1936 Folk School Reform," Working Papers 2021-040, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    5. Marco Manacorda & Edward Miguel & Andrea Vigorito, 2011. "Government Transfers and Political Support," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 1-28, July.
    6. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    7. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    8. Cesar Zucco, 2013. "When Payouts Pay Off: Conditional Cash Transfers and Voting Behavior in Brazil 2002–10," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(4), pages 810-822, October.
    9. Sarah Baird & Craig McIntosh & Berk Özler, 2011. "Cash or Condition? Evidence from a Cash Transfer Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(4), pages 1709-1753.
    10. Brantly Callaway & Andrew Goodman-Bacon & Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna, 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with a Continuous Treatment," Papers 2107.02637, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    11. Michał Myck & Kajetan Trzciński, 2019. "From Partial to Full Universality: The Family 500+ Programme in Poland and its Labor Supply Implications," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 17(03), pages 36-44, October.
    12. Albanese, Giuseppe & Barone, Guglielmo & de Blasio, Guido, 2022. "Populist voting and losers’ discontent: Does redistribution matter?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    13. Abhijit Banerjee & Paul Niehaus & Tavneet Suri, 2019. "Universal Basic Income in the Developing World," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 959-983, August.
    14. Elinder, Mikael & Jordahl, Henrik & Poutvaara, Panu, 2015. "Promises, policies and pocketbook voting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 177-194.
    15. Conley, T. G., 1999. "GMM estimation with cross sectional dependence," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 1-45, September.
    16. Hilary Hoynes & Jesse Rothstein, 2019. "Universal Basic Income in the United States and Advanced Countries," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 929-958, August.
    17. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Rema Hanna & Gabriel E. Kreindler & Benjamin A. Olken, 2017. "Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 32(2), pages 155-184.
    18. Magda Iga & Kiełczewska Aneta & Brandt Nicola, 2020. "The effect of child benefit on female labor supply," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Emily Conover & Román A. Zárate & Adriana Camacho & Javier E. Baez, 2020. "Cash and Ballots: Conditional Transfers, Political Participation, and Voting Behavior," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 68(2), pages 541-566.
    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. Michał Brzeziński & Katarzyna Sałach-Dróżdż, 2023. "Prudent populists? The short-term macroeconomic impact of populist policies in Poland," Working Papers 2023-02, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    2. Maciej Wysocki & Cezary Wojcik & Andreas Freytag, 2022. "Populists and Fiscal Policy: The Case of Poland," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-013, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    3. Kühnast, Julia, 2022. "Growth regimes of populist governments: A comparative study on Hungary and Poland," IPE Working Papers 199/2022, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).

    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. Jan Gromadzki, 2021. "Labor supply effects of a universal cash transfer," IBS Working Papers 02/2021, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    2. Haseeb, Muhammad & Vyborny, Kate, 2022. "Data, discretion and institutional capacity: Evidence from cash transfers in Pakistan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    3. Ganslmeier, Michael, 2023. "Are Campaign Promises Effective?," EconStor Preprints 274069, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Ankush Goyal & Rajender Kumar, 2022. "Does Social Welfare Programmes Influence Households Trust in Local Administration and Their Political Participation? Evidence from the MGNREG Scheme in India," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 16(3), pages 602-617, December.
    5. Loewenthal, Amit & Miaari, Sami H. & Hoeffler, Anke, 2021. "Aid and Radicalization: The Case of Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza," IZA Discussion Papers 14265, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Marco Di Cataldo & Elena Renzullo, 2024. "EU Money and Mayors: Does Cohesion Policy affect local electoral outcomes?," Working Papers 2024: 02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    7. Lehmann, M. Christian & Matarazzo, Hellen, 2019. "Voters’ response to in-kind transfers: Quasi-experimental evidence from prescription drug cost-sharing in Brazil," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    8. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    9. Patricia Justino & Bruno Martorano, 2016. "Redistribution, inequality and political participation: Evidence from Mexico during the 2008 financial crisis," WIDER Working Paper Series 140, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Frey, Anderson, 2019. "Cash transfers, clientelism, and political enfranchisement: Evidence from Brazil," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 1-17.
    11. Dennis Egger & Johannes Haushofer & Edward Miguel & Paul Niehaus & Michael Walker, 2022. "General Equilibrium Effects of Cash Transfers: Experimental Evidence From Kenya," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2603-2643, November.
    12. Sebastian Galiani & Nadya Hajj & Patrick J. McEwan & Pablo Ibarrarán & Nandita Krishnaswamy, 2019. "Voter Response to Peak and End Transfers: Evidence from a Conditional Cash Transfer Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 232-260, August.
    13. Meya, Johannes & Poutvaara, Panu & Schwager, Robert, 2015. "Pocketbook voting and social preferences in referenda," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113120, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Travers Barclay Child & Elena Nikolova, 2017. "War and Social Attitudes: Revisiting Consensus Views," HiCN Working Papers 258, Households in Conflict Network.
    15. Cerqua, A. & Ferrante, C. & Letta, M., 2021. "Electoral Earthquake: Natural Disasters and the Geography of Discontent," GLO Discussion Paper Series 790, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    16. Meya, Johannes & Poutvaara, Panu & Schwager, Robert, 2020. "Pocketbook voting, social preferences, and expressive motives in referenda," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 185-205.
    17. Stephan Schneider & Sven Kunze, 2021. "Disastrous Discretion: Ambiguous Decision Situations Foster Political Favoritism," KOF Working papers 21-491, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    18. Dionne, Kim Yi & Horowitz, Jeremy, 2016. "The Political Effects of Agricultural Subsidies in Africa: Evidence from Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 215-226.
    19. Aidt, Toke & Asatryan, Zareh & Badalyan, Lusine, 2022. "Political consequences of consumer debt relief," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-049, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Cerqua, Augusto & Ferrante, Chiara & Letta, Marco, 2023. "Electoral earthquake: Local shocks and authoritarian voting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • H53 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Welfare Programs
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy

    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:bla:econom:v:91:y:2024:i:361:p:320-345. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.