IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v80y2026i3p_2.html

Relative Exposure to Negative Economic Shocks, Racial Animus, and Voting

Author

Listed:
  • Jones, Daniel B.
  • Owen, Erica
  • Sung, Rena

Abstract

We examine how relative exposure to negative economic shocks across racial groups impacts racial animus and voting patterns. Guided by group position theory, we argue that when dominant groups experience greater economic harm than nondominant groups within the same labor markets, racial animus intensifies. In the US context, the historically central boundary between white and Black Americans provides the most meaningful test of this mechanism. Using data from US commuting zones (2000 to 2020), we focus on the impact of the China shock on anti-Black racial animus. We measure relative exposure as the gap in import exposure between white and Black workers. Our findings show that negative economic shocks disproportionately affecting white workers, compared to Black workers, lead to increased anti-Black animus and increased Republican presidential vote share, even when controlling for overall import exposure. Taken together, these findings suggest that it is economic decline relative to another group that generates racial animus and outwardly racist behavior, as well as influences political behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Jones, Daniel B. & Owen, Erica & Sung, Rena, 2026. "Relative Exposure to Negative Economic Shocks, Racial Animus, and Voting," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(3), pages -2, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:80:y:2026:i:3:p:_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818326101428/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:intorg:v:80:y:2026:i:3:p:_2. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.