IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v8y2018i4p105-d178458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strong Welfare States Do Not Intensify Public Support for Income Redistribution, but Even Reduce It among the Prosperous: A Multilevel Analysis of Public Opinion in 30 Countries

Author

Listed:
  • M. D. R. Evans

    (Department of Sociology, Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station, Interdisciplinary Social Psychology Ph.D. Program, and Applied Statistics Program at the University of Nevada, University of Nevada, 1664 N. Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557, USA)

  • Jonathan Kelley

    (Department of Sociology and Interdisciplinary Social Psychology Ph.D. Program, University of Nevada, and International Survey Center, LLC, 18124 Wedge Parkway, Suite 1035, Reno, NV 89511, USA)

Abstract

How tightly linked are the strength of a country’s welfare state and its residents’ support for income redistribution? Multilevel model results (with appropriate controls) show that the publics of strong welfare states recognize their egalitarian income distributions, i.e., the stronger the welfare state, the less the actual and perceived inequality; but they do not differ from their peers in liberal welfare states/market-oriented societies in their preferences for equality. Thus, desire for redistribution bears little overall relationship to welfare state activity. However, further investigation shows a stronger relationship under the surface: Poor people’s support for redistribution is nearly constant across levels of welfarism. By contrast, the stronger the welfare state, the less the support for redistribution among the prosperous, perhaps signaling “harvest fatigue” due to paying high taxes and longstanding egalitarian policies. Our findings are not consistent with structuralist/materialist theory, nor with simple dominant ideology or system justification arguments, but are partially consistent with a legitimate framing hypothesis, with an atomistic self-interest hypothesis, with a reference group solidarity hypothesis, and with the “me-and-mine” hypothesis incorporating sociotropic and egotropic elements. Database: the World Inequality Study : 30 countries, 71 surveys, and over 88,0000 individuals.

Suggested Citation

  • M. D. R. Evans & Jonathan Kelley, 2018. "Strong Welfare States Do Not Intensify Public Support for Income Redistribution, but Even Reduce It among the Prosperous: A Multilevel Analysis of Public Opinion in 30 Countries," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-52, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:105-:d:178458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/8/4/105/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/8/4/105/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Headey, 2008. "Life Goals Matter to Happiness: A Revision of Set-Point Theory," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 213-231, April.
    2. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Cristian Pop-Eleches & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Guarantees of Freedom," NBER Working Papers 8759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2007. "Governance Matters VI: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators, 1996-2006," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4280, The World Bank.
    4. Lyle Scruggs & Thomas J. Hayes, 2017. "The Influence of Inequality on Welfare Generosity," Politics & Society, , vol. 45(1), pages 35-66, March.
    5. Brady, David & Bostic, Amie, 2015. "Paradoxes of Social Policy: Welfare Transfers, Relative Poverty, and Redistribution Preferences," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 80(2), pages 268-298.
    6. Lupu, Noam & Pontusson, Jonas, 2011. "The Structure of Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 316-336, May.
    7. Angélica Sánchez & Thomas Goda, 2018. "Corruption and the ‘Paradox of Redistribution’," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 675-693, November.
    8. Markus Knell & Helmut Stix, 2021. "Inequality, perception biases and trust," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(4), pages 801-824, December.
    9. Liza G. Steele, 2015. "Income Inequality, Equal Opportunity, and Attitudes About Redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(2), pages 444-464, June.
    10. Lijphart, Arend & Crepaz, Markus M. L., 1991. "Corporatism and Consensus Democracy in Eighteen Countries: Conceptual and Empirical Linkages," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 235-246, April.
    11. Kuhn, Andreas, 2015. "The Individual Perception of Wage Inequality: A Measurement Framework and Some Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 9579, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. David L. Featherman & Robert M. Hauser, 1973. "On the Measurement of Occupation in Social Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 2(2), pages 239-251, November.
    13. Joakim Palme & Walter Korpi, 1998. "The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries," LIS Working papers 174, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    14. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    15. Crepaz, Markus M. L. & Lijphart, Arend, 1995. "Linking and Integrating Corporatism and Consensus Democracy: Theory, Concepts and Evidence," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 281-288, April.
    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. Naoki Sudo, 2020. "Two Types of Support for Redistribution of Wealth: Consistent and Inconsistent Policy Preferences," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Liza G. Steele & Nate Breznau, 2019. "Attitudes toward Redistributive Policy: An Introduction," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, June.
    3. Joshua M. Pearce & Emily Prehoda, 2019. "Could 79 People Solarize the U.S. Electric Grid?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-27, March.
    4. M. D. R. Evans & Jonathan Kelley & C. G. E. Kelley & S. M. C. Kelley, 2020. "Income Inequality in the Great Recession did not Harm Subjective Health in Europe, 2003–2012," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(5), pages 1451-1473, November.

    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. Liza G. Steele & Nate Breznau, 2019. "Attitudes toward Redistributive Policy: An Introduction," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Choi, Gwangeun, 2019. "Revisiting the redistribution hypothesis with perceived inequality and redistributive preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 220-244.
    3. Xabier Garcia-Fuente, 2021. "The Paradox of Redistribution in Time. Social Spending in 53 Countries, 1967-2018," LIS Working papers 815, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    4. Bruch, Sarah K. & van der Naald, Joseph & Gornick, Janet C., 2022. "Poverty Reduction through Federal and State Policy Mechanisms: Variation Over Time and Across the U.S. States," SocArXiv jz5xp, Center for Open Science.
    5. Malte Luebker, 2019. "Can the Structure of Inequality Explain Fiscal Redistribution? Revisiting the Social Affinity Hypothesis," LIS Working papers 762, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    6. Elvire Guillaud & Matthew Olckers & Michaël Zemmour, 2020. "Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(2), pages 444-466, June.
    7. Michael Zemmour, 2015. "Economie politique du financement progressif de la protection sociale," Sciences Po publications 38, Sciences Po.
    8. Tom VanHeuvelen & Kathy Copas, 2018. "The Intercohort Dynamics of Support for Redistribution in 54 Countries, 1985–2017," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Ben Spies-Butcher & Ben Phillips & Troy Henderson, 2020. "Between universalism and targeting: Exploring policy pathways for an Australian Basic Income," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 502-523, December.
    10. Daoud, Adel & Johansson, Fredrik, 2019. "Estimating Treatment Heterogeneity of International Monetary Fund Programs on Child Poverty with Generalized Random Forest," SocArXiv awfjt, Center for Open Science.
    11. Ursula Dallinger, 2015. "Public redistribution and voter demand – The middle class as a modern Robin Hood?," LIS Working papers 630, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    12. Emile Cammeraat, 2020. "The relationship between different social expenditure schemes and poverty, inequality and economic growth," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(2), pages 101-123, April.
    13. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4596cgacdn8svqf2eog4tv7b2i is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Paula Blomqvist & Joakim Palme, 2020. "Universalism in Welfare Policy: The Swedish Case beyond 1990," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 114-123.
    15. Vincent Mahler & David Jesuit, 2004. "State Redistribution in Comparative Perspective: A Cross-National Analysis of the Developed Countries," LIS Working papers 392, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    16. Hauk, Esther & Oviedo, Mónica & Ramos, Xavier, 2022. "Perception of corruption and public support for redistribution in Latin America," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Kerem Gabriel Öktem, 2020. "The Welfare State as Universal Social Security: A Global Analysis," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 103-113.
    18. Aggarwal, Raj & Goodell, John W., 2013. "Political-economy of pension plans: Impact of institutions, gender, and culture," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1860-1879.
    19. Zachary Parolin & Linus Siöland, 2019. "Support for a Universal Basic Income: A Demand-Capacity Paradox?," Working Papers 1901, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    20. Louis Chauvel & Eyal Bar-Haim, 2016. "Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) and Varieties of Distributions (VoD): How Welfare Regimes Affect the Pre- and Post-Transfer Shapes of Inequalities?," LIS Working papers 677, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    21. Baxandall, Phineas, 2002. "Explaining differences in the political meaning of unemployment across time and space," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 469-502.

    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:gam:jsoctx:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:105-:d:178458. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.