IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v682y2019i1p139-154.html

How Intergenerational Mobility Shapes Attitudes toward Work and Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Bettina Schuck
  • Jennifer Shore

Abstract

Past experiences and expectations about the future shape how people think about work and welfare. Given the uncertainty many young people face when entering the labor market, we investigate whether 1) young peoples’ experiences of social mobility and 2) their future mobility expectations impact their attitudes regarding the meaning of work and welfare. Drawing on the concepts of self-interest and deservingness, we examine how both the experiences and expectations of intergenerational social mobility influence the ways in which young adults view the so-called moral dimension of work and welfare. Results of logistic regression analyses of around 11,000 young adults in eleven countries suggest that the relationship between mobility and individuals’ views on work and welfare varies depending on the dimension of mobility (economic and social origins, for example), with expected future mobility exerting a stronger effect on attitudes than past mobility experiences. We find that self-interest, not empathy with one’s social origins, appears to be the primary driver of these attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Bettina Schuck & Jennifer Shore, 2019. "How Intergenerational Mobility Shapes Attitudes toward Work and Welfare," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 682(1), pages 139-154, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:682:y:2019:i:1:p:139-154
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716218822457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716218822457
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716218822457?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2000. "Who wants to redistribute?: The tunnel effect in 1990s Russia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 87-104, April.
    3. Moene, Karl Ove & Wallerstein, Michael, 2001. "Inequality, Social Insurance, and Redistribution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(4), pages 859-874, December.
    4. Bjørnskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina A.V. & Schnellenbach, Jan & Gehring, Kai, 2013. "Inequality and happiness: When perceived social mobility and economic reality do not match," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 75-92.
    5. Niemi, Richard G. & Craig, Stephen C. & Mattei, Franco, 1991. "Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1407-1413, December.
    6. Michael Bang Petersen, 2012. "Social Welfare as Small‐Scale Help: Evolutionary Psychology and the Deservingness Heuristic," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Alejandro Gaviria, 2007. "Social Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution in Latin America," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Fall 2007), pages 55-96.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Buscha, Franz, 2012. "Financial expectations and the ‘left–right’ political value scale: Testing for the POUM hypothesis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 460-464.
    11. 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.
    12. Carsten Jensen & Michael Bang Petersen, 2017. "The Deservingness Heuristic and the Politics of Health Care," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 68-83, January.
    13. Alesina, Alberto & Giuliano, Paola, 2009. "Preferences for Redistribution," IZA Discussion Papers 4056, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. 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.
    15. Arne L. Kalleberg & Peter V. Marsden, 2019. "Work Values in the United States: Age, Period, and Generational Differences," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 682(1), pages 43-59, March.
    16. Femke Roosma & John Gelissen & Wim Oorschot, 2013. "The Multidimensionality of Welfare State Attitudes: A European Cross-National Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 235-255, August.
    17. Duncan Gallie, 2019. "Research on Work Values in a Changing Economic and Social Context," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 682(1), pages 26-42, March.
    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. Quiñones, Mauricio & Posso, Christian M. & Mancera, Nicolas & Duque, Juan C. & Medina, Carlos A., 2023. "Intragenerational mobility and the concept of the equalization of longer-term incomes: An estimation for a developing country," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Tina Haußen, 2014. "Yours, mine & ours - The role of gender and (equivalence) income in preferences for redistribution and public spending," Jena Economics Research Papers 2014-033, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    3. Neher, Frank, 2012. "Preferences for redistribution around the world," Discussion Papers 2012/2, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    4. Laméris, Maite D. & Garretsen, Harry & Jong-A-Pin, Richard, 2020. "Political ideology and the intragenerational prospect of upward mobility," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    5. Rasmus Wiese & Steffen Eriksen, 2024. "Willingness to pay for improved public education and public healthcare systems: the role of income mobility prospects," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 55-76, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Holger Stichnoth, 2012. "Does immigration weaken natives’ support for the unemployed? Evidence from Germany," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 631-654, June.
    8. Cojocaru, Alexandru, 2014. "Prospects of upward mobility and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from the Life in Transition Survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 300-314.
    9. Frank Neher, 2012. "Preferences for Redistribution around the World," Working Papers 26/2012, Universidade Portucalense, Centro de Investigação em Gestão e Economia (CIGE).
    10. 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.
    11. Clark, Andrew E. & D'Ambrosio, Conchita, 2014. "Attitudes to Income Inequality: Experimental and Survey Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 8136, IZA Network @ LISER.
    12. Gilles Le Garrec, 2009. "Feeling guilty and redistributive politics," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-01066215, HAL.
    13. 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.
    14. Bernasconi, Michele, 2006. "Redistributive taxation in democracies: Evidence on people's satisfaction," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 809-837, December.
    15. Fabjan Lashi, 2017. "Customer Preference for Consuming Organic Red Meat - Case Study of Albanian Market," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 3, January -.
    16. Gilles Le Garrec, 2011. "Redistribution and the cultural transmission of the taste for fairness," Working Papers hal-01069524, HAL.
    17. Alesina, Alberto & Di Tella, Rafael & MacCulloch, Robert, 2004. "Inequality and happiness: are Europeans and Americans different?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 2009-2042, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Marc Suhrcke, 2001. "Preferences for Inequality: East vs. West," Papers inwopa01/17, Innocenti Working Papers.
    20. Andreoli, Francesco & Olivera, Javier, 2020. "Preferences for redistribution and exposure to tax-benefit schemes in Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:anname:v:682:y:2019:i:1:p:139-154. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.