IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/revint/v17y2022i4d10.1007_s11558-021-09442-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Voters Reward Politicians for Trade Liberalization? Evidence from South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Sung Eun Kim

    (Korea University)

  • Sujin Cha

    (Korea University)

Abstract

Do voters reward politicians for trade liberalization? We examine this question by analyzing voter responses in South Korea to the US-Korea Trade Agreement. Exploiting a change in party positions on the FTA over time, we examine the effects of different party positions on outcomes in the legislative and presidential elections. We find that voters who expect direct gains (losses) specifically from the treaty increase (decrease) support for the pro-trade party. However, voters in export-oriented industries do not reward politicians for a free trade agreement that does not directly affect their well-being. Our analysis of seven waves of individual-level panel survey data also demonstrates that a short-term change in a candidate’s position on the FTA influences voter decisions in the upcoming presidential election. The findings suggest that voter preferences with regard to trade can materialize into voting behavior when voters have a clear ex ante expectation of specific gains or losses from the trade policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Sung Eun Kim & Sujin Cha, 2022. "Do Voters Reward Politicians for Trade Liberalization? Evidence from South Korea," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 751-780, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:revint:v:17:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11558-021-09442-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11558-021-09442-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11558-021-09442-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11558-021-09442-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Autor & David Dorn & Gordon Hanson & Kaveh Majlesi, 2020. "Importing Political Polarization? The Electoral Consequences of Rising Trade Exposure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3139-3183, October.
    2. Timothy W. Taylor, 2015. "The Electoral Salience of Trade Policy: Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Welfare and Complexity," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 84-109, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Lena Maria Schaffer & Gabriele Spilker, 2019. "Self-interest versus sociotropic considerations: an information-based perspective to understanding individuals’ trade preferences," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 1266-1292, November.
    5. Mansfield, Edward D. & Mutz, Diana C., 2009. "Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 425-457, July.
    6. Alberto Alesina & Nouriel Roubini & Gerald D. Cohen, 1997. "Political Cycles and the Macroeconomy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262510944, December.
    7. Ahlquist, John S. & Clayton, Amanda B. & Levi, Margaret, 2014. "Provoking Preferences: Unionization, Trade Policy, and the ILWU Puzzle," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 33-75, January.
    8. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 11, pages 227-263, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Scheve, Kenneth F. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2001. "What determines individual trade-policy preferences?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 267-292, August.
    10. Hong, Ji Yeon & Paik, Christopher, 2021. "Hate thy communist neighbor: Protestants and politics in South Korea," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 707-723.
    11. Rho, Sungmin & Tomz, Michael, 2017. "Why Don't Trade Preferences Reflect Economic Self-Interest?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(S1), pages 85-108, April.
    12. Kim, Sung Eun & Margalit, Yotam, 2021. "Tariffs As Electoral Weapons: The Political Geography of the US–China Trade War," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 1-38, January.
    13. Irwin, Douglas A, 1994. "The Political Economy of Free Trade: Voting in the British General Election of 1906," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 75-108, April.
    14. Jensen, J. Bradford & Quinn, Dennis P. & Weymouth, Stephen, 2017. "Winners and Losers in International Trade: The Effects on US Presidential Voting," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(3), pages 423-457, July.
    15. Guisinger, Alexandra, 2009. "Determining Trade Policy: Do Voters Hold Politicians Accountable?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 533-557, July.
    16. Margalit, Yotam, 2011. "Costly Jobs: Trade-related Layoffs, Government Compensation, and Voting in U.S. Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 166-188, February.
    17. Sung Eun Kim & Yotam Margalit, 2017. "Informed Preferences? The Impact of Unions on Workers' Policy Views," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(3), pages 728-743, July.
    18. Jeffrey J. Schott & Scott C. Bradford & Thomas Moll, 2006. "Negotiating the Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement," Policy Briefs PB06-4, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Cevat G. Aksoy & Sergei Guriev & Daniel S. Treisman, 2018. "Globalization, Government Popularity, and the Great Skill Divide," NBER Working Papers 25062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Rickard, Stephanie, 2022. "Economic geography, politics, and the world trade regime," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113857, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Harms, Philipp & Steiner, Nils, 2019. "The China Shock and the Nationalist Backlash against Globalization: Attitudinal Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203506, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2021. "How issue framing shapes trade attitudes: Evidence from a multi-country survey experiment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Lake, James & Nie, Jun, 2023. "The 2020 US Presidential election and Trump’s wars on trade and health insurance," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Ida Bastiaens & Evgeny Postnikov, 2020. "Social standards in trade agreements and free trade preferences: An empirical investigation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 793-816, October.
    7. John Kuk & Deborah Seligsohn & Jiakun Jack Zhang, 2022. "The partisan divide in U.S. congressional communications after the China shock," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 494-526, July.
    8. Jieun Lee & Iain Osgood, 2019. "Exports, jobs, growth! Congressional hearings on US trade agreements," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Nils D. Steiner & Philipp Harms, 2020. "Local Trade Shocks and the Nationalist Backlash in Political Attitudes: Panel Data Evidence from Great Britain," Working Papers 2014, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    10. Sebastian Bustos & Jose Ramon Morales Arilla, 2019. "Globalization and Protectionism: AMLO’s 2006 Presidential Run," CID Working Papers 111a, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    11. Jaerim Choi & Sunghun Lim, 2023. "Tariffs, agricultural subsidies, and the 2020 US presidential election," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(4), pages 1149-1175, August.
    12. Philipp Harms & Nils D. Steiner, 2023. "Attitudes towards Globalization: A Survey," Working Papers 2305, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. James Lake & Jun Nie, 2022. "The 2020 US Presidential Election and Trump's Trade War," CESifo Working Paper Series 9669, CESifo.
    14. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto H. & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2019. "Trade Attitudes in Latin America: Evidence from a Multi-Country Survey Experiment," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9603, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Christian Dippel & Robert Gold & Stephan Heblich & Rodrigo Pinto, 2017. "Instrumental Variables and Causal Mechanisms: Unpacking the Effect of Trade on Workers and Voters," CESifo Working Paper Series 6816, CESifo.
    16. Adam William Chalmers & Lisa Maria Dellmuth, 2015. "Fiscal redistribution and public support for European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 386-407, September.
    17. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    18. Yann Algan & Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou & Evgenia Passari, 2017. "The European Trust Crisis and the Rise of Populism," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 48(2 (Fall)), pages 309-400.
    19. Thiemo Fetzer & Carlo Schwarz, 2021. "Tariffs and Politics: Evidence from Trump’s Trade Wars," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(636), pages 1717-1741.
    20. Blanchard, Emily J. & Bown, Chad P. & Chor, Davin, 2024. "Did Trump’s trade war impact the 2018 election?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).

    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:spr:revint:v:17:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11558-021-09442-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.