IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cid/wpfacu/118a.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Social Mobility Explains Populism, Not Inequality or Culture

Author

Listed:
  • Eric S. M. Protzer

    () (Center for Global Development)

Abstract

What explains contemporary developed-world populism? A largely-overlooked hypothesis, advanced herein, is economic unfairness. This idea holds that humans do not simply care about the magnitudes of final outcomes such as losses or inequalities. They care deeply about whether each individual’s economic outcomes occur for fair reasons. Thus citizens turn to populism when they do not get the economic opportunities and outcomes they think they fairly deserve. A series of cross-sectional regressions show that low social mobility – an important type of economic unfairness – consistently correlates with the geography of populism, both within and across developed countries. Conversely, income and wealth inequality do not; and neither do the prominent cultural hypotheses of immigrant stocks, social media use, nor the share of seniors in the population. Collectively, this evidence underlines the importance of economic fairness, and suggests that academics and policymakers should pay greater attention to normative, moral questions about the economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric S. M. Protzer, 2019. "Social Mobility Explains Populism, Not Inequality or Culture," CID Working Papers 118a, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
  • Handle: RePEc:cid:wpfacu:118a
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://growthlab.cid.harvard.edu/files/growthlab/files/2019-09-cid-fellows-wp-118-populism-revision-2021-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2016. "The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 205-240, October.
    2. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Xavier Ramos, 2014. "Inequality And Happiness," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 1016-1027, December.
    3. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    4. Marie Connolly & Miles Corak & Catherine Haeck, 2019. "Intergenerational Mobility Between and Within Canada and the United States," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(S2), pages 595-641.
    5. Hufe, Paul & Kanbur, Ravi & Peichl, Andreas, 2018. "Measuring Unfair Inequality: Reconciling Equality of Opportunity and Freedom from Poverty," IZA Discussion Papers 11601, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2017. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series dp-297, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    7. Miles Corak, 2013. "Income Inequality, Equality of Opportunity, and Intergenerational Mobility," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 79-102, Summer.
    8. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2188-2244.
    9. Chul-In Lee & Gary Solon, 2009. "Trends in Intergenerational Income Mobility," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(4), pages 766-772, November.
    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. Adrian Peralta-Alva & Agustin Roitman, 2018. "Technology and the Future of Work," IMF Working Papers 18/207, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Lankisch, Clemens & Prettner, Klaus & Prskawetz, Alexia, 2019. "How can robots affect wage inequality?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 161-169.
    3. Lucas Chancel, 2019. "Ten facts about income inequality in advanced economies," World Inequality Lab Working Papers hal-02876982, HAL.
    4. Lucas Chancel, 2019. "Ten facts about income inequality in advanced economies," Working Papers hal-02876982, HAL.
    5. Teimouri, Sheida & Zietz, Joachim, 2020. "Coping with deindustrialization: A panel study for early OECD countries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-41.
    6. Alan B. Krueger & Orley Ashenfelter, 2017. "Theory and Evidence on Employer Collusion in the Franchise Sector," Working Papers 614, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    7. Frederic Jenny, 2019. "Populism, Fairness and Competition: Should we Care and What Could we do?," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 280-297, September.
    8. Maarten Goos & Melanie Arntz & Ulrich Zierahn & Terry Gregory & Stephanie Carretero Gomez & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez & Koen Jonkers, 2019. "The Impact of Technological Innovation on the Future of Work," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2019-03, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    9. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    10. Michael Koch & Ilya Manuylov & Marcel Smolka, 2019. "Robots and firms," CESifo Working Paper Series 7608, CESifo.
    11. Michael Wasylenko, 2020. "New York State Economic Status of Regions and Development Programs," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 220, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
    12. Brinca, Pedro & Duarte, João B. & Holter, Hans A. & Oliveira, João G., 2019. "Investment-Specific Technological Change, Taxation and Inequality in the U.S," MPRA Paper 91960, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Carbonero, Francesco. & Ernst, Ekkehard & Weber, Enzo., 2018. "Robots worldwide the impact of automation on employment and trade," ILO Working Papers 995008793402676, International Labour Organization.
    14. Joshua Greenstein, 2020. "The Precariat Class Structure and Income Inequality among US Workers: 1980–2018," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 447-469, September.
    15. Greg Howard & Carl Liebersohn, 2019. "What Explains U.S. House Prices? Regional Income Divergence," 2019 Meeting Papers 1054, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. International Finance Corporation, 2015. "Affordable Higher Education in Mexico," World Bank Other Operational Studies 26052, The World Bank.
    17. Filippo Bertani & Marco Raberto & Andrea Teglio, 2020. "The productivity and unemployment effects of the digital transformation: an empirical and modelling assessment," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 329-355, November.
    18. Daniil P. Frolov & Anna V. Lavrentyeva, 2019. "Regulatory Policy for Digital Economy- Holistic Institutional Framework," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 15(4), pages 33-44.
    19. 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.
    20. Cristiano CODAGNONE & Giovanni LIVA & Egidijus BARCEVICIUS & Gianluca MISURACA & Luka KLIMAVICIUTE & Michele BENEDETTI & Irene VANINI & Giancarlo VECCHI & Emily RYEN GLOINSON & Katherine STEWART & Sti, 2020. "Assessing the impacts of digital government transformation in the EU: Conceptual framework and empirical case studies," JRC Working Papers JRC120865, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inclusive Growth; Populism;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cid:wpfacu:118a. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chuck McKenney). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ciharus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.