IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/14309.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Laws Shape Attitudes? Evidence from Same-Sex Relationship Recognition Policies in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Aksoy, Cevat Giray
  • Carpenter, Christopher S.
  • de Haas, Ralph
  • Tran, Kevin

Abstract

Understanding whether laws shape or simply reflect citizens' attitudes is important but empirically difficult. We provide new evidence on this question by studying the relation between legal same-sex relationship recognition policies (SSRRPs) and attitudes toward sexual minorities in Europe. Using data from the European Social Surveys covering 2002-2016 and exploiting variation in the timing of SSRRPs across countries, we show that legal relationship recognition is associated with statistically significant improvements in attitudes toward sexual minorities. These effects are widespread across demographic groups but are consistently larger for more conservative groups in countries with less gender equality. Our results suggest that laws can exert a powerful influence in shaping societal attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Carpenter, Christopher S. & de Haas, Ralph & Tran, Kevin, 2020. "Do Laws Shape Attitudes? Evidence from Same-Sex Relationship Recognition Policies in Europe," CEPR Discussion Papers 14309, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:14309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=14309
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy Besley & Anne Case, 2003. "Political Institutions and Policy Choices: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(1), pages 7-73, March.
    2. Anjali Adukia & Sam Asher & Paul Novosad, 2020. "Educational Investment Responses to Economic Opportunity: Evidence from Indian Road Construction," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 348-376, January.
    3. Simon Freyaldenhoven & Christian Hansen & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2019. "Pre-event Trends in the Panel Event-Study Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3307-3338, September.
    4. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    5. Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Carpenter, Christopher S. & Frank, Jeff & Huffman, Matt L., 2019. "Gay glass ceilings: Sexual orientation and workplace authority in the UK," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 167-180.
    6. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135-135.
    7. Ariella Kahn-Lang & Kevin Lang, 2020. "The Promise and Pitfalls of Differences-in-Differences: Reflections on 16 and Pregnant and Other Applications," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 613-620, July.
    8. Benjamin G. Bishin & Thomas J. Hayes & Matthew B. Incantalupo & Charles Anthony Smith, 2016. "Opinion Backlash and Public Attitudes: Are Political Advances in Gay Rights Counterproductive?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 625-648, July.
    9. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    10. Charles Kenny & Dev Patel, 2017. "Norms and Reform: Legalizing Homosexuality Improves Attitudes," Working Papers 465, Center for Global Development.
    11. Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Carpenter, Christopher S. & Frank, Jeff & Huffman, Matt L., 2018. "Gay Glass Ceilings: Sexual Orientation and Workplace Authority in the UK," IZA Discussion Papers 11574, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Robert Andersen & Tina Fetner, 2008. "Economic Inequality and Intolerance: Attitudes toward Homosexuality in 35 Democracies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 942-958, October.
    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. Chen, Shuai & van Ours, Jan C., 2020. "Symbolism matters: The effect of same-sex marriage legalization on partnership stability," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 44-58.
    2. D. Mark Anderson & Kyutaro Matsuzawa & Joseph J. Sabia, 2019. "Marriage Equality Laws and Youth Suicidal Behaviors," NBER Working Papers 26364, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Sansone, Dario, 2019. "Pink work: Same-sex marriage, employment and discrimination," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Fernández, Raquel & Parsa, Sahar & Viarengo, Martina, 2019. "Coming Out in America: AIDS, Politics, and Cultural Change," IZA Discussion Papers 12360, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Anderson, D. Mark & Matsuzawa, Kyutaro & Sabia, Joseph J., 2019. "Marriage Equality Laws and Youth Mental Health," IZA Discussion Papers 12819, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Gouveia, Filipe & Nilsson, Therese & Berggren, Niclas, 2020. "Religiosity and discrimination against same-sex couples: The case of Portugal's rental market," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Ganslmeier, Michael & Poutvaara, Panu, 2020. "Public Attention and Policy Responses to COVID-19 Pandemic," IZA Discussion Papers 13427, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    LGB attitudes; Public Opinion; Same-sex relationship recognition policies;

    JEL classification:

    • K36 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Family and Personal Law
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:cpr:ceprdp:14309. 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: (). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.