IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/eyvhj.html

All in this together: deservingness of government aid during the COVID-19 pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Bridgman, Aengus
  • Merkley, Eric

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on governments to engage in widespread cash transfers directly to citizens to help mitigate economic losses. These programs are major redistribution efforts aimed at a variety of sub-groups within society (the unemployed, those with children, those with pre-existing health conditions, etc.) and there has been remarkably little resistance to these government outlays. We employ a novel and pre-registered paired vignette experiment to assess support for government aid during the pandemic in a large, nationally representative sample. We evaluate whether the “normal” deservingness hierarchy and considerations of social affinity or material self-interest continue to drive preferences of Canadians regarding redistribution. We find only small deservingness considerations and little evidence that redistribution preferences are informed by similarity considerations. Instead, we find broad, generous, and non-discriminatory support for direct cash transfers during this period of crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Bridgman, Aengus & Merkley, Eric, 2020. "All in this together: deservingness of government aid during the COVID-19 pandemic," OSF Preprints eyvhj, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:eyvhj
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/eyvhj
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5eea2b5889c97e00471f7fdf/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/eyvhj?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. Javier Olivera, 2014. "Preferences for redistribution after the economic crisis," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 137-145.
    2. Christopher D. DeSante, 2013. "Working Twice as Hard to Get Half as Far: Race, Work Ethic, and America’s Deserving Poor," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(2), pages 342-356, April.
    3. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. 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.
    5. Fong, Christina, 2001. "Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 225-246, November.
    6. 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.
    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. repec:osf:osfxxx:eyvhj_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Cabeza Martínez, Begoña, 2023. "Social preferences, support for redistribution, and attitudes towards vulnerable groups," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Carlo Michael Knotz & Mia Katharina Gandenberger & Flavia Fossati & Giuliano Bonoli, 2022. "A Recast Framework for Welfare Deservingness Perceptions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 927-943, February.
    4. Monica Bozzano & Simona Scabrosetti, 2024. "What Drives Gender Gaps in Preferences for Redistribution? New Evidence from the European Social Survey," Working papers 118, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    5. Knotz, Carlo Michael & Gandenberger, Mia Katharina & Fossati, Flavia & Bonoli, Giuliano, 2021. "Public attitudes toward pandemic triage: Evidence from conjoint survey experiments in Switzerland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    6. repec:osf:osfxxx:upqs8_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bilal El Rafhi & Alexandre Volle, 2019. "The Effect of the Arab Spring on the Preferences for Redistribution in Egypt," Post-Print hal-02101392, HAL.
    8. Pei-Hsun Hsieh & Reuben Kline, 2025. "Deservingness heuristics drive redistributive choices, but weights on recipient effort vary," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    9. Monica Bozzano & Simona Scabrosetti, 2024. "Preferences for Redistribution: Two Decades of Gender Gaps and Generational Differences in Europe," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 70(3), pages 320-345.
    10. Charlotte Cavaillé, 2015. "Deservingness, Self-Interest and the Welfare State: Why Some Care More about Deservingness than Others and Why It Matters," LIS Working papers 652, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    11. 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.
    12. Andreea-Oana Iacobuță & Mihaela Ifrim, 2020. "Welfare Mentality as a Challenge to European Sustainable Development. What Role for Youth Inclusion and Institutions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-25, April.
    13. Begoña Cabeza & Koen Decancq, 2018. "Effort or Luck? Believing in the role of effort during the Spanish economic recession," Working Papers 1818, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    14. Peter Grand & Guido Tiemann, 2020. "The Deserving and the Undeserving: "Heuristic" or "Automatism"?," EconPol Working Paper 53, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    15. Pittau, Maria Grazia & Farcomeni, Alessio & Zelli, Roberto, 2016. "Has the attitude of US citizens towards redistribution changed over time?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PB), pages 714-724.
    16. Sophie Cetre & Max Lobeck & Claudia Senik & Thierry Verdier, 2018. "In search of unanimously preferred income distributions. Evidence from a choice experiment," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) halshs-01863359, HAL.
    17. Corneo, Giacomo & Fong, Christina M., 2008. "What's the monetary value of distributive justice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 289-308, February.
    18. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    19. Elias Naumann, 2018. "Tax Constraints, Social Policy Preferences, and Support for Redistribution," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-11, June.
    20. Liam Delaney & Francis O'Toole, 2008. "Preferences for specific social welfare expenditures in Ireland," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(12), pages 985-989.
    21. Michael Kurschilgen, 2023. "Moral awareness polarizes people’s fairness judgments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 339-364, August.
    22. Fehr, Ernst & Epper, Thomas & Senn, Julien, 2022. "Other-Regarding Preferences and Redistributive Politics," IZA Discussion Papers 15088, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:eyvhj. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.