Individual attitudes towards trade: Stolper-Samuelson revisited
This paper studies to what extent individuals form their preferences towards trade policies along the lines of the Stolper-Samuelson logic. We employ a novel international survey data set with an extensive coverage of high-, middle-, and low-income countries, address a subtle methodological shortcoming in previous studies and condition on aspects of individualenlightenment. We find statistically significant and economically large Stolper-Samuelson effects. In the United States, being high-skilled increases an individual's probability of favoring free trade by up to twelve percentage points, other things equal. In Ethiopia, the effect amounts to eight percentage points, but in exactly the opposite direction.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-tuebingen.de/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bruce A., Blonigen, 2011. "Revisiting the evidence on trade policy preferences," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 129-135, September.
- K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001.
"The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence,"
CEG Working Papers
20016, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," Trinity Economics Papers 200110, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- Hainmueller, Jens & Hiscox, Michael J., 2006.
"Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade,"
Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(02), pages 469-498, April.
- Jens Hainmueller & Michael J. Hiscox, 2005. "Learning to Love Globalization? Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade," International Trade 0505011, EconWPA.
- Edward J. Balistreri, 1997. "The Performance of the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek Model in Predicting Endogenous Policy Forces at the Individual Level," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, February.
- O'Rourke, Kevin Hjortshøj, 2003.
"Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards Globalization,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
4018, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Kevin H. O'Rourke, 2003. "Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards Globalization," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp07, IIIS.
- Kevin O'Rourke, 2003. "Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards Globalization," NBER Working Papers 9872, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lloyd A. Metzler, 1949. "Tariffs, the Terms of Trade, and the Distribution of National Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57, pages 1.
- Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
- Eugene Beaulieu & Ravindra A. Yatawara & Wei Guo Wang, 2005. "Who Supports Free Trade in Latin America?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(7), pages 941-958, 07.
- Ehrlich, Sean D., 2007. "Access to Protection: Domestic Institutions and Trade Policy in Democracies," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(03), pages 571-605, July.
- 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.
- Joshua J. Lewer & Hendrik Van den Berg, 2007. "Religion and International Trade," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 765-794, October.
- 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(03), pages 425-457, July.
- Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005.
"Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
- Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2001. "Why are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2960, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Anna Maria Mayda & Dani Rodrik, 2001. "Why Are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist Than Others?," NBER Working Papers 8461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Anna Maria Mayda (Georgetown University) and Dani Rodrik (Harvard University), 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," Working Papers gueconwpa~05-05-11, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
- Eugene Beaulieu & Michael Benarroch & James D. Gaisford, 2011. "Intra‐industry Trade Liberalization: Why Skilled Workers are More Likely to Support Free Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 579-594, 08.
- White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-38, May.
- Paul R. Krugman, 2008. "Trade and Wages, Reconsidered," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 39(1 (Spring), pages 103-154.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tuewef:11. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.