Determinants of governmental redistribution: Income distribution, development levels, and the role of perceptions

Gründler, Klaus; Köllner, Sebastian

doi:10.1016/j.jce.2016.10.007

Cited by 61 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(68 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Income distributions are skewed to the right, implying that the median voter has an income below the mean and, therefore, is in favour of more redistribution (Janeba and Raff, 1997). Alesina and Rodrik (1994), Alemán and Woods (2018), Gründler and Köllner (2017), Mahler (2008), Houle (2017) and Scervini (2012) confirm this hypothesis.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundsupporting

confidence: 57%

The effects of economic globalisation and ethnic fractionalisation on redistribution

Pleninger

Sturm

2020

World Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the effect of economic globalisation on income redistribution and hypothesise that it depends on ethnic fractionalisation. In highly fractionalised countries, powerful ethnicities are able to extract globalisation-induced benefits, whereas their governments face substantial political obstacles when redistributing income between ethnic groups. Using the newly constructed KOF Globalisation Index, we find supportive evidence for the interactive effect of ethnic fractionalisation and de jure financial globalisation on redistribution. In particular, the total effect of de jure financial globalisation on redistribution is negative in highly fractionalised countries. Governments in these countries are apparently not only reluctant to offset potential consequences stemming from de jure financial globalisation, but they even reduce redistribution to lower levels.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundsupporting

confidence: 57%

The effects of economic globalisation and ethnic fractionalisation on redistribution

Pleninger

Sturm

2020

World Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Luebker (2014) shows that redistributive preferences translate into redistributive outcomes. 8 Gruendler and Koellner (2017) confirm that actual inequality increases redistribution (measured as the difference between market and net Gini coefficient), however, they find an even stronger link between perceived inequality and redistribution.…”

Section: Demand For Redistributionmentioning

confidence: 72%

I Perceive Therefore I Demand: The Formation of Inequality Perceptions and Demand for Redistribution

Bussolo¹,

Ferrer-i-Carbonell²,

Giolbas³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the link between inequality and demand for redistribution by looking at how individuals form their perceptions of inequality. Most of the literature analyzing demand for redistribution has focused on objective inequality, rather than subjective perceptions of inequality. However, a model that links demand for redistribution to subjective inequality is needed, given that recent empirical research has shown a growing gap between subjective and objective inequality. Using data from the International Social Survey Programme survey, the paper focuses on explaining individuals' formation of inequality perceptions using objective variables. The paper then studies the relationship between these perceptions and individuals' demand for redistribution. The analysis finds that objective macro variables are associated with individuals' perceptions of inequality, and that individual circumstances, some of which relate to self-interest, like age, educational attainment, and income, also play an important role. Perceptions of equality, in turn, are significatively correlated to demand for redistribution and seem to substitute for any effect of objective variables. This result suggests that contextual macro variables only affect individuals' demand for redistribution through their perceptions of equality and do not have a direct effect.

show abstract

“…On income inequality and redistribution, see alsoGründler and Köllner (2016) andBergh, Mirkina and Nilsson (2018). POTRAFKE | 971…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The globalisation–welfare state nexus: Evidence from Asia

Potrafke

2018

World Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How globalisation influences social expenditure has been examined for industrialised countries. Globalisation has often been shown to be positively associated with social expenditure in established industrialised countries, a finding that corroborates the compensation hypothesis. Scholars have focused on industrialised countries, because social expenditure is difficult to measure in developing countries. I use new data on social expenditure for Asian non‐OECD countries. Globalisation is measured by the new KOF Globalisation Index. My results do not suggest that globalisation influenced social expenditures in Asia. Neither do the results suggest that the nexus between globalisation and social expenditures varied across high‐income countries, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, and lower‐income Asian countries or across Asian regions. It is conceivable that Asian citizens did not demand increasing social support when globalisation proceeded rapidly because they enjoyed family and other private assistance. Asian countries also have weaker tax and labour market institutions than OECD countries and have therefore more difficulties in increasing social expenditure.

show abstract

Determinants of governmental redistribution: Income distribution, development levels, and the role of perceptions

Cited by 61 publications

References 52 publications

The effects of economic globalisation and ethnic fractionalisation on redistribution

The effects of economic globalisation and ethnic fractionalisation on redistribution

I Perceive Therefore I Demand: The Formation of Inequality Perceptions and Demand for Redistribution

The globalisation–welfare state nexus: Evidence from Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About