Revisiting the evidence on trade policy preferences

Blonigen, Bruce A.

doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2011.05.010

Cited by 74 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies show that a majority of individuals oppose trade liberalization. For example, based on the 1992 round of the U.S. National Election Studies (NES) survey, Scheve and Slaughter (2001) find that 67% of the respondents are in favor of more restrictive trade policies, and similar patterns have been highlighted also by Blonigen (2011) when looking at more rounds of the NES survey, and by Mayda and Rodrik (2005) using a broad cross section of countries.…”

mentioning

confidence: 73%

Policymakers’ Horizon and Trade Reforms

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does policymakers' horizon affect their willingness to support economic reforms? Voting in the U.S. Congress provides an ideal setting to address this question. Differences between the House and Senate, in which members serve two-year and six-year mandates respectively, allow to examine the role of term length; the staggered structure of the Senate allows to compare the behavior of different "generations" of senators and study the impact of election proximity. Considering all major trade liberalization reforms undertaken by the U.S. since the early 1970's, we find that Senate members are more likely to support them than House members. However, inter-cameral differences disappear for third-generation senators, who face re-election at the same time as House members. Considering Senate votes alone, we find that the last generation is more protectionist than the previous two and this result holds both when comparing different senators voting on the same bill, as well as individual senators voting on different bills. Inter-generational differences disappear instead for senators who hold safe seats or have announced their retirement, indicating that the protectionist effect of election proximity is driven by legislators' fear of losing office. JEL classifications: D72, F10

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 73%

Policymakers’ Horizon and Trade Reforms

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the existing literature provides evidence that women do not prefer trade liberalization ( Mayda and Rodrik 2005;Blonigen 2011). An interesting paradox exists between the findings of this paper and some of the rest of the literature.…”

Section: Estimation Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Effect of International Trade on the Gender Wage and Educational Gaps

Yamamura

2016

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. were obtained even after controlling for endogenous bias. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may

show abstract

“…Uncovering women's attitudes towards free trade and protectionism during the interwar years is a more difficult task due to the dearth of individual level information available. As previously discussed, numerous modern studies of women's attitudes towards trade and protectionism have utilised public opinion surveys, with the general conclusion that women are more likely than men to favour protectionism, or at least are less likely to support free trade (O'Rourke & Sinnott, 2001;Mayda & Rodrik, 2005;Blonigen, 2011 (Walden, 1996). Through a probit analysis of these data, differing attitudes towards trade policy can be revealed.…”

Section: A Fortune Magazine Public Opinion Pollmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women voters and trade protectionism in the interwar years

Bromhead¹

2017

Oxford Economic Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. during the interwar period shows that when women were entitled to vote tariffs were, on average, higher. This result is supported by an instrumental variables approach using Protestantism as an instrument for female voting rights. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may

show abstract

Revisiting the evidence on trade policy preferences

Cited by 74 publications

References 14 publications

Policymakers’ Horizon and Trade Reforms

Policymakers’ Horizon and Trade Reforms

Long-Term Effect of International Trade on the Gender Wage and Educational Gaps

Women voters and trade protectionism in the interwar years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About