PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 30, 2009Comparative Political Studies493 citations

Risks and Redistribution

View Full Paper
PRPhilipp Rehm

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Much of the disagreement in the debate about globalization and its present or absent effects on the welfare state stems from competing assumptions about the individual-level determinants of redistributional preferences. This article calls for and provides testing of these causal mechanisms at the individual level. Traditional accounts suggest that risks at the industry level are important determinants of redistributional preferences. This article argues that risks at the occupational level should also be considered. A comprehensive new data set is used to test whether and what types of risks in the labor market play an important role in shaping preferences. Statistical analyses of public opinion surveys (European Social Survey) show strong evidence for the assumed causal mechanism. Contrary to much of the literature, but in line with this article's claims, it is the occupational, rather than the industry level, that is most important. The article lays out implications of these findings.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Philipp Rehm (2009) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d7b6af6cc86f5f11b8a861https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414008330595
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Preferences for Redistribution in the Land of Opportunities2001 · 67 citations
  2. 2Equilibrium social insurance with policymotivated parties2015 · 39 citations
  3. 3Self-interest and the common good: The impact of norms, selfishness and context in social policy opinions1997 · 156 citations