Preferences for redistribution and social structure

Original Paper
  • 146 Downloads

Abstract

We model inter-individual differences in preferences for redistribution as a function of (a) self-interest; (b) ideas about the deservingness of income differences due to luck, effort and talent; (c) subjective perceptions of the relative importance of these determinants for explaining the actual income distribution. Individuals base the latter on information obtained from their reference group. We analyse the consequences for redistributive preferences of homophilous reference group formation based on talent. Our model makes it possible to understand and integrate some of the main insights from the empirical literature. We illustrate with GSS data from 1987 how our model may help in structuring empirical work.

References

  1. Alesina A, Angeletos G-M (2005) Fairness and redistribution. Am Econ Rev 95(4):960–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alesina A, Cozzi G, Mantovan N (2012) The evolution of ideology, fairness and redistribution. Econ J 122:1244–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alesina A, Giuliano P (2011) Preferences for redistribution. In: Benhabib J, Bisin A, Jackson M (eds) Handbook of social economics, vol 1A. Elsevier, New York, pp 93–131Google Scholar
  4. Benabou R, Tirole J (2006) Belief in a just world and redistributive politics. Q J Econ 121(2):699–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cervellati M, Esteban J, Kranich L (2010) Work values, endogenous sentiments and redistribution. J Public Econ 94:612–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corneo G, Fong C (2008) What’s the monetary value of distributive justice. J Public Econ 92:289–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corneo G, Grüner. H-P (2000) Social limits to redistribution. Am Econ Rev 90:1491–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Corneo G, Grüner H-P (2002) Individual preferences for political redistribution. J Public Econ 83:83–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cruces G, Perez-Truglia R, Tetaz M (2013) Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: evidence from a survey experiment. J Public Econ 98:100–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Donder P, Hindriks J (2003) The politics of progressive income taxation with incentive effects. J Public Econ 87:2491–2505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eugster B, Lalive R, Steinhauer A, Zweimüller J (2011) The demand for social insurance: does culture matter? Econ J 121:F413–F448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fleurbaey M (2008) Fairness, responsibility and welfare. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fong C (2001) Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution. J Public Econ 82:225–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaertner W, Schokkaert E (2012) Empirical social choice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Georgiadis A, Manning A (2012) Spend it like Beckham? Inequality and redistribution in the UK, 1983–2004. Public Choice 151:537–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gimpelson V, Treisman D (2015) Misperceiving inequality. NBER: Working Paper 21174Google Scholar
  17. Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L (2006) Does culture affect economic outcomes? J Econ Perspect 20(2):23–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Isaksson A-S, Lindskog A (2009) Preferences for redistribution—a country comparison of fairness judgements. J Econ Behav Organ 72:884–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keely L, Tan C-M (2008) Understanding preferences for income redistribution. J Public Econ 92:944–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Konow J (2003) Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. J Econ Lit 41(4):1188–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lefranc A, Pistolesi N, Trannoy A (2009) Equality of opportunity and luck: definitions and testable conditions, with an application to income in France. J Public Econ 93:1189–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luttens R, Valfort M-A (2012) Voting for redistribution under desert-sensitive altruism. Scand J Econ 114(3):881–907Google Scholar
  23. Luttmer E (2001) Group loyalty and the taste for redistribution. J Polit Econ 109(3):500–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Luttmer E, Singhal M (2011) Culture, context, and the taste for redistribution. Am Econ J Econ Policy 3:157–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook J (2001) Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol 27:415–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meltzer A, Richard S (1981) A rational theory of the size of government. J Polit Econ 89:914–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Page L, Goldstein D (2016) Subjective beliefs about the income distribution and preferences for redistribution. Soc Choice Welf 47:25–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Piketty T (1995) Social mobility and redistributive politics. Q J Econ 110(3):551–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pittau M, Massari R, Zelli R (2013) Hierarchical modelling of disparities in preferences for redistribution. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 75(4):556–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roemer J (1993) A pragmatic theory of responsibility for the egalitarian planner. Philos Public Aff 22:146–166Google Scholar
  31. Roemer J (1998) Equality of opportunity. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Roemer J, Aaberge R, Colombino U et al (2003) To what extent do fiscal regimes equalize opportunities for income acquisition among citizens? J Public Econ 87:539–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roemer J, Trannoy A (2015) Equality of opportunity. In: Atkinson A, Bourguignon F (eds) Handbook of income distribution, vol 2A. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 217–300Google Scholar
  34. Schokkaert E, Truyts T (2014) Preferences for redistribution and social structure. CORE Discussion Paper 2014/1Google Scholar
  35. Yamamura E (2012) Social capital, household income, and preferences for income redistribution. Eur J Polit Econ 28:498–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of LeuvenLouvainBelgium
  2. 2.CORE, Université Catholique de LouvainLouvainBelgium
  3. 3.CEREC, Saint-Louis University–BrusselsBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations