IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0163763.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Attitude toward the Public Health Spending and Its Relationship with Voting Behavior in the 2012 South Korean Presidential Election

Author

Listed:
  • Sang Jun Eun
  • Jin Yong Lee
  • Hye-Min Jung
  • Jin-Seok Lee

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the factors influencing South Korean voters’ attitudes towards increasing public expenditure on health and to identify whether the issue of healthcare expenditure influenced candidate choice in the 2012 Korean presidential election. The study used the data from a survey conducted by the Institute of Korean Politics at Seoul National University immediately following the 2012 presidential election. The survey was completed by a nationwide sample of 1,200 people aged 19 or over using a face-to-face interview method and proportional quota sampling based on sex, age, and region. About 44.3% of respondents had a positive attitude toward increasing public health expenditure. There was no significant difference by the candidate they supported (conservative Park Geun-hye or liberal Moon Jae-in). In particular, even 44.9% of conservative supporters agreed with more spending. Politically neutral respondents (OR = 1.76, 90% CI 1.22–2.54) and strong conservative party supporters (OR = 1.53, 90% CI 1.05–2.25) were more likely to support public health expenditure increase compared to strong liberal party supporters. Also, respondents who believed that the economic gap in the country was widening were 1.91 times more likely to support an increase in public health expenditures. However, the issue of health expenditure had no influence on voters’ choice of presidential candidates, and in particular no negative effect of choice of the ruling (conservative) party’s candidate. Our results should be interpreted with care; one possible reason for this lack of effect might be that constituents voted along partisan lines regardless of their attitude to the welfare issue; another possible explanation might be the success of the “left click strategy” of the conservative party. That is, the conservatives did not reject economic democratization or social welfare expansion. Further research should be done to explain why attitudes to health spending did not directly affect choice of candidate.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang Jun Eun & Jin Yong Lee & Hye-Min Jung & Jin-Seok Lee, 2016. "Determinants of Attitude toward the Public Health Spending and Its Relationship with Voting Behavior in the 2012 South Korean Presidential Election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0163763
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0163763
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0163763&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0163763?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kang, Minah & Reich, Michael R., 2014. "Between credit claiming and blame avoidance: The changing politics of priority-setting for Korea's National Health Insurance System," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 9-17.
    2. Iversen, Torben & Soskice, David, 2001. "An Asset Theory of Social Policy Preferences," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(4), pages 875-893, December.
    3. Bartels, Larry M., 1993. "Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 267-285, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bruno Amable, 2009. "The Differentiation of Social Demands in Europe. The Social Basis of the European Models of Capitalism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 391-426, May.
    2. Elvire Guillaud, 2013. "Preferences for redistribution: an empirical analysis over 33 countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 11(1), pages 57-78, March.
    3. McNamara, Trent & Mosquera, Roberto, 2024. "The political divide: The case of expectations and preferences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Elizabeth Balbachevsky & Helena Sampaio & Cibele Yahn de Andrade, 2019. "Expanding Access to Higher Education and Its (Limited) Consequences for Social Inclusion: The Brazilian Experience," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(1), pages 7-17.
    5. Michaël Zemmour, 2015. "Economie politique du financement progressif de la protection sociale," Working Papers hal-01205217, HAL.
    6. Ahlquist, John S. & Breunig, Christian, 2009. "Country clustering in comparative political economy," MPIfG Discussion Paper 09/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    7. Busemeyer, Marius R. & Cattaneo, Maria Alejandra & Wolter, Stefan C., 2010. "Individual policy preferences for vocational versus academic education micro level evidence for the case of Switzerland," MPIfG Discussion Paper 10/11, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    8. Di Gioacchino, Debora & Sabani, Laura & Tedeschi, Simone, 2014. "Preferences for social protection: Theory and empirics," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 629-644.
    9. Di Tella, Rafael & MacCulloch, Robert, 2006. "Europe vs America: Institutional hysteresis in a simple normative model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(12), pages 2161-2186, December.
    10. CRISTE, Adina, 2013. "A General Assessment Of The Monetary Integration Process In Europe After Euro Adoption," Studii Financiare (Financial Studies), Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 17(4), pages 35-47.
    11. JaeYoul Shin, 2018. "Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 35-56, November.
    12. Guillaud, Elvire & Marx, Paul, 2013. "Preferences for Employment Protection and the Insider-Outsider Divide," IZA Discussion Papers 7569, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Ursula Dallinger, 2015. "Public redistribution and voter demand – The middle class as a modern Robin Hood?," LIS Working papers 630, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    14. Kristel Jacquier, 2012. "Public Support for European Integration : A comparative analysis," Post-Print halshs-00768907, HAL.
    15. Baptiste Françon & Michaël Zemmour, 2013. "What shapes the generosity of short- and long-term benefits? A political economy approach," Post-Print halshs-00821083, HAL.
    16. Jin, Olivia & Pyle, William, 2023. "Labor market hardships and preferences for public sector employment and employers: Evidence from Russia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 577-591.
    17. Raphael Boleslavsky & Christopher Cotton, 2015. "Information and Extremism in Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 165-207, February.
    18. Marques II, Israel, 2018. "Firms and social policy preferences under weak institutions : Evidence from Russia," BOFIT Discussion Papers 7/2018, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4596cgacdn8svqf2eog4tv7b2i is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Yeandle, Alex & Green, Jane & Le Corre, Tiphaine, 2024. "Economic hardship and support for redistribution: synthesising five themes in the literature," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125294, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    21. Elvire Guillaud, 2008. "Preferences for redistribution: a European comparative analysis," Working Papers halshs-00586260, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0163763. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.