IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ecogov/v25y2024i2d10.1007_s10101-024-00313-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for social insurance: the role of job security and risk propensity

Author

Listed:
  • Mauricio Bugarin

    (University of Brasilia)

  • Yasushi Hazama

    (Institute of Developing Economies, IDE-JETRO, Area Studies Center)

Abstract

In a 2003 article, Karl Moene (University of Oslo) and Michael Wallerstein (Yale University) demonstrated that wealthier citizens tend to support higher spending in social policies directed at the unemployed, while preferring lower spending in policies aimed at the employed. This paper reveals that these findings hinge on two key assumptions: that citizens have a coefficient of relative risk aversion (CRRA) greater than one, and that all citizens face an equal probability of job loss—a presumption which is not necessarily realistic. By incorporating the observation that job security tends to correlate positively with income, we demonstrate that affluent individuals may still advocate for reduced spending in unemployment policies, even when their CRRA exceeds one. Moreover, a significant shift in the distribution of job security—such as during an abrupt economic crisis—might engender greater societal support for these policies, contrary to their previous research. Finally, empirical data from recent Brazilian history provide analytical support for the theoretical assertions presented herein.

Suggested Citation

  • Mauricio Bugarin & Yasushi Hazama, 2024. "Preferences for social insurance: the role of job security and risk propensity," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 233-255, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ecogov:v:25:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10101-024-00313-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10101-024-00313-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10101-024-00313-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10101-024-00313-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrigo Schneider & Diloá Athias & Mauricio Bugarin, 2019. "Does enfranchisement affect fiscal policy? Theory and empirical evidence on Brazil," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 389-412, December.
    2. Rodrigo Schneider & Diloá Athias & Mauricio Bugarin, 2020. "Electronic voting and public spending: the impact of de facto enfranchisement on federal budget amendments in Brazil," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 299-315, January.
    3. Thomas Piketty, 1995. "Social Mobility and Redistributive Politics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 551-584.
    4. Maital, Shlomo, 1973. "Public Goods and Income Distribution: Some Further Results," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(3), pages 561-568, May.
    5. Samih Antoine Azar & Vera Karaguezian-Haddad, 2014. "Simulating the market coefficient of relative risk aversion," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-7, December.
    6. Roland Benabou & Efe A. Ok, 2001. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 447-487.
    7. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    8. Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-927, October.
    9. Moene, Karl Ove & Wallerstein, Michael, 2001. "Inequality, Social Insurance, and Redistribution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(4), pages 859-874, December.
    10. Steven R. Beckman & Buhong Zheng, 2007. "The Effects of Race, Income, Mobility and Political Beliefs on Support For Redistribution," Research on Economic Inequality, in: Inequality and Poverty, pages 363-385, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    11. Alberto Alesina & Stefanie Stantcheva & Edoardo Teso, 2018. "Intergenerational Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 521-554, February.
    12. Portugal, Adriana C. & Bugarin, Maurício, 2007. "Electoral Campaign Financing: The role of public contributions and party ideology," Insper Working Papers wpe_102, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    13. Choi, E. K. & Menezes, C. F., 1985. "On the magnitude of relative risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 125-128.
    14. Lupu, Noam & Pontusson, Jonas, 2011. "The Structure of Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 316-336, May.
    15. Cruces, Guillermo & Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Tetaz, Martin, 2013. "Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 100-112.
    16. Adriana Cuocco Portuga & Mauricio Bugarin, 2007. "Electoral Campaign Financing: The Role of Public Contributions and Party Ideology," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Fall 2007), pages 143-177, August.
    17. Robert E. Hall, 1970. "Why Is the Unemployment Rate So High at Full Employment?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 1(3), pages 369-410.
    18. Malte Luebker, 2014. "Income Inequality, Redistribution, and Poverty: Contrasting Rational Choice and Behavioral Perspectives," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 133-154, March.
    19. Zanetti, Francesco, 2014. "Housing and relative risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 23-25.
    20. Lionel Page & Daniel G. Goldstein, 2016. "Subjective beliefs about the income distribution and preferences for redistribution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(1), pages 25-61, June.
    21. Raj Chetty, 2006. "A New Method of Estimating Risk Aversion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1821-1834, December.
    22. Mauricio Bugarin, 2023. "Will democracy support switching from targeting to universalism?," Japanese Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(4), pages 372-394, October.
    23. Romer, Thomas, 1975. "Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 163-185, February.
    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. Campomanes, Ignacio P., 2024. "The political economy of inequality, mobility and redistribution," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    2. Malte Luebker, 2019. "Can the Structure of Inequality Explain Fiscal Redistribution? Revisiting the Social Affinity Hypothesis," LIS Working papers 762, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    3. Laméris, Maite D. & Garretsen, Harry & Jong-A-Pin, Richard, 2020. "Political ideology and the intragenerational prospect of upward mobility," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    4. Silvia Galdi & Anne Maass & Annalisa Robbiani, 2020. "The bright side of pessimism: Promoting wealth redistribution under (felt) economic hardship," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-34, December.
    5. Choi, Gwangeun, 2019. "Revisiting the redistribution hypothesis with perceived inequality and redistributive preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 220-244.
    6. Windsteiger, Lisa, 2022. "The redistributive consequences of segregation and misperceptions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Matías Strehl Pessina, 2022. "Sectores de altos ingresos y preferencias por redistribución," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 22-15, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    8. Torregrosa Hetland, Sara, 2017. "The political economy of peripheral tax reform : the Spanish fiscal transition," Lund Papers in Economic History 156, Lund University, Department of Economic History.
    9. Christopher Hoy & Franziska Mager, 2019. "Why are relatively poor people not more supportive of redistribution? Evidence from a survey experiment across 10 countries," Working Papers 489, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    10. Ernst Fehr & Thomas Epper & Julien Senn, 2022. "Other-regarding Preferences and Redistributive Politics," Working Papers hal-03506826, HAL.
    11. Nina Weber, 2023. "Experience of Social Mobility and Support for Redistribution: Accepting or Blaming the System?," ifo Working Paper Series 397, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    12. Guizzo Altube, Matías & Scartascini, Carlos & Tommasi, Mariano, 2023. "The Political Economy of Redistribution and (in)Efficiency in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13194, Inter-American Development Bank.
    13. Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M. & Krozer, Alice & Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora A. & de la Torre, Rodolfo & Velez-Grajales, Roberto, 2022. "Perceptions of inequality and social mobility in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Hope, David & Limberg, Julian & Weber, Nina, 2023. "Why do (some) ordinary Americans support tax cuts for the rich? Evidence from a randomised survey experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Javier Olivera, 2015. "Preferences for redistribution in Europe," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, December.
    16. Eiji Yamamura, 2021. "Information of income position and its impact on perceived tax burden and preference for redistribution: An Internet Survey Experiment," Papers 2106.11537, arXiv.org.
    17. Barton, Jared & Pan, Xiaofei, 2022. "Movin’ on up? A survey experiment on mobility enhancing policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    18. Vladimir Gimpelson & Daniel Treisman, 2018. "Misperceiving inequality," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 27-54, March.
    19. Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay & Joan Esteban, 2007. "Redistributive Taxation and PublicExpenditures," STICERD - Distributional Analysis Research Programme Papers 95, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    20. Fehr Ernst & Epper Thomas & Senn Julien, 2020. "Social preferences and redistributive politics," ECON - Working Papers 339, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Aug 2023.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk aversion; Job security; Social insurance; Economic inequality; Economic shocks; Preference ordering reversal;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:spr:ecogov:v:25:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10101-024-00313-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.