IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v42y2020i3p434-454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Polarization in US Food Policy Opinions

Author

Listed:
  • Christina Biedny
  • Trey Malone
  • Jayson L. Lusk

Abstract

Many maintain that the US political climate has become more charged with partisan beliefs over the past decade, although little is known about whether this partisan divide can be observed in food policy opinions. This article aims to determine whether Democrat and Republican food policy opinions diverged between 2011 and 2018. We find evidence of the contrary; partisan public opinions on food and agriculture policies have actually converged, with both major parties exhibiting a preference toward heightened government intervention. Our results indicate that voters preferring more government intervention in food policies have become more numerous in the Republican Party for issues including animal welfare and affordable food. However, once we include Independents and other third parties in our sample, we find that the variance between food policy opinions has increased for many policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina Biedny & Trey Malone & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "Exploring Polarization in US Food Policy Opinions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(3), pages 434-454, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:42:y:2020:i:3:p:434-454
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13053
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13053?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. Heckelman, Jac & Dinan, John, 2013. "Empirical Evidence Regarding Regional Political Convergence in the United States," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 43(2).
    2. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Hetherington, Marc J., 2009. "Review Article: Putting Polarization in Perspective," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 413-448, April.
    4. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    5. Graham Kalton & Martin Collins & Lindsay Brook, 1978. "Experiments in Wording Opinion Questions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 27(2), pages 149-161, June.
    6. Bovay, John & Sumner, Daniel A., 2019. "Animal Welfare, Ideology, and Political Labels: Evidence from California’s Proposition 2 and Massachusetts’s Question 3," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(2), May.
    7. Ellison, Brenna D. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Briggeman, Brian C., 2011. "Taxpayer Preferences for Farm Policy and USDA Budget Expenditures," 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas 98597, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Bovay, John & Alston, Julian M., 2016. "GM Labeling Regulation by Plebiscite: Analysis of Voting on Proposition 37 in California," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    9. Ruben Durante & Paolo Pinotti & Andrea Tesei, 2019. "The Political Legacy of Entertainment TV," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(7), pages 2497-2530, July.
    10. Jayson L. Lusk, 2017. "Evaluating the Policy Proposals of the Food Movement," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 387-406.
    11. Krasa, Stefan & Polborn, Mattias K., 2018. "Political Competition in Legislative Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(4), pages 809-825, November.
    12. Ellison Brenna & Lusk Jayson L & Briggeman Brian, 2010. "Other-Regarding Behavior and Taxpayer Preferences for Farm Policy," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, October.
    13. John H. Evans, 2003. "Have Americans' Attitudes Become More Polarized?—An Update," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 84(1), pages 71-90, March.
    14. Nathan M. Jensen & Mi Jeong Shin, 2014. "Globalization and Domestic Trade Policy Preferences: Foreign Frames and Mass Support for Agriculture Subsidies," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 305-324, May.
    15. Hetherington, Marc J., 2001. "Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 619-631, September.
    16. Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2016. "Putting the Chicken Before the Egg Price: An Ex Post Analysis of California's Battery Cage Ban," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-15, September.
    17. SHOR, BORIS & McCARTY, NOLAN, 2011. "The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 530-551, August.
    18. Ellison, Brenna D. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2011. "Taxpayer Preferences For Usda Expenditures," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-6.
    19. Bryan Caplan, 2007. "Introduction to The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies," Introductory Chapters, in: The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies, Princeton University Press.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noé J. Nava & William Ridley & Sandy Dall'erba, 2023. "A model of the U.S. food system: What are the determinants of the state vulnerabilities to production shocks and supply chain disruptions?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 95-109, January.

    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. Hopkins, Kelsey A. & McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Schaefer, K. Aleks, 2022. "Resolving the reality gap in farm regulation voting models," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    2. Leung, Benson Tsz Kin, 2020. "Limited cognitive ability and selective information processing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 345-369.
    3. Colin A. Carter & K. Aleks Schaefer & Daniel Scheitrum, 2021. "Piecemeal Farm Regulation and the U.S. Commerce Clause," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 1141-1163, May.
    4. Ugur Ozdemir & Ali Ihsan Ozkes, 2014. "Measuring Public Preferential Polarization," Working Papers hal-00954497, HAL.
    5. Razvan Vlaicu, 2018. "Inequality, participation, and polarization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(4), pages 597-624, April.
    6. Hassan Afrouzi & Carolina Arteaga & Emily Weisburst, 2022. "Can Leaders Persuade? Examining Movement in Immigration Beliefs," CESifo Working Paper Series 9593, CESifo.
    7. Marc S. Jacob & Barton E. Lee & Gabriele Gratton, 2023. "From Gridlock to Polarization," Discussion Papers 2023-11, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
      • Jacob, Marc S. & Lee, Barton E. & Gratton, Gabriele, 2024. "From gridlock to polarization," Working Papers 341, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    8. Cao, An N.Q. & Heckelei, Thomas & Ionici, Octavian & Robe, Michel A., 2024. "USDA reports affect the stock market, too," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    9. Corwin D. Smidt, 2017. "Polarization and the Decline of the American Floating Voter," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 365-381, April.
    10. Nunnari, Salvatore & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Dynamic Elections and Ideological Polarization," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 505-534, October.
    11. Stefan Linde, 2020. "The Politicization of Risk: Party Cues, Polarization, and Public Perceptions of Climate Change Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2002-2018, October.
    12. Ellison, Brenna & Bernard, John C. & Paukett, Michelle & Toensmeyer, Ulrich C., 2016. "The influence of retail outlet and FSMA information on consumer perceptions of and willingness to pay for organic grape tomatoes," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 109-119.
    13. Tanja Artiga González & Francesco Capozza & Georg D. Granic, 2022. "Can Cognitive Dissonance Theory Explain Action Induced Changes in Political Preferences?," CESifo Working Paper Series 9549, CESifo.
    14. Hopkins, Kelsey A. & McKendree, Melissa G. S. & Rice, Emma D., 2020. "Understanding the U.S. Publics’ Voting on Animal Welfare and Genetically Modified Organism Labeling Ballot Initiatives," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304519, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Jae Lee, 2015. "Assessing Mass Opinion Polarization in the US Using Relative Distribution Method," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 571-598, November.
    16. Marco Colagrossi & Claudio Deiana & Andrea Geraci & Ludovica Giua, 2022. "Hang up on stereotypes: Domestic violence and an anti‐abuse helpline campaign," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(4), pages 585-611, October.
    17. Anthony J. Evans, 2016. "The unintended consequences of easy money: How access to finance impedes entrepreneurship," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 233-252, September.
    18. Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Edward Majewski & Adam Wąs & Svein Ole Borgen & Peter Csillag & Michele Donati & Richard Freeman & Viet Hoàng & Jean-Loup Lecoeur & Maria Cecilia Mancini & An Nguyen & Monia , 2019. "Measuring the Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability of Short Food Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, July.
    19. Engelmann, Dirk, 2012. "How not to extend models of inequality aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 599-605.
    20. Francesca Maria Calamunci & Federico Fabio Frattini, 2023. "When Crime Tears Communities Apart: Social Capital and Organised Crime," Working Papers 2023.08, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    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:wly:apecpp:v:42:y:2020:i:3:p:434-454. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.