IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/146-ec-2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Higher Education Contribute to a Change in Attitudes to Government Price Control in Russia?

Author

Listed:
  • John V. Nye

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Maksym Bryukhanov

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Sergiy Polyachenko

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

Does the educational process itself transform an individual’s world outlook towards pro-market values in transition? Much evidence indicates that education correlates with liberal values. However, it is not clear whether this association is the result of selection into education or whether education itself makes people liberal as education and liberal values both are linked to unobservable characteristics such as cognitive abilities, household traits, and the social environment, implying biased ordinary least squares estimates. We employ unique data from 2 waves of the Russian Longitudinal Measurement Survey (RLMS) which contains individual attitudes towards government price control. To overcome the issue of the mutual correlation of liberal values, education, and predetermined and time stable characteristics (fixed effects), we use regressions in first-differences. A negative link between obtaining higher education and support for government price control is documented. The results are also robust to different indicators of the dependent variable and for different sub-samples. Additionally, based on a cross-section sample, we provide evidence that the psychodynamic channel of educational impact on pro-market attitudes is important: white-collar occupations can be considered as insurance against possible market price shocks. The liberal effect of education shows the importance of research on educational policy in the process of the formation of pro-market attitudes in Russia and in other transition economies.

Suggested Citation

  • John V. Nye & Maksym Bryukhanov & Sergiy Polyachenko, 2016. "Does Higher Education Contribute to a Change in Attitudes to Government Price Control in Russia?," HSE Working papers WP BRP 146/EC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:146/ec/2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://wp.hse.ru/data/2017/04/06/1168262890/146EC2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irina Denisova & Markus Eller & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "What do Russians think about transition?1," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 18(2), pages 249-280, April.
    2. Janina Frentzel‐Zagorska & Krzysztof Zagorski, 1993. "Polish public opinion on privatisation and State Interventionism," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 705-728.
    3. Anna Maria Mayda, 2006. "Who Is Against Immigration? A Cross-Country Investigation of Individual Attitudes toward Immigrants," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(3), pages 510-530, August.
    4. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    5. Caplan, Bryan, 2001. "What Makes People Think Like Economists? Evidence on Economic Cognition from the "Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy."," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 395-426, October.
    6. Hans Pitlik & Ludek Kouba, 2015. "Does social distrust always lead to a stronger support for government intervention?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 355-377, June.
    7. Hayo, Bernd, 2004. "Public support for creating a market economy in Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 720-744, December.
    8. Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2000. "Who wants to redistribute?: The tunnel effect in 1990s Russia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 87-104, April.
    9. Scheve, Kenneth F. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2001. "What determines individual trade-policy preferences?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 267-292, August.
    10. Duch, Raymond M., 1993. "Tolerating Economic Reform: Popular Support for Transition to a Free Market in the Former Soviet Union," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 590-608, September.
    11. Tor G Jakobsen & Ola Listhaug, 2012. "Issue ownership, unemployment and support for government intervention," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 26(3), pages 396-411, June.
    12. Plug, Erik J. S. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1998. "Similarity in response behavior between household members: An application to income evaluation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 497-513, August.
    13. Baron, Jonathan & Kemp, Simon, 2004. "Support for trade restrictions, attitudes, and understanding of comparative advantage," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 565-580, October.
    14. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Guse, A. Joseph, 2012. "Trust, perceptions of corruption, and demand for regulation: Evidence from post-socialist countries," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 292-303.
    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. Polyachenko Sergiy, 2016. "Do changes in social and economic characteristics affect attitude towards price control?," EERC Working Paper Series 16/05e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
    2. Gabriel Felbermayr & Toshihiro Okubo, 2022. "Individual preferences on trade liberalization: evidence from a Japanese household survey," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(1), pages 305-330, February.
    3. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    4. Kevin H. O'Rourke, 2003. "Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards GlobalisationInternational Financial Integration," Trinity Economics Papers 20038, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    5. Murard, Elie, 2017. "Less Welfare or Fewer Foreigners? Immigrant Inflows and Public Opinion towards Redistribution and Migration Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 10805, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. TOMIURA Eiichi & ITO Banri & MUKUNOKI Hiroshi & WAKASUGI Ryuhei, 2014. "Reciprocal Versus Unilateral Trade Liberalization: Comparing individual characteristics of supporters," Discussion papers 14067, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    7. Kevin H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2003. "Migration Flows: Political Economy of Migration and the Empirical Challenges," Trinity Economics Papers 20036, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    8. Hainmueller, Jens & Hiscox, Michael J., 2006. "Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(2), pages 469-498, April.
    9. O'Rourke, Kevin H. & Sinnott, Richard, 2006. "The determinants of individual attitudes towards immigration," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 838-861, December.
    10. Gordon H. Hanson & Kenneth Scheve & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2007. "Public Finance And Individual Preferences Over Globalization Strategies," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 1-33, March.
    11. Mayda, Anna Maria, 2008. "Why are people more pro-trade than pro-migration?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 160-163, December.
    12. TANAKA Ayumu & ITO Banri & JINJI Naoto, 2022. "Individual Preferences Toward Inward Foreign Direct Investment: A Conjoint Survey Experiment," Discussion papers 22005, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Barbara Bechter & Bernd Brandl & Gerhard Schwarz, 2009. "Determinanten der Einstellung zu wirtschaftspolitischen Maßnahmen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 37321.
    14. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsutsui, 2017. "Trade policy preference, childhood sporting experience, and informal school curriculum: Examination from the viewpoint of behavioral economics," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 17-25, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    15. Mauro Caselli & Andrea Fracasso & Silvio Traverso, 2020. "Globalization and electoral outcomes: Evidence from Italy," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 68-103, March.
    16. TOMIURA Eiichi & ITO Banri & MUKUNOKI Hiroshi & WAKASUGI Ryuhei, 2013. "Endowment Effect and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a survey on individuals," Discussion papers 13009, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    17. Simon Kemp, 2008. "Lay attitudes to trade with low-wage countries," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 335-343, April.
    18. Natalia Melgar, 2013. "Interaction Effects in Probit Models, Reinterpreting the Impact of Education on Attitudes towards Immigrants and Free-Trade," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 1013, Department of Economics - dECON.
    19. Stiftung Familienunternehmen (ed.), 2012. "Der Weg zu einer "Agenda 2030": Reformen zwischen objektiver Notwendigkeit und individueller Verweigerung," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 110562.
    20. Karakas, Leyla D. & Kim, Nam Seok & Mitra, Devashish, 2021. "Attitudes towards globalization barriers and implications for voting: Evidence from Sweden," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 851-877.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    market economy; values; education; Russia; attitudes; RLMS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • P10 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - General
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hig:wpaper:146/ec/2016. 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: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    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.