IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notnic/2024-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Non-meritocrats or choice-reluctant meritocrats? A redistribution experiment in China and France

Author

Listed:
  • Margot Belguise
  • Yuchen Huang
  • Zhexun Mo

Abstract

Recent experimental evidence contends that meritocratic ideals are mainly a Western phenomenon. Intriguingly, the Chinese public does not appear to differentiate between merit- and luck-based inequalities, despite China’s historical emphasis on meritocratic institutions. We propose that this phenomenon could be due to the Chinese public’s greater reluctance to make an active choice in realstake redistribution decisions. We run an incentivized redistribution experiment with elite university students in China and France, by varying the initial split of payoffs between two real-life workers to redistribute from. We show that, compared to French respondents, Chinese respondents consistently and significantly choose more non-redistribution across both highly unequal and relatively equal status quo scenarios. Additionally, we also find that Chinese respondents do differentiate between merit- and luck-based inequalities, and do not redistribute less than the French, excluding the individuals who engage in non-redistribution choices. Chinese respondents are also as reactive as the French towards scenarios with noisy signals of merit, such as inequalities of opportunities. Ultimately, we contend that the reluctance to make an active choice is indicative of diminished political agency to act upon redistribution decisions with real-life stakes, rather than apathy, inattention, having benefited from the status quo in Chinese society or libertarian preferences among the Chinese. Notably, our findings show that Chinese individuals’ reluctance to make a choice is particularly pronounced among those from families of working-class and farming backgrounds, while it is absent among individuals whose families have closer ties to the private sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Margot Belguise & Yuchen Huang & Zhexun Mo, 2024. "Non-meritocrats or choice-reluctant meritocrats? A redistribution experiment in China and France," Discussion Papers 2024-05, Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP).
  • Handle: RePEc:not:notnic:2024-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/research/groups/nicep/documents/working-papers/2024/2024-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Alesina & Armando Miano & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Immigration and Redistribution," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Alexander W Cappelen & Johanna Mollerstrom & Bjørn-Atle Reme & Bertil Tungodden, 2022. "A Meritocratic Origin of Egalitarian Behaviour," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(646), pages 2101-2117.
    3. Ruben Durante & Louis Putterman & Joël Weele, 2014. "Preferences For Redistribution And Perception Of Fairness: An Experimental Study," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1059-1086, August.
    4. Corneo, Giacomo & Gruner, Hans Peter, 2002. "Individual preferences for political redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 83-107, January.
    5. Mounir Karadja & Johanna Mollerstrom & David Seim, 2017. "Richer (and Holier) Than Thou? The Effect of Relative Income Improvements on Demand for Redistribution," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 201-212, May.
    6. Ingvild Almås & Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden, 2020. "Cutthroat Capitalism versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(5), pages 1753-1788.
    7. Madland, Kjetil Røiseland & Strømland, Eirik, 2022. "Fairness of the Crowd - An Experimental Study of Social Spillovers in Fairness Decisions," OSF Preprints tnv3g, Center for Open Science.
    8. An, Weihua & Ye, Maoliang, 2017. "Mind the gap: Disparity in redistributive preference between political elites and the public in China," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 75-91.
    9. 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.
    10. Alesina, Alberto & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2005. "Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 897-931, June.
    11. Alexander W Cappelen & Karl Ove Moene & Siv-Elisabeth Skjelbred & Bertil Tungodden, 2023. "The Merit Primacy Effect," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(651), pages 951-970.
      • Alexander Cappelen & Karl Ove Moene & Siv-Elisabeth Skjelbred & Bertil Tungodden, 2017. "The Merit Primacy Effect," Working Papers 2017-047, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    12. Ilyana Kuziemko & Michael I. Norton & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2015. "How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1478-1508, April.
    13. Hongbin Li & Lingsheng Meng & Junsen Zhang, 2006. "Why Do Entrepreneurs Enter Politics? Evidence from China," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(3), pages 559-578, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Daniel Müller & Sander Renes, 2021. "Fairness views and political preferences: evidence from a large and heterogeneous sample," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 679-711, May.
    16. Fischbacher, Urs & Grammling, David & Hausfeld, Jan & Zíka, Vojtěch, 2023. "Identity breeds inequality: Evidence from a laboratory experiment on redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    17. Zhou Xun, 2015. "Preference for Redistribution and Inequality Perception in China: Evidence from the CGSS 2006," AMSE Working Papers 1518, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    18. Ting Chen & James Kai-sing Kung & Chicheng Ma, 2020. "Long Live Keju! The Persistent Effects of China’s Civil Examination System," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(631), pages 2030-2064.
    19. Christopher Hoy & Franziska Mager, 2021. "Why Are Relatively Poor People Not More Supportive of Redistribution? Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment across Ten Countries," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 299-328, November.
    20. Mu, Ren, 2022. "Perceived relative income, fairness, and the role of government: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    21. Akbaş, Merve & Ariely, Dan & Yuksel, Sevgi, 2019. "When is inequality fair? An experiment on the effect of procedural justice and agency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 114-127.
    22. Bortolotti, Stefania & Soraperra, Ivan & Sutter, Matthias & Zoller, Claudia, 2017. "Too Lucky to Be True: Fairness Views under the Shadow of Cheating," IZA Discussion Papers 10877, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    23. Aguiar, Fernando & Becker, Alice & Miller, Luis, 2013. "Whose Impartiality? An Experimental Study Of Veiled Stakeholders, Involved Spectators And Detached Observers," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 155-174, July.
    24. Konow, James & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Akai, Kenju, 2020. "Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    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. Belguise, Margot & Huang, Yuchen & Mo, Zhexun, 2023. "Non-Meritocrats or Conformist Meritocrats? A Redistribution Experiment in China and France," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2308, CEPREMAP.
    2. Belguise, Margot & Huang, Yuchen & Mo, Zhexun, 2023. "Non-Meritocrats or Conformist Meritocrats? A Redistribution Experiment in China and France," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1476, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. Busso, Matias & Ibáñez, Ana María & Messina, Julián & Quigua, Juliana, 2023. "Preferences for redistribution in Latin America," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120687, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. 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).
    6. Hope, David & Limberg, Julian & Weber, Nina Sophie, 2021. "Why Do (Some) Ordinary Americans Support Tax Cuts for the Rich? Evidence From a Randomized Survey Experiment," SocArXiv chk9b, Center for Open Science.
    7. de Bresser, Jochem & Knoef, Marike, 2022. "Eliciting preferences for income redistribution: A new survey item," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    8. Cabeza Martínez, Begoña, 2023. "Social preferences, support for redistribution, and attitudes towards vulnerable groups," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Roth, Christopher & Settele, Sonja & Wohlfart, Johannes, 2022. "Beliefs about public debt and the demand for government spending," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 165-187.
    10. Fehr, Ernst & Epper, Thomas & Senn, Julien, 2022. "Other-Regarding Preferences and Redistributive Politics," IZA Discussion Papers 15088, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. G. Andersen, Asbjørn & Franklin, Simon & Getahun, Tigabu & Kotsadam, Andreas & Somville, Vincent & Villanger, Espen, 2023. "Does wealth reduce support for redistribution? Evidence from an Ethiopian housing lottery," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    12. Andreoli, Francesco & Olivera, Javier, 2020. "Preferences for redistribution and exposure to tax-benefit schemes in Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    13. Alexander Cappelen & Yiming Liu & Hedda Nielsen & Bertil Tungodden, 2024. "Fairness in a Society of Unequal Opportunities," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 506, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    14. Cohn, Alain & Jessen, Lasse J. & Klašnja, Marko & Smeets, Paul, 2023. "Wealthy Americans and redistribution: The role of fairness preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    15. Fehr, Dietmar & Müller, Daniel & Preuss, Marcel, 2024. "Social mobility perceptions and inequality acceptance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 366-384.
    16. 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.
    17. Nora Yuqian Chen & Yuchen Huang & Zhexun Fred Mo, 2023. "Money is Justice: Experimental Evidence on Non-meritocratic Redistributive Preferences in China," Working Papers halshs-03496033, HAL.
    18. de Bresser, Jochem & Knoef, Marike, 2021. "Preferences for Income Redistribution : A New Survey Item and Experimental Evidence," Other publications TiSEM 246972d6-0fdb-4243-9e34-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Riccardo Bruni & Alessandro Gioffré & Maria Marino, 2022. ""In-group bias in preferences for redistribution: a survey experiment in Italy"," IREA Working Papers 202223, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Nov 2023.
    20. Jeffrey, Karen, 2021. "Automation and the future of work: How rhetoric shapes the response in policy preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 417-433.

    More about this item

    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:not:notnic:2024-05. 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: Hilary Hughes (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nicepuk.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.