IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/r73pv_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Deontological and Consequentialist Preferences Towards Arms Exports -- A Comparative Conjoint Experiment in France and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Rudolph, Lukas

    (LMU Munich)

  • Freitag, Markus
  • Thurner, Paul

Abstract

Despite fierce politicization in arms-exporting democracies, we lack systematic research on mass public preferences on arms transfers. We propose that citizens either apply a deontologist (rejecting transfers categorically) or consequentialist (trading-off economic, strategic and normative aspects) calculus of preference formation. Conducting population-representative survey experiments (N=6617) in Germany and France, two global top-five major arms exporters, we find that 10–15 per cent of respondents follow deontologist considerations, a preference structure potentially relevant for all foreign policies involving the use of military force. Still, a majority shows differentiated preferences, giving largest weight to normative considerations, with assessments affected by moderating features (e.g., scenarios of just war). Principled rejection of arms trade and a large consequentialist weight for normative factors are more pronounced in Germany compared to France, indicating that public opinion might pose a stronger constraint for government policy in this country. Respondents' preferences match opinion polls on post-Russian invasion Ukraine armament, indicating high external validity of our experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Rudolph, Lukas & Freitag, Markus & Thurner, Paul, 2021. "Deontological and Consequentialist Preferences Towards Arms Exports -- A Comparative Conjoint Experiment in France and Germany," SocArXiv r73pv_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:r73pv_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/r73pv_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/607d534beb9cc9027714a7b6/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/r73pv_v1?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. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    2. Joshua D. Kertzer & Thomas Zeitzoff, 2017. "A Bottom‐Up Theory of Public Opinion about Foreign Policy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(3), pages 543-558, July.
    3. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    4. Ganter, Flavien, 2023. "Identification of Preferences in Forced-Choice Conjoint Experiments: Reassessing the Quantity of Interest," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 98-112, January.
    5. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    6. Press, Daryl G. & Sagan, Scott D. & Valentino, Benjamin A., 2013. "Atomic Aversion: Experimental Evidence on Taboos, Traditions, and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 188-206, February.
    7. Bechtel, Michael M. & Genovese, Federica & Scheve, Kenneth F., 2019. "Interests, Norms and Support for the Provision of Global Public Goods: The Case of Climate Co-operation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 1333-1355, October.
    8. Daniel L. Chen & Martin Schonger, 2022. "Social preferences or sacred values? Theory and evidence of deontological motivations," Post-Print hal-03894046, HAL.
    9. Tomz, Michael & Weeks, Jessica L.P. & Yarhi-Milo, Keren, 2020. "Public Opinion and Decisions About Military Force in Democracies," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(1), pages 119-143, January.
    10. Brian C. Rathbun & Rachel Stein, 2020. "Greater Goods: Morality and Attitudes toward the Use of Nuclear Weapons," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(5), pages 787-816, May.
    11. Christopher W. Blair & Jonathan A. Chu & Joshua A. Schwartz, 2022. "The Two Faces of Opposition to Chemical Weapons: Sincere Versus Insincere Norm-Holders," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(4-5), pages 677-703, May.
    12. Kirk Bansak, 2021. "Estimating causal moderation effects with randomized treatments and non‐randomized moderators," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 65-86, January.
    13. Lisa Lechner, 2016. "The domestic battle over the design of non-trade issues in preferential trade agreements," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5), pages 840-871, September.
    14. Rudolph, Lukas & Kolcava, Dennis & Bernauer, Thomas, 2023. "Public Demand for Extraterritorial Environmental and Social Public Goods Provision," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 516-535, April.
    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. Rudolph, Lukas & Freitag, Markus & Thurner, Paul, 2021. "The Comparative Legitimacy of Arms Exports - A Conjoint Experiment in Germany and France," SocArXiv r73pv, Center for Open Science.
    2. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    3. Kantorowicz, Jaroslaw & Collewet, Marion & DiGiuseppe, Matthew & Vrijburg, Hendrik, 2024. "How to finance green investments? The role of public debt," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Lisa Langdon Koch, 2024. "Punishment and blame: How core beliefs affect support for the use of force in a nuclear crisis," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(6), pages 649-669, November.
    5. Lisanne de Blok & Max Heermann & Julian Schuessler & Dirk Leuffen & Catherine E. de Vries, 2024. "All on board? The role of institutional design for public support for differentiated integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 593-604, September.
    6. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    8. Christopher W. Blair & Jonathan A. Chu & Joshua A. Schwartz, 2022. "The Two Faces of Opposition to Chemical Weapons: Sincere Versus Insincere Norm-Holders," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(4-5), pages 677-703, May.
    9. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    10. Dongshu Liu & Li Shao, 2024. "Nationalist propaganda and support for war in an authoritarian context: Evidence from China," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(6), pages 985-1001, November.
    11. Xiang, C. & van Gevelt, T., 2025. "China's global leadership aspirations and domestic support for climate policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    12. Beetsma, Roel & Burgoon, Brian & Nicoli, Francesco, 2023. "Is european attachment sufficiently strong to support an EU fiscal capacity: Evidence from a conjoint experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Yuki Matsuura & Masanori Kubota & Kaoru Hidaka & Taku Yukawa, 2024. "Who Pursues the Bomb? Leaders’Education Abroad and the Development of Weapons of Mass Destruction," OSIPP Discussion Paper 24E005, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    14. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    15. Tyler Jost & Joshua D. Kertzer, 2024. "Armies and Influence: Elite Experience and Public Opinion on Foreign Policy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 68(9), pages 1769-1797, October.
    16. Toke S. Aidt & Facundo Albornoz & Esther Hauk, 2019. "Foreign Influence and Domestic Policy: A Survey," Working Papers 1072, Barcelona School of Economics.
    17. Aaron R Kaufman, 2020. "Implementing novel, flexible, and powerful survey designs in R Shiny," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, April.
    18. KASUYA Yuko & MIWA Hirofumi & ONO Yoshikuni, 2022. "Why are There More Women in the Upper House?," Discussion papers 22094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    19. Toke S. Aidt & Facundo Albornoz & Esther Hauk, 2021. "Foreign Influence and Domestic Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 426-487, June.
    20. Breslawski, Jori, 2024. "Who Deserves Aid? Perceptions of Fairness in Contexts of Forced Displacement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    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:osf:socarx:r73pv_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.