IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ude/wpaper/1707.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Micro-foundations of individual preferences for protectionism in Canada and Uruguay

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Melgar

    (Departamento de Economía, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República)

Abstract

Even when the majority of economists agree on the benefits of free trade, everywhere we turn to,trade is restricted. In contexts where politicians offer different policy options and voters demand them based on their individual preferences, one may ask what determines personal preferences on trade policy; which economic, cultural, social elements shape them. The goal of this paper is to answer these questions in the case of two different economies: Canada and Uruguay. The data source is the module on National Identity (2003) which was carried out in accordance with the International Social Survey Program. Based on probit models, the main conclusion of this paper is that the evidence does not support the conclusions on preference formation of the Hecksher-Ohlin trade model, while elements such as religion, political preferences, and nationalism, as well as demographic characteristics, have a significant impact on trade policy preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Melgar, 2007. "Micro-foundations of individual preferences for protectionism in Canada and Uruguay," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 1707, Department of Economics - dECON.
    • Handle: RePEc:ude:wpaper:1707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/23413
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Guiso, Luigi & Sapienza, Paola & Zingales, Luigi, 2003. "People's opium? Religion and economic attitudes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 225-282, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    5. kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Kishore Gawande and Pravin Krishna, 2001. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," Working Papers 2001-38, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    7. K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," CEG Working Papers 20016, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    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. 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.
    2. Yu Jin Woo & Ikuo Kume, 2021. "Taking Gains from Trade Seriously: The Effects of Consumer Perspective on Free Trade," Working Papers 2020, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    3. Dhingra, Swati, 2006. "Re-examination of the Mayer Median Voter Model of Trade Policy," MPRA Paper 892, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 14 Nov 2006.
    4. Harms, Philipp & Steiner, Nils, 2019. "The China Shock and the Nationalist Backlash against Globalization: Attitudinal Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203506, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. O'Rourke, Kevin, 2003. "Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards Globalization," CEPR Discussion Papers 4018, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," Trinity Economics Papers 200110, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Costenot, Arnaud, 2006. "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs: A New Perspective on Protectionism," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt1bt8n04n, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    10. Aleksandra Sojka & Jorge Diaz-Lanchas & Federico Steinberg, 2019. "The Politicization of Transatlantic Trade in Europe: Explaining Inconsistent Preferences Regarding Free Trade and the TTIP," JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis 2019-09, Joint Research Centre.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Ayse Kaya & James T. Walker, 2009. "Individual Attitudes towards the Impact of Multinational Enterprises on Local Businesses," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2009-02, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    14. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jacob McGrew, 2014. "Task Routineness and Trade Policy Preferences," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 505-518, November.
    15. Teng, Faxin, 2008. "Warum sind manche Individuen und Länder protektionistischer als andere? [Why Are Some People and Countries More Protectionist than Others?]," MPRA Paper 31958, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. 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.
    17. Jeffrey Drope & Abdur Chowdhury, 2014. "Economic (In)Security and Gender Differences in Trade Policy Attitudes," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1067, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    18. Xiaohuan Lan & Ben G. Li, 2015. "The Economics of Nationalism," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 294-325, May.
    19. Natalia Melgar & Juliette Milgram & Máximo Rossi, 2009. "The role of macroeconomic performance in individual’s attitudes towards protectionism," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0809, Department of Economics - dECON.
    20. Ina Jäkel & Marcel Smolka, 2013. "Individual Attitudes Towards Trade: Stolper-Samuelson Revisited," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 731-761, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Preferences; micro-foundations; protectionism; rationality; ISSP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:ude:wpaper:1707. 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: Andrea Doneschi or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/derauuy.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.