IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wti/papers/551.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adding Another Level: Individual Responses to Globalization and Government Welfare Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Schaffer, Lena Maria
  • Spilker, Gabriele

Abstract

For the last decade, numerous scholarly works have centered on the question of whether states increase their spending on welfare to cushion their citizens from losses arising from globalization -- the compensation hypothesis. However, research has so far overwhelmingly focused either on the macro or the micro level of the proposed relationship. In this paper we go one step further by explicitly accounting for the combination of responses of individual citizens and country-specific characteristics in a hierarchical model framework. We first analyze whether individuals living in countries that face relatively more pressure from globalization do indeed show a more negative attitude towards increased internationalization. In a second step, we then shed light on the question of whether countries with more extensive welfare policies are successful in shielding their citizenry from the winds of globalization. In contrast to theoretical expectations, our results do not lend support to the conjecture that increasing globalization causes concern to individuals in European countries. However, as predicted by standard trade theory, those individuals who are winning from trade do indeed perceive globalization as something positive especially if they live in very open countries. As far as the nexus between welfare policies and individual contentment is concerned, our results suggest that if nation states compensate their citizens they become indeed more likely to see globalization in a positive light.

Suggested Citation

  • Schaffer, Lena Maria & Spilker, Gabriele, 2013. "Adding Another Level: Individual Responses to Globalization and Government Welfare Policies," Papers 551, World Trade Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:wti:papers:551
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wti.org/media/filer_public/35/61/35614268-23d5-4de9-8abe-316e91ee9af1/working_paper_20136.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Axel Dreher & Jan-Egbert Sturm & Heinrich Ursprung, 2008. "The impact of globalization on the composition of government expenditures: Evidence from panel data," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 263-292, March.
    3. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1982. "International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 379-415, April.
    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. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 997-1032, October.
    6. Burgoon, Brian, 2001. "Globalization and Welfare Compensation: Disentangling the Ties that Bind," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(3), pages 509-551, July.
    7. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1995. "Capital mobility, trade, and the domestic politics of economic policy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 657-687, October.
    8. Hays, Jude C. & Ehrlich, Sean D. & Peinhardt, Clint, 2005. "Government Spending and Public Support for Trade in the OECD: An Empirical Test of the Embedded Liberalism Thesis," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(2), pages 473-494, April.
    9. Cameron, David R., 1978. "The Expansion of the Public Economy: A Comparative Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 1243-1261, December.
    10. Achen, Christopher H., 2005. "Two-Step Hierarchical Estimation: Beyond Regression Analysis," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 447-456.
    11. Mansfield, Edward D. & Mutz, Diana C., 2009. "Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 425-457, July.
    12. Down, Ian, 2007. "Trade Openness, Country Size and Economic Volatility: The Compensation Hypothesis Revisited," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Kittel, Bernhard & Winner, Hannes, 2002. "How reliable is pooled analysis in political economy? The globalization welfare state nexus revisited," MPIfG Discussion Paper 02/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    14. Genschel, Philipp, 2004. "Globalisation and the welfare state: A retrospective," TranState Working Papers 3, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    15. 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.
    16. Cusack, Thomas R. & Iversen, Torben & Rehm, Philipp, 2005. "Risks at work: the demand and supply sides of government redistribution," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions, States, Markets SP II 2005-15, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    18. Duane Swank, 1998. "Funding the Welfare State: Globalization and the Taxation of Business in Advanced Market Economies," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(4), pages 671-692, September.
    19. Down Ian, 2007. "Trade Openness, Country Size and Economic Volatility: The Compensation Hypothesis Revisited," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, September.
    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. Ehrlich Sean D, 2010. "Who Supports Compensation? Individual Preferences for Trade-Related Unemployment Insurance," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, April.
    2. Ida Bastiaens & Evgeny Postnikov, 2020. "Social standards in trade agreements and free trade preferences: An empirical investigation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 793-816, October.
    3. Federico Podestà, 2016. "Do Big Governments Promote Trade Liberalization? A Long-Term Analysis of 18 OECD Countries, 1975-2000," FBK-IRVAPP Working Papers 2016-02, Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies (IRVAPP), Bruno Kessler Foundation.
    4. Vikas Dixit, 2014. "Relation between Trade Openness, Capital Openness and Government Size in India," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 49(1), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Sijeong Lim & Brian Burgoon, 2017. "Globalization and Support for Unemployment Spending in Asia," Working Papers hal-01670983, HAL.
    6. Erkam Sari & Hakan Hotunluoglu, 2021. "Government Size and Openness: Insights Basedon Country Classifications," World Journal of Applied Economics, WERI-World Economic Research Institute, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Francesca Gastaldi & Paolo Liberati, 2011. "Economic integration and government size: a review of the empirical literature," Financial Theory and Practice, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 35(3), pages 327-384.
    8. 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.
    9. Andreas Bergh & Irina Mirkina & Therese Nilsson, 2020. "Can social spending cushion the inequality effect of globalization?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 104-142, March.
    10. Nils D. Steiner & Philipp Harms, 2020. "Local Trade Shocks and the Nationalist Backlash in Political Attitudes: Panel Data Evidence from Great Britain," Working Papers 2014, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    11. 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.
    12. Anna Maria Mayda & Kevin H. O'Rourke & Richard Sinnott, 2007. "Risk, Government and Globalization: International Survey Evidence," NBER Working Papers 13037, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Philipp Heimberger, 2021. "Does economic globalization affect government spending? A meta-analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 349-374, June.
    14. Wen Xin & Russell Smyth, 2010. "Economic Openness and Subjective Well‐being in China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 18(2), pages 22-40, March.
    15. Andreas Bergh & Anders Kärnä, 2021. "Globalization and populism in Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 51-70, October.
    16. Hira Mujahid & Shaista Alam, 2014. "The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Demand and Price Volatility in Pakistan: Co Integration Approach for Compensation Hypothesis," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(6), pages 744-754, June.
    17. Ming-Chang Tsai & Hsin-Hsin Pan, 2022. "Protecting Farmers and Workers in Socialist Market Transitions: Mass Attitudes Toward Imports in Asia," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    18. 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.
    19. María Franco Chuaire & Carlos Scartascini & Mariano Tommasi, 2017. "State capacity and the quality of policies. Revisiting the relationship between openness and government size," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 133-156, July.
    20. Rickard, Stephanie J., 2015. "Compensating the losers: an examination of Congressional votes on trade adjustment assistance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 88051, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:wti:papers:551. 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: Morven McLean (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wtibech.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.