Individual Preferences for Political Redistribution

By G. Corneo, Hans Peter Grüner. 2002

765 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ce627bc3ee001fe541329ea7a65b12d962fa7bfc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Political Science and International Relations

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Public support for redistribution: what explains cross-national differences? (2010, background): “Two basic arguments of Esping-Andersen’s (1990) welfare regime approach are important for the explanation of cross-national variations of public opinion: first, the assumption that the dominating cleavage groups and their social policy interests differ between regimes.”
Preferences for Redistribution in the Land of Opportunities (2005, neutral): “…The relationship between social mobility and individual demand for redistribution is studied by Ravallion and Lokshin (2000) on Russian data, Corneo and Gruner (2002) using an international survey on several OECD countries, and by Corneo (2001) for Germany and the United States.4 All these…”
ETHNIC DIVERSITY, PUBLIC SPENDING, AND INDIVIDUAL SUPPORT FOR THE WELFARE STATE: A REVIEW OF THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE (2013, neutral): “See for instance Piketty (1995), Ravallion and Lokshin (2000), Bénabou and Ok (2001), Corneo (2001), Corneo and Grüner (2000, 2002), Senik (2004, 2006, 2008), Alesina and La Ferrara (2005b), and the surveys by Borck (2007) and by Alesina and Giuliano (2009).”
Preferences for Redistribution (2009, background): “Finally, the desire to act in accordance with public values, or to obtain high social standing could also play a critical role in the determination of preferences for redistributive policies (see Corneo and Gruner (2000, 2002)).”
Attitudes to Income Inequality: Experimental and Survey Evidence (2014, result): “This might be thought of as consistent with some of those at the bottom providing a negative signal (as in D’Ambrosio and Frick, 2012), or more generally with some negative externalities in society associated with poverty. O'Connell (2004) uses information on (the log of) the income received by the ”
Progressive taxation and tax morale (2011, neutral): “Corneo and Gruener (2002) employ an empirical cross-country analysis and confirm that the standard economic model is only partially able to explain individual support for redistribution.”
Fairness and Redistribution: U.S. Versus Europe (2003, neutral): “Looking at 11In the paper by Corneo and Gruner (2002), other motivations of the demand for redistribution, along with the political-economic channel, are taken into account, and the results are shown to differ between Eastern and Western European countries.”
Growing up in a Recession (2014, neutral): “For different models relating preferences for redistribution and political outcomes, see Piketty (1995), Alesina and Angeletos (2005), Corneo and Gruner (2002), and Benabou and Tirole (2006).”
Inequality-Aversion and Income Mobility: A Direct Test (2003, background): “The relative importance of effort and luck in income has been shown to be a significant determinant of attitudes towards redistribution ( Corneo and Gruner, 2002 ).”
Preferences for redistribution: an empirical analysis over 33 countries (2011, background): “Ravallion and Lokshin [34] and Corneo and Grüner [15, 16]”
A glimpse through the veil of ignorance: equality of opportunity and support for redistribution (2010, background): “1 Corneo and Gr'uner (2002) provide results of a survey in 12 countries.”