作为再分配的改革意外之财:当代中国再分配偏好调查实验

IF 2.3 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Margot Belguise , Nora Yuqian Chen , Yuchen Huang , Zhexun Mo
{"title":"作为再分配的改革意外之财:当代中国再分配偏好调查实验","authors":"Margot Belguise ,&nbsp;Nora Yuqian Chen ,&nbsp;Yuchen Huang ,&nbsp;Zhexun Mo","doi":"10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2025.102651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>China has experienced a remarkable rise in living standards over four decades of economic reforms, alongside a tremendous increase in inequalities. In this context, do Chinese people support redistribution of wealth gained through reform windfalls? To answer this question, we conducted an online survey experiment with a nationally representative sample from China (<em>N</em> = 2<em>,</em>000). The treatment group was shown examples of wealth acquired through typical reform-era pathways requiring minimal ability or effort. This exposure led to a 0.1 standard deviation decrease in their support for redistribution. We propose a “reform windfall as redistribution” mechanism to explain this reduction: the treated group perceives the reform era as inherently redistributive, providing opportunities to escape systemic inequalities tied to the political system, thereby reducing the perceived need for formal redistribution. This decline in support is not driven by changes in fairness perceptions, as respondents do not attribute the wealth acquisition scenarios to ability or effort, nor do they view them as distinctly fair or unfair. Furthermore, we find limited evidence of heterogeneity, with one exception: individuals reporting higher economic pressure show an even greater reduction in redistributive support when exposed to the treatment. We hypothesize that this occurs because unmet expectations for upward mobility exacerbate their reactions to the treatment scenarios.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51439,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Economy","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 102651"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reform windfall as redistribution: A survey experiment on redistributive preferences in contemporary China\",\"authors\":\"Margot Belguise ,&nbsp;Nora Yuqian Chen ,&nbsp;Yuchen Huang ,&nbsp;Zhexun Mo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2025.102651\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>China has experienced a remarkable rise in living standards over four decades of economic reforms, alongside a tremendous increase in inequalities. In this context, do Chinese people support redistribution of wealth gained through reform windfalls? To answer this question, we conducted an online survey experiment with a nationally representative sample from China (<em>N</em> = 2<em>,</em>000). The treatment group was shown examples of wealth acquired through typical reform-era pathways requiring minimal ability or effort. This exposure led to a 0.1 standard deviation decrease in their support for redistribution. We propose a “reform windfall as redistribution” mechanism to explain this reduction: the treated group perceives the reform era as inherently redistributive, providing opportunities to escape systemic inequalities tied to the political system, thereby reducing the perceived need for formal redistribution. This decline in support is not driven by changes in fairness perceptions, as respondents do not attribute the wealth acquisition scenarios to ability or effort, nor do they view them as distinctly fair or unfair. Furthermore, we find limited evidence of heterogeneity, with one exception: individuals reporting higher economic pressure show an even greater reduction in redistributive support when exposed to the treatment. We hypothesize that this occurs because unmet expectations for upward mobility exacerbate their reactions to the treatment scenarios.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Political Economy\",\"volume\":\"87 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102651\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Political Economy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268025000114\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268025000114","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在四十年的经济改革中,中国的生活水平有了显著提高,与此同时,不平等现象也大大加剧。在这种情况下,中国人是否支持对通过改革意外之财获得的财富进行再分配?为了回答这个问题,我们对中国具有全国代表性的样本(N = 2,000)进行了在线调查实验。我们向处理组展示了通过典型的改革时期途径获得财富的例子,这些途径只需要极少的能力或努力。这种接触导致他们对再分配的支持率下降了 0.1 个标准差。我们提出了一种 "作为再分配的改革意外之财 "机制来解释这种下降:接受治疗组认为改革时代本质上是再分配时代,它提供了摆脱与政治制度相关的系统性不平等的机会,从而减少了对正式再分配的需求。支持率的下降并不是由公平观念的变化所导致的,因为受访者并没有将财富获取情景归因于能力或努力,也没有将其视为明显的公平或不公平。此外,我们还发现了有限的异质性证据,但有一个例外:报告经济压力较大的个体在接受处理后,其再分配支持率的下降幅度更大。我们假设,之所以会出现这种情况,是因为他们对向上流动的期望没有得到满足,从而加剧了他们对待遇情景的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reform windfall as redistribution: A survey experiment on redistributive preferences in contemporary China
China has experienced a remarkable rise in living standards over four decades of economic reforms, alongside a tremendous increase in inequalities. In this context, do Chinese people support redistribution of wealth gained through reform windfalls? To answer this question, we conducted an online survey experiment with a nationally representative sample from China (N = 2,000). The treatment group was shown examples of wealth acquired through typical reform-era pathways requiring minimal ability or effort. This exposure led to a 0.1 standard deviation decrease in their support for redistribution. We propose a “reform windfall as redistribution” mechanism to explain this reduction: the treated group perceives the reform era as inherently redistributive, providing opportunities to escape systemic inequalities tied to the political system, thereby reducing the perceived need for formal redistribution. This decline in support is not driven by changes in fairness perceptions, as respondents do not attribute the wealth acquisition scenarios to ability or effort, nor do they view them as distinctly fair or unfair. Furthermore, we find limited evidence of heterogeneity, with one exception: individuals reporting higher economic pressure show an even greater reduction in redistributive support when exposed to the treatment. We hypothesize that this occurs because unmet expectations for upward mobility exacerbate their reactions to the treatment scenarios.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: The aim of the European Journal of Political Economy is to disseminate original theoretical and empirical research on economic phenomena within a scope that encompasses collective decision making, political behavior, and the role of institutions. Contributions are invited from the international community of researchers. Manuscripts must be published in English. Starting 2008, the European Journal of Political Economy is indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index published by Thomson Scientific (formerly ISI).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信