Inequality and demand for public policies

On the basis of the findings of the first funding period, this projects studies a) which inequalities drive political /electoral choice of individuals, b) whether and how citizens expect parties and governments to address these inequalities and c) which policies they demand to remedy those inequalities they consider most important. Indeed, a generalized aversion against all forms of inequality of opportunity (e.g. based on social background, wealth, gender, sexual orientation, or ethnicity) among the public has been shown over and over in empirical research. However, while research in the first funding period has confirmed this general finding, it has also shown that different social groups (in particular upwardly and downwardly mobile occupational groups, as well as political groups along the left-right axis) differ strongly in the types of inequalities they evaluate as more or less problematic, and that inequality-aversion per se does not necessarily translate into political choice and behavior. In other words: just because voters are inequality-averse does not imply that considerations of inequality actually impact their party choice in elections. To study whether inequality-concerns matter more for “winners” or for “losers” of inequality dynamics, and the conditions under which these groups actually care enough about inequalities for this to be a relevant consideration of political behavior, this project will conduct comparative experimental surveys in different Western societies (conjoint experiments). These surveys allow measuring the relative importance citizens attribute to different inequalities and the extent to which they value claims by parties to address these inequalities. The expectation is that both winners and losers of inequality dynamics are most divisively politicized by “innate categorical” inequalities (e.g. gender, ethnicity, or parental background), and that these inequalities “crowd out” contestation of inequalities by income and education (which are more easily legitimized through powerful narratives of “meritocracy”, see also project 2c and 2d). Such crowding out could be countered by policies that acknowledge the intersectionality between economic and categorical inequalities. By combining actual policy repertoires of governments with public opinion surveys, the project will study support patterns for policies effectively addressing inequalities along different dimensions.