Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:24:45.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Imposed institutions and preferences for redistribution§

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2017

ALBERTO CHONG  and
MARK GRADSTEIN
ALBERTO CHONG*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA; Universidad del Pacifico, Lima, Peru
MARK GRADSTEIN
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel; CEPR; CESifo; IZA
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To what extent do imposed institutions shape preferences? We consider this issue by comparing the market-versus-state attitudes of respondents from a capitalist country, Finland, and from an ex-communist group of Baltic countries, and by arguing that the period of communist rule can be viewed as an ‘experiment’ in institutional imposition. We find that, consistent with some earlier related work, citizens from ex-communist countries tend to be more supportive of state ownership than respondents from capitalist economies. However, they also favour increasing inequality and competition as the means to enhance incentives. We conclude that, in some important relevant dimensions, institutional imposition (which lasted for about 50 years) had a limited effect on preferences.

Keywords

Institutionsmarkets versus stateredistributional preferences

JEL classification

D30: General I31: General Welfare, Well-Being D02: Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact P30: General P51: Comparative Analysis of Economic Systems
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , February 2018 , pp. 127 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

§

We appreciate comments and suggestions from Gianmarco Leon, Vanessa Rios, two anonymous referees, and the editor. We are also grateful to seminar participants at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and University College London.

References

Acemoglu, D. (2006), ‘Modeling Inefficient Institutions’, in Blundell, R., Newey, W. and Persson, T. (eds), Advances in Economics and Econometrics, vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, chapter 9, pp. 341–80.Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and Fuchs-Schündeln, N.. 2007. ‘Good-bye Lenin (or not?): The Effect of Communism on People's Preferences. American Economic Review, 97 (4): 1507–28.Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and Glaeser, E. (2004), Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World of Difference, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and Ferrara, E. la (2005), ‘Preferences for Redistribution in the Land of Opportunities’, Journal of Public Economics, 89: 897–931.Google Scholar
Beck, T. and Laeven, L. (2006) ‘Institution Building and Growth in Transition Economies’, Journal of Economic Growth, 11 (2): 157–86.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, D., Pistor, K. and Richard, J.-F. (2003), ‘Economic Development, Legality, and the transplant effect’, European Economic Review, 47 (1): 165–95.Google Scholar
Biais, B. and Perotti, E. (2002), ‘Machiavellian Privatization’, American Economic Review, 92 (1): 240–58.Google Scholar
Corneo, G. and Gruner, H.-P. (2002), ‘Individual Preferences for Political Redistribution’, Journal of Public Economics, 83: 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Tella, R. and MacCulloch, R. (2009), ‘Why Doesn't Capitalism Flow to Poor Countries?’ Mimeographed document. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 285–321. Available at http://www.people.hbs.edu/rditella/papers/BPEACapitalismFlow.pdf (accessed 10 March 2017).Google Scholar
Easterly, W. and Levine, R. (2003), ‘Tropics, Germs, and Crops: The Role of Endowments in Economic Development’, Journal of Monetary Economics, 50 (1): 3–39.Google Scholar
Ferguson, N. (2003), Empire: The Rise and Fall of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power, New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gimpelson, V. and Treisman, D. (2015), ‘Misperceiving Inequality’, NBER Working Paper no. 21174, Cambridge, MA. Available at https://www.cato.org/publications/research-briefs-economic-policy/misperceiving-inequality (accessed 10 March 2017).Google Scholar
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., and Zingales, L. (2006), ‘Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes?’ Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20 (2): 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, Paul (1989) The Economics of Shortage in the Centrally Planned Economies , in Davis, C. and Charemza, W., Models of Disequilibrium and Shortage in Centrally Planned Economies, Springer Netherlands: International Studies in Economic Modelling, pp. 49–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, Paul (2012) Vodka and Pickled Cabbage: Eastern European Travels of a Professional Economist, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
La Porta, R., López-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R.-W. (1998), ‘Law and Finance’, Journal of Political Economy, 106: 1113–55.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. and Richard, S. (1981), ‘A Rational Theory of the Size of Government’, Journal of Political Economy, 89 (5): 914–27.Google Scholar
Nove, A. (1992), An Economic History of the USSR, 3rd edn, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Pipes, R. (1993), Russia under the Bolshevik Regime: 1919–1924, New York, NY: Knopf.Google Scholar
Pipes, R. (1995), Russia under the Old Regime, 2nd edn, London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Rajan, R. (2005), ‘Failed States, Vicious Cycles, and a Proposal’, Mimeographed document, Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Rajan, R. (2006), ‘The Persistence of Underdevelopment: Institutions, Human Capital, or Constituencies?’ NBER Working Paper 12093, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Ravallion, M. and Lokshin, M. (2000), ‘Who Wants to Redistribute? The Tunnel Effect in 1990 Russia’, Journal of Public Economics, 76 (1): 87–104.Google Scholar
Rodrik, D. (2000), ‘Institutions for High-Quality Growth: What They Are and How to Acquire Them’, Studies in Comparative International Development, 35 (3): 3–31.Google Scholar
Shiller, R., Boycko, M., and Korobov, V. (1991), ‘Popular Attitudes toward Free Markets: The Soviet Union and the United States Compared’, American Economic Review, 81 (3): 385–400.Google Scholar
Shiller, R., Boycko, M., and Korobov, V. (1992), ‘Hunting for Homo Sovieticus: Situational versus Attitudinal Factors in Economic Behavior’, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1: 127–81.Google Scholar
Shleifer, A. and Treisman, D. (2005), ‘A Normal Country? Russia after Communism’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19 (1): 151–74.Google Scholar
Sokoloff, K.-L. and Engerman, S. (2000), ‘Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14 (3): 217–32.Google Scholar
Walkin, J. (1962), The Rise of Democracy in Pre-Revolutionary Russia: Political and Social Institutions under the Last Three Tsars, New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
Wuorinen, J.-H. (1965), A History of Finland, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar