Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:08:17.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beliefs about Social Fluidity and Preferences for Social Policies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2014

ANTONIO M. JAIME-CASTILLO  and
ILDEFONSO MARQUÉS-PERALES
ANTONIO M. JAIME-CASTILLO
Affiliation:
University of Malaga, Faculty of Economics and Business, Spain email: [email protected]
ILDEFONSO MARQUÉS-PERALES
Affiliation:
University of Sevilla, Faculty of Education, Spain email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several studies have shown that attitudes toward social policy are influenced by expectations of social mobility at the individual level and perceptions of social fluidity at the aggregate level. If individuals think of inequalities as the result of inherited disadvantages, they will be more willing to distribute resources from the rich to the poor. However, one important question remains open: How do individuals perceive the distribution of opportunities in society? In this paper we argue that individuals believe a society to be fair if opportunities for reaching the top of the social ladder are equally distributed among the population. That is, the distribution of resources is fair to the extent that individual outcomes do not depend on social origins. To address this issue, we asked a representative sample of individuals in the Spanish region of Andalusia what they think the chances are for persons of different social origins to achieve a high social status. We have found that those who think the chances for reaching the top are unequally distributed are those who support greater government responsibility and oppose meritocracy and competition, as they believe the initial distribution of opportunities to be unfair.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 615 - 633
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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.)

References

Alesina, A. and Glaeser, E. L. (2004), Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World of Difference, Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Alesina, A. and Giuliano, P. (2011), ‘Preferences for redistribution’, in Benhabib, J., Jackson, M. O. and Bisin, A. (eds.), Handbook of Social Economics, Vol. 1A, The Netherlands: Elsevier, pp. 93–131.Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and La Ferrara, E. (2005), ‘Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities’, Journal of Public Economics, 89: 5–6, 897–931.Google Scholar
Becker, H. (2007), Telling about Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Benabou, R. and Ok, E. A. (2001), ‘Social mobility and the demand for redistribution: the POUM hypothesis’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116: 2, 447–487.Google Scholar
Benabou, R. and Tirole, J. (2006), ‘Belief in a just world and redistributive politics’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121: 699–746.Google Scholar
Bertaux, D. and Thompson, P. (1997), Pathways to Social Class: A Qualitative Approach to Social Mobility, New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Blekesaune, M. (2007), ‘Economic conditions and public attitudes to welfare policies’, European Sociological Review, 23: 3, 393–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1994), Raisons Pratiques: Sur la Théorie de l'Action, Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1998), Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Calzada, I. and Del Pino, E. (2008), ‘Perceived efficacy and citizens’ attitudes toward welfare state reform’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74: 4, 555–574.Google Scholar
Calzada, I. and Del Pino, E. (2011), ‘Are Spaniards different? European convergence and regional divergence in the evaluation of the welfare state’, in Guillén, A. M. and León, M. (eds.), The Spanish Welfare State in the European Context, London: Ashgate Publishing, pp. 139–162.Google Scholar
Chamberlayne, P., Bornat, J. and Wengraf, T. (eds.) (2000), The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Sciences: Comparative Issues and Examples, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Duru-Bellat, M. and Kieffer, A. (2008), ‘Objective/subjective: the two facets of social mobility’, Sociologie du Travail, 50S: e1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. and Goldthorpe, J. (1992), The Constant Flux, London: Clarendon.Google Scholar
EU-SILC (2005), European Union Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC), 2005 Cross-Sectional [rev.1/September 2009], Luxembourg: EUROSTAT.Google Scholar
ERSA (2011), Encuesta de la Realidad Social en Andalucía, Sevilla: Centro de Estudios Andaluces.Google Scholar
Evans, M. D. R. and Kelley, J. (2004), ‘Subjective social location: data from 21 nations’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16: 3–38.Google Scholar
Gneezy, U., Niederle, M. and Rustichini, A. (2003), ‘Performance in competitive environments: gender differences’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118: 3, 1049–1074.Google Scholar
Goldthorpe, J. (2000), On Sociology: Numbers, Narrative and the Integration of Research and Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hubert, J. and Form, W. (1978), Income and Ideology, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Jaeger, M. M. (2006), ‘What makes people support public responsibility for welfare provision: self-interest or political ideology? A longitudinal approach’, Acta Sociologica, 49: 3, 321–338.Google Scholar
Kelley, S. M. and Kelley, C. G. (2009), ‘Subjective social mobility: data from 30 nations’, in Haller, M., Jowell, R. and Smith, T. (eds.), Charting the Globe: The International Social Survey Program 1984–2009, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kluegel, J. R. and Smith, E. R. (1986), Beliefs about Inequality: Americans’ Views of What Is and What Ought to Be, New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lane, R. E. (1959), ‘The fear of equality’, American Political Science Review, 53: 35–51.Google Scholar
Linos, K. and West, M. (2003), ‘Self-interest, social beliefs, and attitudes to redistribution: re-addressing the issue of cross-national variation’, European Sociological Review, 19: 4, 393–409.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. M. (1992), ‘Foreword: the political consequences of social mobility’, in Turner, F. (ed.), Social Mobility and Political Attitudes: Comparative Perspectives, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. H. and Richard, S. F. (1981), ‘A rational theory of the size of government’, Journal of Political Economy, 89: 5, 914–927.Google Scholar
Merrill, B. and West, L. (2009), Using Biographical Methods in Social Research, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Paterson, L. (2008), ‘Political attitudes, social participation and social mobility: a longitudinal analysis’, British Journal of Sociology, 59: 3, 413–434.Google Scholar
Patton, M. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Piketty, T. (1995), ‘Social mobility and redistributive politics’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 551–584.Google Scholar
Piketty, T. (1998), ‘Self-fulfilling beliefs about social status’, Journal of Public Economics, 70: 1, 115–132.Google Scholar
Rainer, H. and Siedler, T. (2008), ‘Subjective income and employment expectations and preferences for redistribution’, Economic Letters, 99: 449–453.Google Scholar
Ravallion, M. and Lokshin, M. (2000), ‘Who wants to redistribute? The tunnel effect in 1990s Russia’, Journal of Public Economics, 76: 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runciman, W. G. (1966), Relative Deprivation and Social Justice: A Study of Attitudes to Social Inequality in 20th Century England, London: Routledge Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Rydgren, J. (2009), ‘Beliefs’, in Hedström, P. and Bearman, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 72–93.Google Scholar
Rytina, J. H., Form, W. H. and Pease, J. (1970), ‘Income stratification ideology: beliefs about the American opportunity structure’, American Journal of Sociology, 75: 703–716.Google Scholar
Sachweh, P. and Olafsdottir, S. (2012), ‘The welfare state and equality? Stratification realities and aspirations in three welfare regimes’, European Sociological Review, 28: 2, 149–168.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. (2011), ‘The experience of social mobility and the formation of attitudes toward redistribution’, Cologne: GK Soclife Working Papers Series 6/2001.Google Scholar
Sombart, E. (1976), Why Is There No Socialism in the United States? New York: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Svallfors, S. (2006), The Moral Economy of Class. Class and Attitudes in Comparative Perspective, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, A. (2002), Democracy in America, Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Weakliem, D. L. (1992), ‘Does social mobility affect political behavior?’, European Sociological Review, 8: 2, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar