Differences In Policy Preferences Research Articles

Gender Differences in Policy Preferences of Legislators: Evidence from China’s National Legislature

Abstract Do female legislators have different policy preferences than male legislators? Despite a large body of literature from liberal democracies and recent studies of electoral authoritarian regimes, this topic has received little attention in the context of single-party regimes. Based on quasi-experimental methods and regression models, we analyze original data from 38,383 proposals introduced during China’s 12th National People’s Congress and test the effect of gender on policies concerning conventionally selected feminine issues and “political stance,” issues that are unique to single-party regimes. The analysis confirms the effect of gender on policy preference across several feminine issues. However, the effect of gender is null on issues concerning political stance. Our findings suggest that while single-party regimes allow gender differences to emerge among legislators on issues that are not politically important, they tend to discourage such differences on politically prominent issues. This study advances the literature on both gender politics and authoritarian politics.

Who promotes gender-sensitive policies?

We study whether female-headed local governments in Spain are more likely to engage in gender sensitive policies such as long-term care support, pre-schooling, or work and family-life balancing services. Using a fuzzy regression discontinuity design estimated on the set of mixed electoral races, we find no evidence of female mayors being more likely to implement these policies at the local level. We do find evidence of differences between parties in the probability of implementing these policies, suggesting that the gender of the politician is less important than their partisan or ideological position when it comes to these policy levers. We interpret these results through a model of political selection in which strong parties can impose their agendas on candidates despite primitive differences in policy preferences across genders.

Sexism and Attitudes Toward Policy Spending in Australia and the United States

Sexist attitudes influence a wide range of political behaviors, including support for explicitly gendered policies like gender quotas. But we know much less about how sexism might broadly shape policy preferences. We argue that some policy domains are implicitly associated with being pro-women or pro-men because of gender socialization, gender segregation in the workforce, and differences in policy preferences in the general population and among political elites. As (hostile) sexists view women as inherently undeserving, making illegitimate claims on government, and getting ahead at the expense of men, we hypothesize that they will oppose policies associated with women, while supporting “male” policies such as defense and law enforcement. We test our hypothesis using the 2019 Australian Election Study and 2018 US Cooperative Congressional Study. We find similar patterns of policy preferences, wherein those holding sexist attitudes (net of other attitudes and demographic characteristics) want to cut funding for pro-women policies like social services, education, and health, while they approve of increased funding for law enforcement and defense.

Conserving for the common good: Preferences for water conservation policies during a severe drought in Northern California

During the 2011–2017 drought in California, water providers used a variety of demand-side management (DSM) policies to successfully reduce water consumption by over 20%. Unfortunately, because utilities used numerous conservation policies simultaneously, little is known about support for specific policies—specifically, an untested water-budgeting policy wherein utilities gave households an allotment of water and charged higher prices for water used in excess of the budget. California recently legislated mandatory long-term reductions in water usage. It is therefore critical to obtain a better understanding of which policies, including water budgeting, have strongest public support, and to understand how the drought experience changed residents' water use behaviors, attitudes, beliefs, habits, and personal capabilities surrounding conservation. This work surveyed individuals residing in northern California, the “North State,” during a period of severe drought. We used best-worst scaling to determine households’ preferences for DSM policies; asked households how their water use behaviors changed; and evaluated psychological attitudes toward drought and water conservation. Results show the vast majority of households changed their water use behaviors during the drought. Over two-thirds of respondents never exceeded their water budgets and said they would continue to conserve after the state lifted conservation requirements. Respondents preferred water budgets relative to more familiar DSM policies, a result with implications for forecasting future water demand. Last, our survey finds only minor differences in policy preferences for respondents with different demographics and attitudes toward water use, even for variables (e.g., income) that previous literature has found to have disparate welfare effects across users. • A majority of Californians changed their water-use behaviors during severe drought. • Northern California residents support using novel water budgets over voluntary conservation or watering restrictions. • Sociodemographic/psychological differences had little effect on conservation support.

Examining the Actor Coalitions and Discourse Coalitions of the Opt-Out Movement in New York: A Discourse Network Analysis

Background/Context Since 2013, opting out of state standardized tests has become a movement—the grassroots, organized efforts to refuse to take high-stakes state standardized tests. In particular, opt-out rates in the state of New York have been consistently fluctuating around 20%. Purpose/Objective This study aims to examine the actor coalitions and discourse coalitions that have propelled the opt-out movement in the state of New York—the movement's epicenter with the highest opt-out rate in the United States. Conceptual Framework This study is conceptually grounded in the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), a prominent conceptual lens to investigate the formation of coalitions and their impact on policymaking. The ACF posits that advocacy coalitions are forged by policy actors who have similar policy preferences. By contrast, differences in policy preferences are manifested in the discourse that serves to defend or propose coherent arguments as justifications for policy preferences held by the opposition coalitions. Research Design This study compiled the Opt-out Discourse Data Set by using data from 323 press articles and 52 archival documents from 2015 to 2018. Each news article or archival document was coded with three variables: movement actors, statements articulated by the actors, and the actors’ sentiment toward the statements. An actor-statement bipartite network, an actor coalition network, and a discourse coalition network were created, respectively. Next, Freeman degree centrality was calculated to identify major actors and their statements. The network metrics of density and connectedness of the two competing coalitions were calculated to compare the coalitions’ network structure. Findings In the actor coalition network, the movement advocacy coalition is clearly more densely connected than the movement opposition coalition in terms of the number of actors, coalition density, and coalition connectedness. The discourse coalition network shows similar patterns: the movement advocacy coalition is densely connected, as evidenced by the numbers of nodes in each coalition and the network metrics of coalition density and connectedness. Conclusions/Recommendations This study concludes with a discussion on how the future of the opt-out movement depends on (1) how the movement advocacy coalition continues to amass power and influence in education policymaking, and (2) how the New York State Education Department exercises its power over implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Moreover, this article demonstrates the application of discourse network analysis to examine qualitative data in education research. The discourse network approach is particularly instrumental in explaining a policy output by identifying coalitions and their interactions within and across the coalitions.

American Party Women Redux: Stability in Partisan Gender Gaps

ABSTRACTRecent research in American politics demonstrates that despite gender-based partisan sorting, gender gaps in policy preferences persist within political parties—particularly among Republicans. Republican women report significantly more moderate views than their male counterparts across a range of policy areas. These gaps are largely attributable to gender differences in beliefs about the appropriate scope of government and attitudes toward gender-based inequality. Arguably, gender has become a more salient feature of American elections in recent years, and this heightened salience raises questions about whether these within-party gender gaps are stable over time or vary across campaign contexts. We use survey data from the 2012 and 2016 American National Election Study to evaluate whether gender gaps in policy preferences are stable across elections or if the 2016 election context affected the magnitude of gender differences in policy preferences. We find that gender gaps in policy preferences within political parties are fairly stable across the two electoral periods.

The Political Consequences of External Economic Shocks: Evidence from Poland

AbstractHow do external economic shocks influence domestic politics? We argue that those materially exposed to the shock will display systematic differences in policy preferences and voting behavior compared to the unexposed, and political parties can exploit these circumstances. Empirically, we take advantage of the 2015 surprise revaluation of the Swiss franc to identify the Polish citizens with direct economic exposure to this exogenous event. Using an original survey fielded prior to the 2015 elections and an embedded survey experiment, we show that exposed individuals were more likely to demand government support and more likely to desert the government and vote for the largest opposition party, which was able to use the shock to expand its electoral coalition without alienating its core voters. Our article clarifies the connection between international shocks, voters’ policy preferences, partisan policy responses, and, ultimately, voting decisions.

Enlargement and exit: The origins of Article 50

Many international organizations and the vast majority of federations lack exit clauses. Existing theoretical explanations of this stylized fact focus on issues of credible commitment, signaling, and the risk of strategic exploitation. However, such accounts are unable to explain the adoption of Article 50 by the European Union, which allows unilateral withdrawal. I theorize and demonstrate empirically that in the case of the European Union, an exit-voice logic lies at its origin during the 2002–2003 European Convention. As a protection to undesired policy changes post entry, countries of the 2004 Eastern accession demanded an exit right. Underlying the fear for policy changes was their much lower level of economic development and corresponding differences in policy preferences. As a mirror image, rich outliers like the United Kingdom and Denmark also supported Article 50, which likely contributed to its final adoption through the Treaty of Lisbon.

How information affects support for education spending: Evidence from survey experiments in Germany and the United States

To study whether current spending levels and public knowledge of them contribute to transatlantic differences in policy preferences, we implement parallel survey experiments in Germany and the United States. In both countries, support for increased education spending and teacher salaries falls when respondents receive information about existing levels. Treatment effects vary by prior knowledge in a manner consistent with information effects rather than priming. Support for salary increases is inversely related to salary levels across American states, suggesting that higher salaries could explain much of Germans' lower support for increases. Information about the tradeoffs between specific spending categories shifts preferences from class-size reduction towards alternative purposes. Additional German experiments indicate that information effects extend to specific reform proposals and to other areas of public spending.

Gendered policy preferences? Candidates’ views on political issues in a comparative perspective

This article examines whether gender affects candidates’ position on the economic and cultural dimensions of political competition in nine West European countries. Using data from the Comparative Candidate Survey, we find that female candidates hold, on average, more liberal views than their male party colleagues. These gender differences vary according to the nature of issues. Female candidates are more liberal than their party colleagues on the cultural dimension, but we find no systematic differences in policy preferences on economic issues. Moreover, gender differences vary according to parties’ ideological position on the left–right scale with a more pronounced gender gap in right-wing parties. Our findings contribute to the literature on female candidates and on the impact of women in politics more broadly.

How Nonpartisan Ballot Design Conceals Partisanship: A Survey Experiment of School Board Members in Two States

Studies suggest that between one-fourth and one-third of localities elect their leaders on partisan ballots. Does the presence of a party label on the ballot affect the level of partisanship in local office? I leverage the fact that within select states, school boards vary as to whether their members are elected on partisan or nonpartisan ballots. Do the differences in policy preferences between Democrats and Republicans differ across these ballot contexts? Does a party cue treatment, where respondents are reminded of the general policy positions of both parties, differentially affect elected officials in different ballot contexts? Evidence from the survey reveals a group of “polarized nonpartisans” who tend to express more partisan views about public policy than their co-partisans elected in an explicitly partisan system. At the same time, providing party cues in policy debates disproportionately moves those elected on partisan ballots as opposed to nonpartisan ones. That partisan-elected officials are more influenced by party cues appears to validate the motivations of nonpartisan reformers, yet the “polarized nonpartisans” found in the control group should give those reformers pause and reveals the need for continued research into the behavioral consequences of nonpartisan ballots.

Finding beneficiaries: trade adjustment assistance system in South Korea

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the essential cause for the policy failure of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) in South Korea.Design/methodology/approachTo substantiate the claims made for the failure of the policy, this paper focuses on the differences in policy preferences among the government ministries and agencies involved in TAA.FindingsThe failure in the TAA policy, according to this study, was attributed to the conflicts and miscoordination arising from the differences in policy preferences among government ministries and agencies. To rectify this failure, the South Korean government had to revise its laws and regulations several times over a short period.Originality/valueDrawing on the analytical framework of the literature on policy failure, this paper examines the causal relationships between outcomes of TAA policy and the conflicts or miscoordination among government bodies at each stage: initiatives and planning, implementation and operation of the policy.

Whose input counts? Evaluating the process and outcomes of public consultation through the BC Water Act Modernization

ABSTRACTPublic consultation has become an increasingly common form of democratic engagement. While critics have challenged the potential for public consultation to democratize policy-making due to existing power structures, few studies have undertaken a systematic evaluation of the policy outcomes of consultation. This study combines qualitative and quantitative techniques to systematically analyze participants’ responses to policy proposals, and compare those responses with resulting policies. We utilized this approach to examine the large-scale public consultation process that informed the development of British Columbia’s new Water Sustainability Act (2014). Our analysis revealed: (1) barriers to effectual engagement, particularly for First Nations; (2) statistical differences in policy preferences between industry and nonindustry groups; and (3) patterns in how these preferences align with policy outcomes, suggesting uneven participant influence on policy-making. This study highlights the importance of analyzing consultation outcomes alongside process design, and the need to assess consultation’s fairness and effectiveness by examining its outcomes for different participant groups.

What Determines Public Support for Graduated Development Impact Fees?

The development impact fee is one growth management tool that is often adopted to reduce externalities associated with development on the urban fringe. But it is also used as a revenue generator that offsets property taxes. While graduated impact fees are a potential means to reduce sprawling development, it is unclear which public constituencies favor their adoption. Using an adjacent category logit model, there is limited evidence for exclusion based on race or class and, surprisingly, homeownership is not a major determinant of support. The model results indicate differences in policy preferences among longtime Phoenix residents, newcomers, city dwellers, and sub/exurbanites, which may suggest a desire to maintain the status quo and shift the burden of new development to developers and homebuyers. This article contributes to local government literature through an empirical examination of how sociodemographic factors drive public support for graduated development impact fees.

How Information Affects Support for Education Spending: Evidence from Survey Experiments in Germany and the United States

To study whether current spending levels and public knowledge of them contribute to transatlantic differences in policy preferences, we implement parallel survey experiments in Germany and the United States. In both countries, support for increased education spending and teacher salaries falls when respondents receive information about existing levels. Treatment effects vary by prior knowledge in a manner consistent with information effects rather than priming. Support for salary increases is inversely related to salary levels across American states, suggesting that salary differences could explain much of Germans' lower support for increases. Information about the tradeoffs between specific spending categories shifts preferences from class-size reduction towards alternative purposes.

How Information Affects Support for Education Spending: Evidence from Survey Experiments in Germany and the United States

To study whether current spending levels and public knowledge of them contribute to transatlantic differences in policy preferences, we implement parallel survey experiments in Germany and the United States. In both countries, support for increased education spending and teacher salaries falls when respondents receive information about existing levels. Treatment effects vary by prior knowledge in a manner consistent with information effects rather than priming. Support for salary increases is inversely related to salary levels across American states, suggesting that salary differences could explain much of Germans’ lower support for increases. Information about the tradeoffs between specific spending categories shifts preferences from class-size reduction towards alternative purposes.

The politics of bank bailout in Japan: a cognitive capture and leadership view

This article explores why the Japanese government did not decisively intervene on behalf of bank bailouts at the early stage of the banking crisis of 1997–98 and investigates the institutional and political context behind the use of fiscal money for bank bailouts in 1997–98, 1998–99, and 2001–05. In contrast with prevailing views, which emphasize the conflicts of interest or differences in policy preferences between politicians and bureaucrats and their captured nature either by bankers’ special interests or political/bureaucratic interests, this article argues that Japanese policymakers shared a congruent policy preference — that is, minimizing the disruptions in the existing institutional arrangement in government-bank-firm relations and this congruence in policy preference (or ‘cognitive capture’) compelled the government to take a creditor-centered approach to the banking problem — i.e., letting banks resolve their own problems. It also argues that a strong political leadership that can break with the ‘cognitive capture’ and sustain government's resolute commitment to solving the nonperforming loan problem is an essential factor for successful bank restructuring.

Side by Side, Worlds Apart

The degree to which people desire policy change is a function of two factors: preferences for future policies and perceptions of current policies. Political scientists, pollsters, and pundits know a good deal about people’s policy preferences but surprisingly little about the distance of those preferences from policy perceptions. In this article, we assess the distance between policy perceptions and policy preferences to calculate the amount of policy change desired. The data come from an original survey tapping respondents’ preferred and perceived policies and from those few National Election Surveys where parallel items on policy preferences and perceptions were posed. By incorporating policy perceptions alongside of preferences, our findings provide a better indication of the gulf between the policy change desired by liberals and the policy change desired by conservatives. The findings help explain polarization in the United States where differences in policy preferences alone often do not indicate extreme diversity.

Where You Sit is Where You Stand: Policy Preferences in the Czechoslovak Transition

This paper shows that systematic differences in policy preferences existed between Czechs and Slovaks in the early 1990s. In spite of having lived in the same institutional environment for almost 75 years and in spite of being subjected to the same policy shocks in that period, the Czechs displayed significantly stronger pro-market attitudes than the Slovaks. Those differences are not explained by a variation in ‘collective memory’ of the pre-communist era, differences in the levels of economic development before communism, differences in religiosity, legal origins or past institutions. To a large extent, however, the differences in policy preferences can be accounted for by the expected costs of transition in different areas of Czechoslovakia. In particular, the unemployment rate in 1994, after the core of the economic reforms had been adopted, accounts for almost one half of the differences in market-related policy preferences between Czechs and Slovaks in the early phases of the transition. It seems therefore that the variation in expectations about whether particular regions were likely to be winners or losers of the transition affected individual preferences over policy.

The Macro Politics of a Gender Gap

What explains the dynamic movement in the gender gap in public opinion toward government activism over the past 30 years? The thermostatic model of politics suggests that aggregate public opinion adjusts to liberal changes in public policy by preferring less government and to conservative changes in policy by preferring more government. Given the cross-sectional differences in policy preferences between men and women, we argue that the dynamic movement in the gender gap in policy preferences for more or less government spending is a function of asymmetrical responses by men and women to changes in public policy. We find that both men and women respond to changes in public policy by shifting their policy preferences in the same direction. But men appear more responsive to policy changes than do women. It is this asymmetrical response to changes in public policy that is responsible for the dynamics of the gender gap in policy preferences across time. Our results show that the gap increases when policy moves in a liberal direction, as men move in a conservative direction at a faster rate than women. In contrast, when policy moves to the right, the opinions of both men and women will respond by moving to the left, but the greater responsiveness among men will decrease the gap, bringing male preferences closer to the preferences of women.