Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-768ffcd9cc-w9xp6 Total loading time: 0.612 Render date: 2022-12-02T09:31:53.167Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2005

Lane Kenworthy
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology at the University of Arizona (lane.kenworthy@arizona.edu)
Jonas Pontusson
Affiliation:
Department of Politics at Princeton University (jpontuss@princeton.edu)

Abstract

We use data from the Luxembourg Income Study to examine household market inequality, redistribution, and the relationship between market inequality and redistribution in affluent OECD countries in the 1980s and 1990s. We observe sizeable increases in market household inequality in most countries. This development appears to have been driven largely, though not exclusively, by changes in employment: in countries with better employment performance, low-earning households benefited relative to high-earning ones; in nations with poor employment performance, low-earning households fared worse. In contrast to widespread rhetoric about the decline of the welfare state, redistribution increased in most countries during this period, as existing social-welfare programs compensated for the rise in market inequality. They did so in proportion to the degree of increase in inequality, producing a very strong positive association between changes in market inequality and changes in redistribution. We discuss the relevance of median-voter theory and power resources theory for understanding differences across countries and changes over time in the extent of compensatory redistribution.Lane Kenworthy is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Arizona (lane.kenworthy@arizona.edu). Jonas Pontusson is a professor in the Department of Politics at Princeton University (jpontuss@princeton.edu). Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Conference of Europeanists (March 2002), a workshop on the Comparative Political Economy of Inequality at Cornell University (April 2002), the annual meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (June 2002), and a seminar at the Center for European Studies, Harvard University (December 2003). For criticisms and suggestions the authors thank Richard Freeman, Janet Gornick, Alex Hicks, Torben Iversen, Larry Kahn, Tomas Larsson, Jim Mosher, Nirmala Ravishankar, David Rueda, Tim Smeeding, John Stephens, Michael Wallerstein, Christopher Way, Erik Wright, and the Perspectives on Politics reviewers.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2005 American Political Science Association

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, Alberto, and Edwards Glaeser. 2004. Fighting poverty in the US and Europe: A world of difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allan, James, and Lyle Scruggs. 2004. Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies. American Journal of Political Science 48 (3): 496512.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Anthony B., and Andrea Brandolini. 2001. Promise and pitfalls in the use of “secondary” data-sets: Income inequality in OECD countries as a case study. Journal of Economic Literature 39 (3): 77199.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Anthony, Lee Rainwater, and Timothy M. Smeeding. 1995. Income distribution in OECD countries. Paris: OECD.
Beramendi, Pablo. 2001. The politics of income inequality in the OECD: The role of secondary effects. Working paper 284. Luxembourg Income Study. http://www.lisproject.org/publications/liswps/284.pdf.
Beramendi, Pablo, and Thomas R. Cusack. 2004. Diverse disparities: The politics of wage, market, and disposable inequalities. Discussion paper of the Research Area Markets and Political Economy, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.
Blau, Francine D., and Lawrence M. Kahn. 2002. At home and abroad: U.S. labor market performance in international perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Blau, Francine D., and Lawrence M. Kahn. 1996. International differences in male wage inequality: Institutions versus market forces. Journal of Political Economy 104 (4): 791834.Google Scholar
Bradley, David, Evelyne Huber, Stephanie Moller, François Nielsen, and John D. Stephens. 2003. Distribution and redistribution in postindustrial democracies. World Politics 55 (2): 193228.Google Scholar
Burtless, Gary. 1998. Technological change and international trade. In The inequality paradox: Growth of income disparity, ed. James A. Auerbach and Richard S. Belous, 6091. Washington, DC: National Policy Association.
Ebbinghaus, Bernhard. 2000. Any way out of “exit from work”? Reversing the entrenched pathways of early retirement. In Welfare and work in the open economy, vol. 2, Diverse responses to common challenges, ed. Fritz W. Scharpf and Vivien A. Schmidt, 51153. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 2005. Income distributions and life chance opportunities. In The new egalitarianism, ed. Anthony Giddens and Patrick Diamond. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta, and Marino Regini, eds. 2000. Why deregulate labour markets? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Estevez-Abe, Margarita, Torben Iversen, and David Soskice. 2001. Social protection and the formation of skills: A reinterpretation of the welfare state. In Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage, ed. Peter A. Hall and David Soskice, 14583. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Franzese, Robert J. Jr. 2002. Macroeconomic policies in developed democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, Richard B., and Lawrence F. Katz. 1994. Rising wage inequality: The United States versus other advanced countries. In Working under different rules, ed. Richard B. Freeman, 2962. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Freeman, Richard B., and Lawrence F. Katz, eds. 1995. Differences and changes in wage structures. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Garfinkel, Irwin, Lee Rainwater, and Timothy M. Smeeding. 2004. Welfare state expenditures and the distribution of child opportunities. Working paper 379. Luxembourg Income Study. http://www.lisproject.org/publications/liswps/379.pdf.
Garrett, Geoffrey. 1998. Partisan politics in the global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Golden, Miriam A., Michael Wallerstein, and Peter Lange. 1999. Postwar trade-union organization and industrial relations in twelve countries. In Change and continuity in contemporary capitalism, ed. Herbert Kitschelt, Peter Lange, Gary Marks, and John D. Stephens, 194230. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gornick, Janet C. 1999. Gender equality in the labour market. In Gender and welfare state regimes, ed. Diane Sainsbury, 21042. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, Peter A., and David Soskice. 2001. Introduction. In Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage, ed. Peter Hall and David Soskice, 168. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hicks, Alexander. 1999. Social democracy and welfare capitalism: A century of income security politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Huber, Evelyne, and John D. Stephens. 2001. Development and crisis of the welfare state: Parties and policies in global markets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Iversen, Torben, and Thomas Cusack. 2000. The causes of welfare state expansion. World Politics 52 (3): 31349.Google Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Frances Rosenbluth. 2004. The political economy of gender: Explaining cross-national variation in the gender division of labor and the gender voting gap. Revised version of paper presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA.
Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2001. An asset theory of social policy preferences. American Political Science Review 95 (4): 87593.Google Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2004. Electoral systems and the politics of coalitions: Why some democracies redistribute more than others. Paper presented to the Conference of Europeanists, Chicago, March 11–13.
Iversen, Torben, and Anne Wren. 1998. Equality, employment, and budgetary restraint: The trilemma of the service economy. World Politics 50 (4): 50746.Google Scholar
Kautto, Mikko, Matti Heikkilä, Bjørn Hvinden, Staffan Marklund, and Niels Ploug, eds. 1999. Nordic social policy: Changing welfare states. London: Routledge.
Kenworthy, Lane. 2003. Do affluent countries face an incomes-jobs tradeoff? Comparative Political Studies 36 (10): 11801210.Google Scholar
Kenworthy, Lane. 2004. Egalitarian capitalism: Jobs, incomes, and growth in affluent countries. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kenworthy, Lane. Forthcoming. Jobs with equality. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Korpi, Walter. 1983. The democratic class struggle. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Korpi, Walter, and Joakim Palme. 2003. New politics and class politics in the context of austerity and globalization. American Political Science Review 97 (3): 42546.Google Scholar
Kwon, Hyeok Yong, and Jonas Pontusson. 2004. The dynamics of government partisanship, labor movements, and welfare spending in OECD countries, 1962–98. Unpublished paper, Department of Government, Cornell University.
Luxembourg Income Study. N.d. http://www.lisproject.org.
Mahler, Vincent, and David Jesuit. 2004. State redistribution in comparative perspective: A cross-national analysis of the developed countries. Working paper 392. Luxembourg Income Study. http://www.lisproject.org/publications/liswps/392.pdf.
Marklund, Staffan, and Anders Nordlund. 1999. Economic problems, welfare convergence, and political instability. In Kautto et al. 1999, 1953.
Meltzer, Allan H., and Scott F. Richard. 1981. A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy 89 (5): 91427.Google Scholar
Mishel, Lawrence, Jared Bernstein, and Heather Boushey. 2003. The state of working America 2002/2003. An Economic Policy Institute book. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Mitchell, Deborah. 1991. Income transfers in ten welfare states. Brookfield, VT: Avebury.
Moene, Karl Ove, and Michael Wallerstein. 2001. Inequality, social insurance, and redistribution. American Political Science Review 95 (4): 85974.Google Scholar
Moene, Karl Ove, and Michael Wallerstein. 2003. Earnings inequality and welfare spending. World Politics 55: 485516.Google Scholar
Nelson, Phillip. 1999. Redistribution and the income of the median voter. Public Choice 98 (1–2): 18794.Google Scholar
Nickell, Stephen, and Richard Layard. 1999. Labor market institutions and economic performance. In Handbook of labor economics, vol. 3C, ed. Orley Ashenfelter and David Card, 302984. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Organization for Economic Co-operation Development [OECD]. 1999. OECD employment outlook. Paris: OECD.
Organization for Economic Co-operation Development [OECD]. 2004. OECD social expenditure database: 1980–2001. Paris: OECD.
Organization for Economic Co-operation Development [OECD]. N.d. Trends in earnings dispersion. Unpublished dataset. OECD Directorate for Education, Employment, Labour, and Social Affairs.
Pierson, Paul. 1996. The new politics of the welfare state. World Politics 48 (2): 14379.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 2001. Coping with permanent austerity. In The new politics of the welfare state, ed. Paul Pierson, 41056. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ploug, Niels. 1999. Cuts in and reform of the Nordic cash benefit systems. In Kautto et al. 1999, 79103.
Pontusson, Jonas. 2005. Inequality and prosperity: Social Europe versus liberal America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Pontusson, Jonas, David Rueda, and Christopher Way. 2002. Comparative political economy of wage distribution. British Journal of Political Science 32 (2): 281308.Google Scholar
Romer, Thomas. 1975. Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax. Journal of Public Economics 4 (2): 16385.Google Scholar
Rueda, David, and Jonas Pontusson. 2000. Wage inequality and varieties of capitalism. World Politics 52 (3): 35083.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz W. 2000. Economic changes, vulnerabilities, and institutional capabilities. In Welfare and work in the open economy. Vol. 1, From vulnerability to competitiveness, ed. Fritz W. Scharpf and Vivien A. Schmidt, 21124. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schwabish, Jonathan A., Timothy M. Smeeding, and Lars Osberg. 2003. Income distribution and social expenditures: A cross-national perspective. Working paper 350. Luxembourg Income Study. http://www.lisproject.org.
Soskice, David. 1999. Divergent production regimes. In Change and continuity in contemporary capitalism, ed. Herbert Kitschelt, Peter Lange, Gary Marks, and John D. Stephens., 10134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stephens, John D. 1979. The transition from capitalism to socialism. London: Macmillan.
Strom, Kaare. 1990. A behavioral theory of competitive political parties. American Journal of Political Science 34 (2): 56598.Google Scholar
Swank, Duane. 2002. Global capital, political institutions, and policy change in developed welfare states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Visser, Jelle, and Anton Hemerijck. 1997. “A Dutch miracle”: Job growth, welfare reform, and corporatism in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Wallerstein, Michael. 1999. Wage-setting institutions and pay inequality in advanced industrial societies. American Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 64980.Google Scholar
272
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *