Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:32:30.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2006

Jens Hainmueller  and
Michael J. Hiscox
Jens Hainmueller
Affiliation:
Government Department at Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., jhainm@fas.harvard.edu
Michael J. Hiscox
Affiliation:
Government Department at Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., hiscox@fas.harvard.edu
Get access

Abstract

Recent studies of public attitudes toward trade have converged on one central finding: support for trade restrictions is highest among respondents with the lowest levels of education. This has been interpreted as strong support for the Stolper-Samuelson theorem, the classic economic treatment of the income effects of trade that predicts that trade openness benefits those owning factors of production with which their economy is relatively well endowed (those with skills in the advanced economies) while hurting others (low-skilled workers). We reexamine the available survey data, showing that the impact of education on attitudes toward trade is almost identical among respondents in the active labor force and those who are not (even those who are retired). We also find that, while individuals with college-level educations are far more likely to favor trade openness than others, other types of education have no significant effects on attitudes, and some actually reduce the support for trade, even though they clearly contribute to skill acquisition. Combined, these results strongly suggest that the effects of education on individual trade preferences are not primarily a product of distributional concerns linked to job skills. We suggest that exposure to economic ideas and information among college-educated individuals plays a key role in shaping attitudes toward trade and globalization. This is not to say that distributional issues are not important in shaping attitudes toward trade—just that they are not clearly manifest in the simple, broad association between education levels and support for free trade.The authors would like to thank James Alt, Jeffry Frieden, Robert Lawrence, Dani Rodrik, Ron Rogowski, Ken Scheve, Andy Baker, Peter Gourevitch, and Beth Simmons for helpful comments on earlier drafts.

Type
Research Note
Information
International Organization , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 469 - 498
Copyright
© 2006 The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press

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

REFERENCES

Adler, Emanuel. 1992. The Emergence of Cooperation: National Epistemic Communities and the International Evolution of the Idea of Nuclear Arms Control. International Organization 46 (1):101–45.Google Scholar
Allport, G. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, Mass.: Addison & Wesley.
Baker, Andy. 2003. Why Is Trade Reform so Popular in Latin America? World Politics 55 (3):423–55.Google Scholar
Balistreri, Edward J. 1997. The Performance of the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek Model in Predicting Endogenous Policy Forces at the Individual Level. Canadian Journal of Economics 30 (1):1–17.Google Scholar
Bauer, Raymond A., Ithiel de Sola Pool, and Lewis Anthony Dexter. 1972. American Business and Public Policy: The Politics of Foreign Trade. 2d ed. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Beaulieu, Eugene. 2002. Factor or Industry Cleavages in Trade Policy? An Empirical Analysis of the Stolper-Samuelson Theorem. Economics and Politics 14 (2):99–131.Google Scholar
Betts, Katherine. 1988. Ideology and Immigration: Australia 1976 to 1987. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University Press.
Bhagwati, Jagdish. 1988. Protectionism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American Voter: Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Case, C. E., A. M. Greeley, and S. Fuchs. 1989. Social Determinants of Racial Prejudice. Sociological Perspectives 32 (4):469–83.Google Scholar
Destler, I. M. 1995. American Trade Politics. 3d ed. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Erikson, Robert S., Norman R. Luttbeg, and Kent L. Tedin. 1991. American Public Opinion: Its Origins, Content, and Impact. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan.
Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4):887–917.Google Scholar
Gabel, Matthew J. 1998. Interests and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion, and European Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gleason, J., and L. J. Van Scyoc. 1995. A Report on the Economic Literacy of Adults. Journal of Economic Education 26 (3):203–10.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith. 1988. Ideas, Institutions, and American Trade Policy. International Organization 42 (1):179–217.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith, and Robert Keohane, eds. 1993. Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Grossman, Gene, and Elhanan Helpman. 1994. Protection for Sale. American Economic Review 84 (4):833–50.Google Scholar
Haas, Peter M., ed. 1992. Knowledge, Power and International Policy Coordination. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Hall, Peter A., ed. 1989. The Political Power of Economic Ideas. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Hainmueller, Jens, and Michael J. Hiscox. 2004. Educated Preferences: Explaining Individual Attitudes Toward Immigration in Europe. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September.
Hiscox, Michael J. 2002. International Trade and Political Conflict. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Hiscox, Michael J. 2004. Through a Glass and Darkly: Attitudes Towards International Trade and the Curious Effects of Issue Framing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September.
Holsti, Ole. R. 1996. Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
International Social Survey Program (ISSP). 1998. International Social Survey Program: National Identity, 1995 [computer file]. ICPSR release. Cologne, Germany: Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung/Ann Arbor, Mich.: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. 〈www.icpsr.umich.edu〉.
Jones, Ronald. 1971. A Three-Factor Model in Theory, Trade, and History. In Trade, Balance of Payments, and Growth, ed. Jagdish Bhagwati, Ronald Jones, Robert A. Mundell, and Jaroslav Vanek, 3–21. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Katzenstein, Peter, ed. 1996. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Keck, Margaret E., and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Kindleberger, Charles. 1975. The Rise of Free Trade in Western Europe. Journal of Economic History 35 (1):20–55.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Michael Tomz, and Jason Wittenberg. 2001. Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results. Version 2.0. Harvard University.
Krugman, Paul A. 1993. What Do Undergrads Need to Know About Trade? American Economic Review 83 (2):23–26.Google Scholar
Magee, Stephen. 1980. Three Simple Tests of the Stolper-Samuelson Theorem. In Issues in International Economics, edited by P. Oppenheimer, 138–53. London: Oriel Press.
Mayda, Anna Maria. 2004. Who Is Against Immigration? A Cross-Country Investigation of Attitudes Towards Immigrants. IZA Discussion Paper 1115. Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.
Mayda, Anna Maria, and Dani Rodrik. 2005. Why Are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others? European Economic Review 49 (6):1393–430.Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, and Alida Brill. 1983. Dimensions of Tolerance: What Americans Believe About Civil Liberties. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Miller, Warren E., Donald R. Kinder, Steven J. Rosenstone, and the National Election Studies. 1992. American National Election Study, 1992: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [Enhanced with 1990 and 1991 Data] [computer File]. 2d. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies, and Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. 〈www.icpsr.umich.edu〉.
Mussa, M. 1974. Tariffs and the Distribution of Income. Journal of Political Economy 82 (6):1191–203.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, Kevin, and Richard Sinnott. 2002. The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences. In Brookings Trade Forum, edited by Susan M. Collins and Dani Rodrik, 157–96. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Panel Study of Income Dynamics. 1999. 1968–1980 Retrospective Occupation-Industry Files Documentation. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan.
Price, Richard. 1998. Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines. International Organization 52 (3):613–44.Google Scholar
Pryor, Frederic. 2002. General Discussion. In Brookings Trade Forum, edited by Susan M Collins and Dani Rodrik, 201–3. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Rogowski, Ronald. 1989. Commerce and Coalitions. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Rosenstone, Steven J., Donald R. Kinder, Warren E. Miller, and the National Election Studies. 1996. American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [Computer file]. 4th version. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1999. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2000.
Ruggie, John Gerard. 1998. What Makes the World Hang Together? International Organization 52 (4):855–85.Google Scholar
Sass, Steven. 1997. The Promise of Private Pensions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Sass, Steven. 2003. Reforming the U.S. Retirement Income System: The Growing Role of Work. Issues in Brief 1; Boston College, Mass.: Center for Retirement Research.
Saunders, P. 1980. The Lasting Effects of Introductory Economics Courses. Journal of Economic Education 12 (1):1–14.Google Scholar
Scheve, Kenneth F., and Matthew J. Slaughter. 2001a. What Determines Individual Trade-Policy Preferences? Journal of International Economics 54 (2):267–92.Google Scholar
Scheve, Kenneth F., and Matthew J. Slaughter. 2001b. Globalization and the Perceptions of American Workers. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Scheve, Kenneth F., and Matthew J. Slaughter. 2001c. Labor Market Competition and Individual Preferences over Immigration Policy. Review of Economics and Statistics 83 (1):133–145.Google Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn. 1993. Human Rights, Principled Issue-Networks, and Sovereignty in Latin America. International Organization 47 (3):411–42.Google Scholar
Social Security Administration. 2002. 2000 Income of the Aged Chartbook. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Stolper, W., and P. Samuelson. 1941. Protection and Real Wages. Review of Economic Studies 9 (1):58–73.Google Scholar
Walstad, William B. 1997. The Effect of Economic Knowledge on Public Opinion of Economic Issues. Journal of Economic Education 28 (3):195–205.Google Scholar
Walstad, William B., and Ken Rebeck. 2002. Assessing the Economic Knowledge and Economic Opinions of Adults. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 42 (5):921–35.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
World Bank. Various years. World Development Indicators. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.