Self-interest versus sociotropic considerations: an information-based perspective to understanding individuals’ trade preferences

Abstract

Economic self-interest has been central to explaining individual trade preferences. Depending on the theoretical trade model different variables influence individuals' attitude towards globalization and existing research has come to different conclusions as to whether individuals' preferences are dependent on skill level, income or the sector of employment. Other studies depart from economic self-interest by arguing that it is not self-interest that motivates individuals to form their preference, but country-level economic factors (sociotropic considerations) instead. We argue that one needs to approach trade preference formation from an informationbased perspective and we test experimentally how people react if they are aware that they personally or nationally will gain or lose from trade and which of the two aspects are more important. By using survey experiments embedded in a representative national survey in the U.S. we are able to differentiate whether a person was triggered by ego-or sociotropic benefits/costs of free trade.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it: how the public’s economic confidence in the fossil fuel industry reduces support for a clean energy transition

“…11 Generally, it is conceivable that both mechanisms may work as, for example, both employment in the oil and gas sector as well as benefits for communities have been linked to policy support for alternative energy industries (Kallbekken and Saelen 2011, Boudet et al 2016, Tvinnereim and Ivarsflaten 2016, Olson-Hazboun et al 2018, Mayer and Malin 2019, Beiser-McGrath and Bernauer 2020. In this study, we were limited to testing the sociotropic version of the argument but future studies may explore both, egocentric and sociotropic considerations and also, how the two are linked (e.g., Schaffer andSpilker 2019, p. 1271-72).…”

“…For example, individuals may form their trade preferences based on national information cues (Mansfield and Mutz 2009). Alternatively, individuals' trade policy preferences can also originate from other-regarding behavior (altruism), such as in cases where people residing in areas with geographically concentrated industries consider how trade policies may affect the local/regional industries and, in turn, the general wellbeing of the region (Schaffer andSpilker 2019, p. 1271). Considering the historical role that fossil fuel industries have played in the economic developments of entire regions through their direct (employment) and indirect (taxes, economic benefits for ancillary businesses) effects (Mildenberger 2020, p. 39), it is conceivable that sociotropic economic considerations are at the core of our proposed link between confidence in these industries and support for climate policies.…”

Towards Explaining Varying Degrees of Politicization of EU Trade Agreement Negotiations

“…A wide range of studies have highlighted the material and cultural conditions that affect the formation of individual-level preferences on trade policy. The first group of studies usually considers such preferences as a function of the individual-level welfare effects of trade policy choices (Colantone & Stanig, 2018;Jensen, Quinn, & Weymouth, 2015;Margalit, 2011), while the second focuses on the role and identity-based consideration and cultural factors (Mansfield & Mutz, 2009, 2013Schaffer & Spilker, 2019). These studies thus contribute to identifying one important set of micro-foundations of trade policy formation (Kertzer & Zeitzoff, 2017;Owen & Walter, 2017).…”

Elite cueing and attitudes towards trade agreements: the case of TTIP

“…Several studies, focusing on a variety of different issues, have already found support for the expectation that cueing effects are smaller for more knowledgeable respondents compared to respondents with lower levels of knowledge (Kam, 2005;Nicholson, 2011;Boudreau and MacKenzie, 2014;Bechtel et al, 2015;Guisinger and Saunders, 2017;Pannico, 2017). Indeed, recent research indicates that less knowledgeable persons are still in need of simple heuristics such as elite cues even if they are provided with (hypothetical) information about the consequences of free trade for them or their country (Schaffer and Spilker, 2019).…”