Against the current consensus among comparative political economists, we argue that inequality matters for redistributive politics in advanced capitalist societies, but it is the structure of inequality, not the level of inequality, that matters. Our theory posits that middle-income voters will be inclined to ally with low-income voters and support redistributive policies when the distance between the middle and the poor is small relative to the distance between the middle and the rich. We test this proposition with data from 15 to 18 advanced democracies and find that both redistribution and nonelderly social spending increase as the dispersion of earnings in the upper half of the distribution increases relative to the dispersion of earnings in the lower half of the distribution. In addition, we present survey evidence on preferences for redistribution among middle-income voters that is consistent with our theory and regression results indicating that the left parties are more likely to participate in government when the structure of inequality is characterized by skew.
Why is it that some countries have witnessed significant increases in inequality since the 1960s while at the same time experiencing very little change in the way politics is conducted? And why is it that in other countries, where inequality has increased much less, the Left has become substantially more redistributive? The answer, the authors argue, has to do with the interaction between inequality and political mobilization of low-income voters. The authors make two points in this article. First, high levels of inequality move Left parties to the left. Second, although increasing inequality pushes the core constituencies of Left parties to the left, it also makes some individuals less likely to be involved in politics. The authors argue that Left parties will respond to an increase in inequality only when low-income voters are politically mobilized. They explore these claims through a comparative analysis of Left party programs in 10 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries over the period 1966 to 2002.
This article draws on a new data set that enables the authors to compare the distribution of income from employment across OECD countries. Specifically, the article conducts a pooled cross-sectional time-series analysis of the determinants of wage inequality in sixteen countries from 1973 to 1995. The analysis shows that varieties of capitalism matter. The authors find that the qualities that distinguish social market economies from liberal market economies shape the way political and institutional variables influence wage inequality. Of particular interest to political scientists is the finding that the wage-distributive effects of government partisanship are contingent on institutional context. Union density emerges in the analysis as the single most important factor influencing wage inequality in both institutional contexts.
Can egalitarianism itself contribute to growth? This political scientist looks at the recent success of the Nordic states and answers "yes." He also cites other characteristics that have made the Nordic economies work, not least their investment in education and policies to promote female employment.
Explaining why the German speaking Swiss were so reluctant about joining the European Economic Area and the French German speaking were so enthusiastic.
Since the 2000s, local communities responsible for the management of common-pool resources, such as water or forest, have started to organize themselves regionally in order to promote their mode of community-based governance. Such a change in the scale of governance and in the agency of local communities reflects the on-going globalization of common-pool resources. Furthermore, it illustrates the evolving nature of global environmental governance that now includes new actors from civil society. Relying on a comparison of two transnational community-based networks in Latin America, the paper will first study the strategies and interests of such communities in the transformation of global norms affecting the management of their resources. Secondly, it will analyze the extent to which the relationships between those communal groups and nation states still remain decisive. Finally, it will question how this involvement of grassroots movements modifies both the essence of natural resources and their scales of governance.
On February 9, Swiss voters narrowly approved the reintroduction of quotas on immigration, damaging Swiss-EU relations in the process. Why did the Swiss vote this way? Does it have anything to do with Robin Hood? And will this impact on the EU membership debate in the UK?
This articles shows how theories of international relations are unsatisfactory for explaining the failure of the myriad attempts to establish a transatlantic free trade area throughout history. The mere removal of tariffs should logically have occurred a long time ago. Perhaps it would have been better to study the weight of protectionist lobbies on both sides of the Atlantic to explain these multiple failures. Taking into account this factor would certainly better assess the likelihood of success of the current revival than current explanations that seem unsatisfactory. Organization: Institut d'études européennes, Université libre de Bruxelles
Cet article critique une approche qualifiée de « dissociative » dans l'analyse des relations entre les États-Unis et l'Union européenne. Il remet en cause aussi bien les présupposés théoriques que les observations empiriques des chercheurs qui ont prédit une dislocation des liens transatlantiques du fait de la fin de la guerre froide. Cette étude analyse principalement les raisonnements qui ont permis d'affirmer que I'OTAN était condamnée à disparaître, que les accords de l'Uruguay Round ne seraient jamais conclus, que l'Union européenne deviendrait une forteresse protectionniste et que les États-Unis étaient engagés dans une entreprise de sabotage du marché et de la monnaie unique européenne.
