Abstract
We estimate the determinants of individuals’ inequality aversion and preferences for redistribution in Turkey using the 2007 and 2011 World Values Survey data. Our results show that factors as predictors of opposing inequality and supporting redistribution in both surveys are dissatisfaction with the financial situation of the household, being on the left side of the political scale, belief that hard work brings a better life, and the opposite of this belief as well. According to the 2011 survey, being woman, being self-employed, belonging to lower class, living in poorer East Central Anatolia region and in Central Anatolia are associated with increased opposition to inequality and support for redistribution. The odds of supporting redistribution decrease for people living in the Aegean region according to both the surveys. For 2007, being in the highest income category relative to the middle is associated with a decreased opposition to inequality and support for redistribution. As for the impact of living in a specific region, besides Aegean region, for 2007, coefficients indicate a decrease in the odds for the following regions: North Eastern Anatolia, Eastern Marmara, Central Anatolia and Western Black Sea.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
For example, for the year 2006, public tax auditors reported that 65.3 % of due direct taxes had been evaded and/or avoided (http://arsiv.sabah.com.tr/2007/05/03/haber).
- 2.
“One of the assumptions underlying ordered logistic (and ordered probit) regression is that the relationship between each pair of outcome groups is the same. This is called the proportional odds assumption or the parallel regression assumption. Because the relationship between all pairs of groups is the same, there is only one set of coefficients (only one model). If this was not the case, we would need different models to describe the relationship between each pair of outcome groups.” If the proportional odds assumption is violated, the model needs to be run as a generalized ordered logistic model (Institute for Digital Research and Education (idre) UCLA: Statistical Consulting Group 2012, accessed 20 December 2012).
- 3.
By equalizing values from 1 to 5 of the dependent variable to 1, and values from 6 to 10 to 0. These results are available upon request.
- 4.
Technical Specifications for Turkey of the WVS, available at: http://www.wvsevsdb.com.
References
Alesina, A., & Angeletos, G. M. (2005). Fairness and redistribution. The American Economic Review, 95(4), 960–980.
Alesina, A., Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. (2004). Inequality and happiness: Are Europeans and Americans different? Journal of Public Economics, 88, 2009–2042.
Alesina, A., & Giuliano, P. (2009). Preferences for redistribution (NBER Working Paper 14825), [online] Available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w14825. Accessed 20 Sep 2012.
Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2005). Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 897–931.
Bénabou, R., & Ok, E. (2001). Social mobility and the demand for redistribution: The POUM hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 447–487.
Cojocaru, A. (2011). Inequality and well being in transition economies: A non-experimental test of inequality aversion (Working Papers 238). ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
Corneo, G., & Grüner, H. P. (2002). Individual preferences for political redistribution. Journal of Public Economics, 83(1), 83–107.
Fehr, E., Naef, M., & Schmidt, K. M. (2006). Inequality aversion, efficiency, and maximin preferences in simple distribution experiments: Comment. The American Economic Review, 96(5), 1912–1917.
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817–868.
Ferreira, F. H. G., Gignoux, J., & Aran, M. (2010). Inequality of economic opportunity in Turkey: An assessment using asset indicators and women’s background variables. State Planning Organization of the Republic of Turkey and World Bank Welfare and Social Policy Analytical Work Program Working Paper No. 3.
Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Ramos, X. (2010). Inequality aversion and risk attitudes (IZA Discussion Paper no. 4703).
Fong, C. (2001). Social preferences, self-interest and the demand for redistribution. Journal of Public Economics, 82, 225–246.
Gaeta, G. L. (2012). In the mood for redistribution. An empirical analysis of individual preferences for redistribution in Italy. Economics Bulletin, 32(3), 2383–2398.
Gezici, F. (2006). New regional definition and spatial analysis of regional ınequalities in Turkey related to the regional policies of EU. Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, 12(1), 10–32.
Guillaud, E. (2013). Preferences for redistribution: An empirical analysis over 33 countries. Journal of Economic Inequality, 11(1), 57–78.
Haggard, S., Kaufman, R. R., & Long, J. D. (2013). Income, occupation, and preferences for redistribution in the developing world. Studies in Comparative International Development, 48(2), 113–140.
Institute for Digital Research and Education (idre) UCLA: Statistical Consulting Group. (2012). Stata data analysis examples, ordered logistic regression, [online] Available at http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/dae/ologit.htm. Accessed 20 Dec 2012.
Kaltenthaler, K., Ceccoli, S., & Gelleny, R. (2008). Attitudes toward eliminating ıncome ınequality in Europe. European Union Politics, 9(2), 217–241.
Luttmer, E. F. P., & Singhal, M. (2011). Culture, context, and the taste for redistribution. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(1), 157–79.
Macunovich, D. J. (2011). A note on ınequality aversion across countries. Using two new measures (IZA Discussion Paper no. 5734).
Neher, F. (2012). Preferences for redistribution around the world. Freie Universitat Berlin School of Business and Economics Discussion Paper, Economics 2012/2.
Piketty, T. (1999). Attitudes toward ıncome ınequality in France: Do people really disagree? Seminar notes no. 9918, C.E.P.R.E.M.A.P.
Scheve, K. A., & Stasavage, D. (2006). Religion and preferences for social insurance. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1(3), 255–286.
Stata Technical Bulletin. (2000). STB-53. Texas: Stata Corporation.
Tosuner, M., & Demir, İ. C. (2008). Ege Bölgesi’nin Vergi Ahlak Düzeyi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, [online] Available at http://www.iibfdergi.aku.edu.tr/pdf/10_2/18.pdf. Accessed 27 Jan 2013.
Verme, P. (2007). Happiness and ınequality aversion worldwide. Conference Paper, [online] Available at http://www.isid.ac.in/~planning/ConferenceDec07/Papers/PaoloVerme.pdf. Accessed 5 Nov 2012.
World Bank. (2010). Report No: 48627-TR. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Acknowledgements
This research was financially supported by the Galatasaray University Scientific Research Projects Fund under the Project code 14.103.001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Karayel, A. (2016). Attitudes to Income Inequality and Preferences for Redistribution in Turkey. In: Bilgin, M., Danis, H., Demir, E., Can, U. (eds) Business Challenges in the Changing Economic Landscape - Vol. 1. Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, vol 2/1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22596-8_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22596-8_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22595-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22596-8
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)