Not logged in.

Contribution Details

Type Working Paper
Scope Discipline-based scholarship
Title Gender preference gaps and voting for redistribution
Organization Unit
Authors
  • Eva Ranehill
  • Roberto A. Weber
Language
  • English
Institution University of Zurich
Series Name Working paper series / Department of Economics
Number 271
ISSN 1664-7041
Number of Pages 34
Date 2021
Abstract Text There is substantial evidence that women tend to support different policies and political candidates than men. Many studies also document gender differences in a variety of important preference dimensions, such as risk-taking, competition and pro-sociality. However, the degree to which differential voting by men and women is related to these gaps in more basic preferences requires an improved understanding. We conduct an experiment in which individuals in small laboratory “societies” repeatedly vote for redistribution policies and engage in production. We find that women vote for more egalitarian redistribution and that this difference persists with experience and in environments with varying degrees of risk. This gender voting gap is accounted for partly by both gender gaps in preferences and by expectations regarding economic circumstances. However, including both these controls in a regression analysis indicates that the latter is the primary driving force. We also observe policy differences between male- and female-controlled groups, though these are substantially smaller than the mean individual differences - a natural consequence of the aggregation of individual. preferences into collective outcomes.
Related URLs
Other Identification Number merlin-id:15440
PDF File Download from ZORA
Export BibTeX
EP3 XML (ZORA)
Keywords Gender differences, risk, altruism, redistributive preferences, experiment, Geschlechtsunterschied, Altruismus, Risikoverhalten, Wahlverhalten, Entscheidungsfindung, Umverteilung, Experiment
Additional Information Auch erschienen als CESifo Working Paper, No. 6776 Revised version ; Former title: Do gender preference gaps impact policy outcomes?