Standard redistributive arguments suggest that the impact of household income on preferences for public education spending should be negative, because wealthier families are likely to oppose the redistributive effect of public funding. However, the empirical evidence does not confirm this prediction. This paper addresses this ‘puzzle’ by focusing on the role of the inclusiveness of the education system and the allocation of public spending between tiers of education in shaping the impact of income on preferences. By using data from the International Social Survey Programme (2006), we show that, when access to higher levels of education is restricted (low inclusiveness) and when the share of public spending on tertiary education is high, the poor are less likely to support public education spending. This result suggests that reforming the education system towards greater inclusiveness might contribute to increase political backing for public investment in education from the relatively poor majority of the population.
Individual preferences for public education spending. Does personal income matter? / Di Gioacchino, Debora; Sabani, Laura; Tedeschi, Simone. - In: ECONOMIC MODELLING. - ISSN 0264-9993. - (2019). [10.1016/j.econmod.2019.01.007]
Individual preferences for public education spending. Does personal income matter?
Di Gioacchino, Debora;Sabani, Laura;Tedeschi, Simone
2019
Abstract
Standard redistributive arguments suggest that the impact of household income on preferences for public education spending should be negative, because wealthier families are likely to oppose the redistributive effect of public funding. However, the empirical evidence does not confirm this prediction. This paper addresses this ‘puzzle’ by focusing on the role of the inclusiveness of the education system and the allocation of public spending between tiers of education in shaping the impact of income on preferences. By using data from the International Social Survey Programme (2006), we show that, when access to higher levels of education is restricted (low inclusiveness) and when the share of public spending on tertiary education is high, the poor are less likely to support public education spending. This result suggests that reforming the education system towards greater inclusiveness might contribute to increase political backing for public investment in education from the relatively poor majority of the population.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
DiGioacchino_Individual_2019.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
608.69 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
608.69 kB | Adobe PDF | Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.