This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Sevä, I. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Local Contexts, Social Risks and Social Spending Preferences

A Multi-Level Approach

Department of Sociology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden, ingemar.johansson.seva{at}soc.umu.se

In this article, I analyse the relationship between local context and individuals’ social spending preferences in Sweden. The contextual unit studied is the municipality and the analyses are based on both individual-level survey data (n = 5,324) and municipal-level data. Multi-level modelling is used to handle data at both levels simultaneously. It is suggested that the presence of social risks in the local community affects whether individuals are willing to support high social spending. It is argued that the interdependent nature of certain social risks, such as local unemployment rates, depopulation and labour market structure, is an important factor explaining contextual influence on social spending preferences. The results indicate that the prevalence of social risks in a municipality affect the willingness of local inhabitants to support high social spending. Support for high social spending tends to be greater, taking individual-level determinants into account, in municipalities suffering from unemployment, ill health, depopulation, a low tax base and an industry sector dominated by agriculture and manufacturing. This finding also indicates that contextual influence on political attitudes might not be restricted to interpersonal interaction, as often suggested in past research.

Key Words: attitudes • local context • multi-level • social spending • Sweden • welfare state

References

• Andress, H.J. and Heien, T. ( 2001) ‘Four Worlds of Welfare State Attitudes? A Comparison of Germany, Norway, and the United States’, European Sociological Review 17: 337-56.
• Baldwin, P. ( 1990) The Politics of Social Solidarity: Class Bases of the European Welfare State, 1875-1975. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Birgersson, B.O. ( 1975) Kommunen som serviceproducent: Kommunal service och serviceattityder i 36 svenska kommuner. Stockholm: Statsvetenskapliga institutionen, Stockholms universitet.
• Blekesaune, M. and Quadagno, J. ( 2003) ‘Public Attitudes Toward Welfare State Policies: A Comparative Analysis of 24 Nations’, European Sociological Review 19: 415-27.[Abstract]
• Blomberg, H. and Kroll, C. ( 1999) ‘Do Structural Contexts Matter? Macrosociological Factors and Popular Attitudes Towards Public Welfare Services’, Acta Sociologica 42: 319-35.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Books, J.W. and Prysby, C.L. ( 1991) Political Behavior and the Local Context. New York: Praeger.
• Brännström, L. ( 2006) Phantom of the Neighbourhood: Longitudinal Studies on Area-Based Conditions and Individual Outcomes. Stockholm: Swedish Institute for Social Research.
• Burbank, M.J. ( 1995) ‘How Do Contextual Effects Work? Developing a Theoretical Model’, in M. Eagles (ed.) Spatial and Contextual Models in Political Research. London: Taylor and Francis.
• Burbank, M.J. ( 1997) ‘Explaining Contextual Effects on Vote Choice’, Political Behavior 19: 113-32.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Curtice, J. ( 1995) ‘Is Talking Over the Garden Fence of Political Import?’, in M. Eagles (ed.) Spatial and Contextual Models in Political Research. London: Taylor and Francis.
• Cutler, F. ( 2007) ‘Context and Attitude Formation: Social Interaction, Default Information, or Local Interests?’, Political Geography 26: 575-600.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Edlund, J. ( 2006) ‘Trust in the Capability of the Welfare State and General Welfare State Support: Sweden, 1997-2002’, Acta Sociologica 49: 395-417.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Edlund, J. ( 2007) ‘Class Conflicts and Institutional Feedback Effects in Liberal and Social Democratic Welfare Regimes: Attitudes toward State Redistribution and Welfare Policy in Six Western Countries’, in S. Svallfors (ed.) The Political Sociology of the Welfare State: Institutions, Social Cleavages and Orientations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Eriksson, K. ( 2007) Spelar adressen någon roll? En studie av områdeseffekter på medborgares politiska deltagande. Umeå: Statsvetenskapliga institutionen, Umeå universitet.
• Evans, G. ( 1993) ‘The Decline of Class Divisions in Britain? Class and Ideological Preferences in the 1960s and the 1980s’, British Journal of Sociology 44: 449-71.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Hox, J.J. ( 2002) Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
• Huckfeldt, R.R. ( 1986) Politics in Context: Assimilation and Conflict in Urban Neighborhoods. New York: Agathon Press.
• Huckfeldt, R.R. and Sprague, J. ( 1995) Citizens, Politics and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Jaeger, M.M. ( 2006) ‘What Makes People Support Public Responsibility for Welfare Provision: Self-Interest or Political Ideology? A Longitudinal Approach’, Acta Sociologica 49: 321-38.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Kautto, M. ( 2000) Two of a Kind? Economic Crisis, Policy Responses and Well-Being During the 1990’s in Sweden and Finland: A Balance Sheet for Welfare of the 1990’s (SOU 2000:83). Stockholm: Fritzes offentliga publikationer.
• Larsen, C.A. ( 2006) The Institutional Logic of Welfare Attitudes: How Welfare Regimes Influence Public Support. Aldershot: Ashgate.
• Luke, D.A. ( 2004) Multilevel Modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• MacKuen, M. and Brown, C. ( 1987) ‘Political Context and Attitude Change’, American Political Science Review 81: 471-90.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Magidson, J. and Vermunt, J.K. ( 2001) ‘Latent Class Factor and Cluster Models, Bi-Plots and Related Graphical Displays’, Sociological Methodology 31: 223-64.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Mutz, D.C. ( 1998) Impersonal Influence: How Perceptions of Mass Collectives Affect Political Attitudes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Overbye, E. ( 1995) ‘Explaining Welfare Spending’, Public Choice 83: 313-35.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Pattie, C. and Johnston, R. ( 1999) ‘Context, Conversation and Conviction: Social Networks and Voting at the 1992 British General Election’, Political Studies 47: 877-89.[CrossRef]
• Pattie, C. and Johnston, R. ( 2000) ‘"People Who Talk Together Vote Together": An Exploration of Contextual Effects in Great Britain’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90: 41-66.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Sannerstedt, A. ( 1981) Attityder till kommunal service. (Report from Kommunaldemokratiska forskningsgruppen, 9). Stockholm: LiberFörlag/Allmänna förlaget.
• Snyder, R. ( 2001) ‘Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method’, Studies in Comparative International Development 36: 93-110.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Steenbergen, M.R. and Jones, B.S. ( 2002) ‘Modeling Multilevel Data Structures’, American Journal of Political Science 46: 218-37.[CrossRef][Web of Science]

Acta Sociologica, Vol. 52, No. 3, 249-262 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0001699309339801


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Sevä, I. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?