Abstract
This study analyzed how attitudes toward welfare vary or align in Korean society based on the distribution of income and assets. It aimed to identify coalition structures based on income and asset combinations surrounding the current welfare system. The analysis revealed that regardless of income level, groups that have not accumulated sufficient assets are more likely to have positive attitudes when it comes to advocating the expansion of public welfare spending. However, with regard to redistributive policies aimed at addressing social vulnerability, it is evident that there is currently no group capable of forming a coalition with the low-income, low-asset group. Therefore, it can be predicted that in the process of reforming the social security system, an approach of universal welfare policies, providing benefits to the majority of citizens, coupled with additional benefits proportional to the taxes paid, may receive high levels of support.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Certainly, the problems associated with time series data could be addressed using a random effects model. In fact, when we performed a panel ordinal logistic regression analysis using the 'xtologit' command in Stata, we explored the analysis with a random effects model and found that the results were not significantly different from those in this study. However, it's important to note that panel ordinal logistic regression assumes that weights remain constant over time within the same panel, which does not hold in this study due to the variation in weights across years. Given the need to correct for the over-representation of low-income households in this study, we decided to use pooled logistic regression analysis instead.
Housing wealth refers to real estate assets other than one's primary residence. It includes the price of the residential property and, in the case of home ownership, the value of the property. In the context of rental properties, this would include the security deposit for monthly rentals or the deposit and key money for leasehold properties.
Financial assets include deposits, savings accounts, stocks, bonds, funds and other financial instruments.
References
Ansell, B. W. (2014). The political economy of ownership: Housing markets and the welfare state. American Political Science Review, 108(2), 383–402.
Ansell, B., & Cansunar, A. (2021). The political consequences of housing (un) affordability. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(5), 597–613.
Busemeyer, M. R., & Iversen, T. (2020). The welfare state with private alternatives: The transformation of popular support for social insurance. The Journal of Politics, 82(2), 671–686.
Fuller, G. W., Johnston, A., & Regan, A. (2020). Housing prices and wealth inequality in western Europe. West European Politics, 43(2), 297–320.
Garcia-Fuente, X. (2021). The Paradox of Redistribution in time. Social spending in 53 countries, 1967–2018 (No.815). LIS Working Paper Series.
Groves, R., Murie, A., & Watson, C. (2007). Housing and the new welfare state: Examples from East Asia and Europe. Ashgate.
Han, C. R. (2021). Lectures on panel data analysis. Parkyoungsa. in Korean.
Han, S. W., & Kwon, H. Y. (2023). Home ownership, house prices, and belief in meritocracy: Evidence from South Korea and 34 countries. Political Studies: 00323217231176677.
Hariri, J. G., Jensen, A. S., & Lassen, D. D. (2020). Middle class without a net: Savings, financial fragility, and preferences over social insurance. Comparative Political Studies, 53(6), 892–922.
Huh, S. Y., & Kim, H. S. (2016). A study of welfare attitudes in South Korea. Korean Social Security Studies, 32(3), 203–235. in Korean.
Jensen, A. S., & Wiedemann, A. (2023). Cross-national support for the welfare state under wealth inequality. Comparative Political Studies, 56(13), 1959–1995.
Kaplan, G., Violante, G. L., & Weidner, J. (2014). The wealthy hand-to-mouth (Brookings papers on economic activity). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kemeny, J. (1981). The myth of home-ownership: Private versus public choices in housing tenure. Routledge.
Kim, D. K. (2018). A history of welfare capitalism in South Korea. Seoul National University Press. in Korean.
Kim, D. K., & Yang, J. M. (2023). Asset economy and policy attitudes—A study on attitudes towards taxation for the unearned income by gender, age group, and labor market status. Economy and Society, 139, 191–231. in Korean.
Kim, H. G., & Kwon, H. Y. (2017). House and the welfare state: Assets, debts, and attitudes toward welfare policy. Korean Political Science Review., 51(1), 261–285. in Korean.
Kim, S. W., Kim, S. J., & Kang, S. W. (2014). Welfare policy preference in South Korea: Growth versus redistribution and targeting versus universalism. Korean Social Security Studies, 30(2), 67–90.
Koo, H. G. (2022). Privilege and anxiety: The Korean middle class in the global era. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (1998). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institutions, inequality, and poverty in the Western countries. American Sociological Review, 63, 661–687.
Larsen, C. A. (2008). The institutional logic of welfare attitudes: How welfare regimes influence public support. Comparative Political Studies, 41(2), 145–168.
Lee, C. S., Hwang, I. H., & Lim, H. J. (2018). The socio-economic foundations of the Korean Welfare State: asset inequality, insurance motives, and social policy preferences, 2007–2016. Korean Political Science Review, 52(5), 1–30. in Korean.
Lee, S. K., Shin, H. J., & Kim, C. H. (2020). Inequality of the household income and wealth in Korea: Research outcome and agenda. Economy and Society, 127, 60–94. in Korean.
Lupu, N., & Pontusson, J. (2011). The structure of inequality and the politics of redistribution. American Political Science Review, 105(2), 316–336.
Meltzer, A. H., & Richard, S. F. (1981). A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy, 89(5), 914–927.
Moene, K. O., & Wallerstein, M. (2001). Inequality, social insurance, and redistribution. American Political Science Review, 95(4), 859–874.
Romer, T. (1975). Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax. Journal of Public Economics, 4(2), 163–185.
Ronald, R., & Doling, J. (2010). Shifting East Asian approaches to home ownership and the housing welfare pillar. International Journal of Housing Policy., 10(3), 233–254.
Yang, J. M., & Kim, D. K. (2022). Household assets and welfare attitudes: Focusing on the interaction effect of homeownership and asset size. Korean Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 45–80. in Korean.
Yoon, H. S. (2019). The origin and trajectory of the South Korean Welfare State. Sahoepyeongnonakademi. in Korean.
Funding
This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2022S1A5B5A16050830).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
See Table 6.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, J. A Study on the Impact of the Combination of Income and Assets on Welfare Attitudes in Korean Society. Soc Indic Res 172, 901–924 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03332-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03332-9