Research

We investigate whether and how partisan politics played a role in the Netherlands. To do so, we review existing literature and prepare descriptive statistics from recent datasets. We focus on two related questions: (i) Are there effects of partisan politics in the Netherlands in the past 60 years? (ii) Do developments in party and voter behavior influence the relevance of partisan influences for Dutch governance? As we find that there is only limited existing research on partisan politics in the Dutch context, we empirically explore the relationship between government ideology and typical, country-level partisan outcome variables. We find mixed evidence for partisan policymaking in the Netherlands. Some findings are in line with partisan theory, some are counter-indicative. Exploring the role of party and voter movements, we document a shifting political landscape in which the potential for traditional partisan influences has become smaller. 

We examine the effect of studying business on the beliefs and values of students and study the role of economics in influencing this effect. We observe significant differences between business students and students from other disciplines, among which economics, at the start of their first year. We also discover that some of these differences persist or are reinforced at the end of the year. Furthermore, we find changes in beliefs and values of business students that take only one year to manifest. Above all, while we observe that some values and beliefs of business students change over time, we observe no such changes for economics students. This suggests that the effect of studying business is not entirely driven by exposure to economics in business studies.

We re-examine the effect of prospects of upward mobility (POUM) on the support for redistribution. Unlike previous studies, we analyse this relation in an intragenerational context and consider the moderating effect of political ideology through which mobility expectations affect redistributive preferences. We find that the POUM effect is conditional on political preferences. That is, we find that only for right-wing individuals expected upward income mobility negatively affects support for redistribution. Left-wing individuals prefer redistribution, regardless of expected upward income movements.

We propose a novel measure of voter ideology and study the (socio-economic) determinants of political beliefs. We examine the dimensionality of contemporary voter ideology using survey data of a representative sample of Dutch citizens. Using factor-analyses, we identify and validate four relevant dimensions that capture (1) preferences for economic equality, (2) preferences for markets and efficiency, (3) preferences for personal and cultural freedom, and (4) nationalist, protectionist and populist preferences. We continue with a regression analysis on the determinants of multidimensional voter ideology and compare these to the determinants of the traditional left-right measure of ideology. We find that there is substantial heterogeneity in the determinants of political preferences. Moreover, using a one-dimensional left-right representation of voter ideology conceals most of this heterogeneity.

Many empirical studies in the field of economics use survey measures of political ideology, intending to capture individuals’ trade-off between efficiency and equality. We examine the behavioural consistency of survey-measured left-right political ideology by conducting a distribution experiment in which decision-makers face a trade-off between allocating money equally or efficiently. We distinguish between decision-makers that receive the money to distribute as ‘manna-from-heaven’ and decision-makers that have earned the money to distribute in a real effort task. When decision makers receive money as ‘manna-from-heaven’, we find that self-reported ideology is not able to explain behaviour in the experiment. When money is earned in a real effort task, rather than given, behaviour is in line with self-reported ideology. We find that both left-wing and right-wing individuals behave more in line with their stated ideology. Individuals self-reporting as right-wing more often choose efficiency over equality relative to left-wing individuals when money is earned. 

We study if and how identification with the nation state relates to individuals’ voting behaviour. We theorize that a limited number of ideal types exist that best capture the sources of identification with the nation state, and as a result, people identify with the nation state in distinctive ways. Using unique survey data of Dutch respondents, we identify three ideal types: the first type identifies strongly with traditions, symbols, and history; the second type identifies via civic liberties and religious freedom; and the third type does not identify strongly with the nation state via any characteristic. We then suggest that the way in which individuals identify with the nation state translates into different political issues being salient to them, namely those issues that are salient to their identity. This, in turn, affects how individuals vote. Considering the three types of national identification and voting behaviour (i.e., turnout and party preferences), our results show that the types national identification are related to voting behaviour in significantly distinctive ways. This is corroborated by findings on individuals’ positions on relevant political issues. We draw two main conclusions. First, it is not only the strength, but also the type of national identification that matters for voting. Second, there is a strong and persistent tension between the types of national identification that suggests a clash of normative world views.

In this paper, we investigate how local public leadership influences citizens’ willingness to act against climate change. Using a pre-registered online survey experiment conducted in Groningen, the Netherlands, we examine two aspects of leadership: ‘leading-by-example’ through public action and leadership by individual public leaders. Respondents were randomly assigned to receive information about municipal climate initiatives, to see a motivational video by a former mayor, to receive both information and the video, or neither. Willingness to act against climate change was measured through an incentivized allocation decision, where we asked respondents to divide 150 euro between themselves and a charity that combats climate change. Very preliminary results suggest that both public action and individual leadership significantly increase citizens’ climate efforts. Additionally, the findings indicate that there are misperceptions about fellow citizens’ climate behaviour and norms. Our findings highlight the potential of local leadership in mobilizing collective action. 

Identity cleavages increasingly drive political outcomes, including the distribution of income and wealth. At the heart of this are people’s preferences regarding the distribution of income. Recent studies show that in order to understand what drives such preferences, a crucial role is reserved for identity. National identity is especially important, since it affects the acceptance of different (marginalised) groups in society and, consequently, the majority’s views on income redistribution. This can explain why some voters might be against redistribution even if this disadvantages them. Our understanding of this can be improved by recognizing that there are distinct ways to identify with the nation state. This project is the first to investigate the causal relation between national identity and redistribution while considering heterogeneity in national identification. To do so, we use an experimental survey design. Our findings add to our understanding of the demand for redistribution, an essential ingredient to ensure sustained support for public institutions and find solutions to growing social polarisation.

Recent budget cuts to "woke" foreign aid priorities in countries like the Netherlands and the U.S. raise the question whether these policy changes reflect citizens’ preferences or correspond to a political narrative. This project surveys over 11,000 people in four high-income, aid-giving countries to understand public opinion on foreign aid. Using an incentivized online survey experiment, it explores citizens' perceptions of foreign aid, identifies the causes citizens prioritize, and how this relates to support for policy. The findings offer insights into drivers of public support for aid and provide policymakers with evidence to better align aid decisions with citizens’ values.