The Wrath of the Places Left Behind - Spatial Inequality, Public Goods, and Populism in Germany and the U.S.

A widely held view is that increasing globalisation and inequality are fostering support for populist actors. Surprisingly, when focusing on Germany and the U.S., populist voting is highest in less globalised regions with rather equal income distributions. My paper addresses this puzzle and answers the research question how this subnational variance of populist voting in less globalised counties can be explained. I answer this question by developing the concept of spatial inequality, which describes the regional inequality that arises as some counties strongly benefit from globalisation while other less globalised counties are left behind. I argue that this spatial inequality is a previously overlooked determinant of populist voting, as it creates favourable conditions for the populist anti-elite/people-centrist rhetoric to resonate with voters. Additionally, I argue that this effect is mediated by public good provision, because the inequality induced feeling of being left behind is reinforced by inadequate public good provision. The mechanism I propose draws on an extensive body of globalisation and inequality as well as populism research. Although previous research has found that globalisation can reduce but also increase inequality (see e.g., Firebaugh 2003; Milanovic 2016; Wade 2004), many scholars point to the general patter that inequality surges within nations because of the uneven spread of globalisation benefits (Freeman 2011; Niño-Zarazúa et al. 2017). In analysing this uneven spread of benefits, the “losers” of globalisation, i.e. people with low skills, directly affected by globalisation, are usually suspected to vote for anti-globalisation populist actors (see e.g., Becker et al. 2017; Kriesi/Pappas 2016). While the early research on the determinants of populism has often focused on the socioeconomic predispositions of these “losers” of globalisation (see e.g., Swank/Betz 2003) more recent work has shifted the focus towards the relationship between populist voting and rising inequality within nations (see Pastor/Veronesi 2019). However, the relationship between inequality and populist voting is still not established clearly. Additionally, previous research has mainly focused on the direct effect of globalisation and found inconclusive results (Dorn et al. 2018; Rommel/Walter 2018). I address this research gap by shifting the focus towards relative inequality between subnational regions and thereby the indirect effect of globalisation. Further, I draw on recent economic research and argue that the provision of public goods mediates the effect of spatial inequality on populist voting (see Diermeier 2020). Using county-level data to develop spatial inequality and public good scarcity indices, I can provide empirical support for these arguments. The findings have important implications for understanding the sub-national variance in populist voting and the role of relative economic deprivation as well as public good provision.