Working Papers

Abstract

Conventional theories of labor market outsider representation emphasize partisan ideology as the primary determinant of legislative attention to precarious workers’ interests. We challenge this view by demonstrating that governing status, rather than ideology, is a decisive factor shaping outsider representation in majoritarian electoral systems where high electoral thresholds prevent labor market outsiders from supporting credible alternative parties. To test this theory, we exploit South Korea’s 2017 post-impeachment presidential election, which created an exogenous shift in governing status during a congressional session. Using a cross-over difference-in-differences (DID) method, we find that while opposition parties actively propose pro-outsider legislation, their lack of governing power renders these efforts largely symbolic. Conversely, governing parties possess the institutional capacity to implement meaningful reforms but face systematic incentives to avoid pro-outsider policies. This creates a representational paradox where newly emerging precarious groups receive significant legislative attention but limited policy implementation.

Abstract

This study examines how U.S. trade policies, intended to strengthen America’s economic position, may systematically undermine the dollar’s global dominance. Our analysis demonstrates that as U.S. tariff policies push countries away from American markets and toward Chinese economic integration, they systematically increase their gold reserve shares as a hedge against dollar-related risks. Effects intensify dramatically across presidential periods, with countries at the 25th percentile of Chinese import dependence increasing gold shares by approximately 2.33 percentage points during the early Trump 2.0 period compared to the Obama baseline. Complementary analysis of Treasury maturity composition reveals that official sector holdings have shifted toward shorter-duration assets during Trump 2.0, providing additional evidence of declining confidence in long-term dollar stability. These findings show how trade restrictions create a self-defeating cycle: tariffs reduce countries’ stakes in dollar-based arrangements while simultaneously increasing their incentives to diversify into alternative reserve assets, thereby generating unintended consequences that undermine America’s monetary advantages.

Abstract 

While research shows globalization-induced job losses fuel anti-establishment voting in the US, this overlooks that America is also the world’s largest foreign direct investment (FDI) recipient, creating millions of local jobs. We argue that FDI-receiving communities perceive impacts of globalization differently because they experience wage growth, positive contact with skilled migrants, and global value chain integration, fostering pro-globalization sentiment. Using county-level data from 2008–2020, we find counties with substantial FDI job growth showed smaller vote swings toward Trump in 2016. This ef- fect was strongest in counties with simultaneous job losses, particularly among white, male, or rural populations—demographics that typically exhibit the strongest anti- establishment sentiment and are most susceptible to trade-displacement grievances. These findings reveal a counter-narrative: where global integration delivers tangible prosperity, it builds political resilience against populist backlash.

Abstract 

Roll-call data are among the most distinctive and information-rich datasets in political science, yet conventional ideal point models—such as NOMINATE and Bayesian IRT—rely on non-metric utility formulations that distort relational structure. We apply a distance-based framework, the Latent Space Item Response Model (LSIRM), to this setting, demonstrating how Euclidean distance restores a proper metric foundation for legislative behavior while enabling joint embedding of legislators and bills in a bipartite network framework. In simulation studies, LSIRM consistently recovers known coalition structures with higher cluster separation. In the empirical application to the 118th U.S. House roll-call data, LSIRM improves predictive accuracy and provides bill embeddings that serve as interpretive anchors, clarifying cross-cutting cleavages and issue alignments. This study illustrates how adapting a statistical model originally developed in network analysis to roll-call data yields new insights into party cohesion, factional divisions, and the multidimensional geometry of legislative politics.

Abstract 

This study investigates how international organizations (IOs) can maintain legitimacy and influence when domestic politics become polarized around their involvement. Using the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) engagement with South Korea’s controversy over Japan’s Fukushima wastewater release as a case study, we examine both elite discourse and public opinion formation around IO legitimacy. Through analysis of political party statements, we identify three key characteristics—expertise, neutrality, and transparency—that parties strategically invoke to either legitimize or challenge IO involvement in domestic affairs. We then test how these characteristics affect public attitudes toward IO engagement more broadly through a survey experiment with 3,106 South Korean citizens. While overall effects on IO acceptance are modest, we find that emphasizing technical expertise significantly increases support for IO involvement among initially skeptical subgroups, particularly liberals and moderates. Notably, groups with lower baseline trust in IO involvement—including college-educated respondents—proved most responsive to expertise-based appeals. These findings suggest that while IO involvement in polarized domestic debates faces inherent limitations, technical competence can serve as a crucial legitimizing resource, particularly among educated and initially skeptical audiences who are capable of processing expertise-based arguments.

Abstact 

Industrialized countries have been experiencing a significant decline in birth rates, posing unprecedented challenges to their economic and social welfare systems. We argue that the “low fertility trap,” characterized by declining fertility rates despite policy efforts to counteract them, is more likely to occur in countries with significant population concentration in their capital cities. Using an instrumental variable approach with the age of the national capital city as an instrument of spatial population concentration, we find that population concentration in capital cities decreases fertility rates, even after controlling for various factors. Furthermore, our analysis of global survey data finds strong evidence that individuals living in countries with higher spatial population concentration perceive a greater conflict between careers and bearing children.