Technology, migrants or offshoring: How the perceived source of labour-market risks shapes policy demands

We study whether, and how, perceived sources of labour-market risks (immigration, technological change, and offshoring) explain demand for different types of government intervention. Drawing on deservingness and in-/outgroup arguments, we expect that individuals favour interventions that not only benefit themselves but limit benefits to groups they hold responsible for economic vulnerability. Using two waves of a survey fielded in Austria in 2021–2022, we show that perceiving immigration as a more important labour-market risk predicts increased support for protectionism and laissez-faire (i.e., regulation-based policies) and decreased support for social welfare and social investment (i.e., welfare-based policies). The reverse pattern applies to individuals who perceive technological change as greater risk. This largely aligns with our framework predicting that immigration risks activate a cultural in-/out-group (natives/immigrants) mindset while technological risks activate a class-based in-/out-group (employers/employees) mindset. For individuals who perceive offshoring as the predominant risk source, the effect is conditional on political orientation. Linking survey data to CHES data, we show that these risk perceptions also predict support for political parties with corresponding policy programs. Individuals thus demand policies tailored to risk concerns. We conclude that perceived sources of economic risk help explain why risk–preference relationships transcend the conventional libertarian–interventionist pattern.