Article summary
This article asks whether differences in local agricultural competitiveness help explain the growing political divide between rural and urban voters. The authors propose that where agriculture is uncompetitive, rural voters are more likely to support protectionist parties and policies because agriculture remains central to local economic and social life; where agriculture confers a comparative advantage, the rural–urban cleavage should be weaker. The paper reports cross-national and subnational analyses that test this comparative-advantage argument while qualifying its claims with multiple data sources and designs.
