2004
Volume 96, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0025-9454
  • E-ISSN: 1876-2816

Abstract

Abstract

Ever since ancient Greece, people have philosophized and discussed about the fair distribution of resources. A body of empirical research on this topic has emerged in the second half of the 20st century. Oftentimes, respondents are presented with a distribution and asked whether they consider it just. In this paper, respondents are asked to allocate a sum of money across three families that represent distinct allocation principles – we study the principles of equality, need, subjective performance, and objective performance. We find that individuals heavily weigh the need principle in their allocation decisions. However, our research also shows that allocation behavior is on the one hand dependent on the situation and on the other hand associated with individual factors. Political preference and gender do not influence the allocation behaviors of individuals, but religion and age have the hypothesized effects.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.1.005.ROTS
2021-03-01
2021-09-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aristoteles
    Aristoteles(1999). Ethica Nicomachea. In C.Pannier & J.Verhaeghe (red.), Aristoteles, Ethica Nicomachea (pp. 139-173). Groningen: Historische uitgeverij.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aristoteles
    Aristoteles(2005). Ethica Nicomachea. In C.Hupperts & B.Poortman (red.), Aristoteles, Ethica Nicomachea (pp. 247-295). Budel: Damon.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Arts, W. & Gelissen, J.(2001). Welfare states, solidarity and justice principles: Does the type really matter?Acta Sociologica, 94, 283-299.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Boom, W.H. van(2019). Norm en normativiteit in het vermogensrecht (preadvies CJV 2019). Zutphen: Paris.
  5. Bornstein, B., Gervais, S., Dietrich, H. & EscamillaJ.(2014). All else being equal: Overcoming the egalitarian norm. In B.Bornstein & R.Wiener (red.), Justice, conflict and wellbeing (pp. 3-30). New York: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek
    Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek(2019). Vermogensstatistiek 2019: Vermogen van huishoudens, totaal, top 1% en top 0,1% hoogste vermogens 2011-2017.
  7. Cohn, S., White, S.O. & Sanders, J.(2000). Distributive and procedural justice in seven nations. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 553-579.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Debusscher, M. & Elchardus, M.(2002). Het draagvlak van de solidariteit. Deelrapport 4. De steun voor de sociale zekerheid. Brussel: Vrije Universiteit.
  9. Dekker, P. & Ridder, J. den(2014). Polariseert Nederland? Ontwikkelingen in politiek-culturele tegenstellingen. In C.Vrooman, J.Boelhouwer & M.Gijsberts (red.), Verschil in Nederland: Sociaal en cultureel rapport 2014 (pp. 103-129). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Durkheim, E.(1968). Les règles de la méthode sociologique (1895). Paris: P.U.F.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Eagly, A.H.(1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  12. Eckhoff, T.(1974). Justice: Its determinants in social interaction, Rotterdam: Universitaire Pers Rotterdam (Rettferdighet ved utveksling og fordeling av verdier. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget 1970).
  13. Eckhoff, T.(1966). Justice, efficiency and self-made rules in public administration. In: T.Eckhoff (red.), Rettferdighet og rettssikkerhet: Justice and the rule of law (pp. 66-90). Oslo: Tanum Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gatskova, K.(2013). Distributive justice attitudes in Ukraine: Need, desert or social minimum?Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 46, 227-241.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gilligan, C.(1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press.
  16. Howell, S.E. & Day, C.L.(2000). Complexities of the gender gap. The Journal of Politics, 62, 858-874.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kluegel, J.R. & Miyano, M.(1995). Justice beliefs and support for the welfare state in advanced capitalism. In J.R.Kluegel, D.S.Mason & B.Wegener (red.), Social justice and political change. Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (pp. 81-105). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lamont, J. & Favor, C.(2017). Distributive Justice. In E.N.Zalta (red), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (pp. 1-24), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/justice-distributive/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/justice-distributive/
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Linkey, H.E. & Alexander, S.(1998). Need norm, democratic influence, social role, and justice judgment. Current Psychology, 17, 152-162.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lucardie, P. & Voerman, G.(2012). Populisten in de polder. Amsterdam: Boom.
  21. Mathiesen, T.(1965). The defences of the weak: A sociological Study of a Norwegian correctional institution. London: Tavistock.
  22. Miller, D.(1999). Social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  23. Næss, S.(1969). Rettferdighets-holdninger: En undersøkelse av skolebarn og laerere. Oslo: Institutt for Rettsociologi og Forvaltningslaere.
  24. Næss, S. (z.j.).Schoolchildren’s ideas of justice (artikel). Oslo: Institutt for Rettsociologi og Forvaltningslaere.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Oorschot, W.J.H. van(2000). De legitimiteit van sociale zekerheid. Een sociologische analyse van motieven voor solidariteit. In S.Klosse (red.), Sociale zekerheid: Een ander gezichtspunt. Toekomstperspectief vanuit vier disciplines (pp. 37-76). Brugge: Die Keure.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Piaget, J.(1932). Le jugement moral chez l’enfant. Paris: P.U.F.
  27. Piketty, T.(2019). Capital et idéologie. Paris: Seuil.
  28. Piketty, T.(2014). Kapitaal in de 21ste eeuw. Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij.
  29. PVV
    PVV(2012). Verkiezingsprogramma 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Rawls, J.(1972). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. Reybrouck, D. van(2011). Pleidooi voor populisme. Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij.
  32. Roosma, F.(2019). Wie verdient nog onze solidariteit? Veranderingen in solidariteitsgevoelens met ouderen, zieken en gehandicapten, werklozen en immigranten in de 21ste eeuw. Mens en Maatschappij, 94, 483-505.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Scott, J.T. & Bornstein, B.H.(2009). What’s fair in foul weather and fair? Distributive justice across different allocation contexts and goods. The Journal of Politics, 71, 831-846.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. SP
    SP (2013-2017). Verkiezingsprogramma 2013-2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Tabata, L.N., Thomas, S.L. & Heck, R.H.(2012). Multilevel modeling of categorical outcomes using IBM SPSS. New York: Routledge.
  36. Velde, H. te(2010). Van regentenmentaliteit tot populisme: Politieke tradities in Nederland. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker.
  37. VVD
    VVD (2012-2017). Verkiezingsprogramma 2012-2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Vermeij, L., Sonck, N. & Broek, A. van den(2014). Jong versus oud? In C.Vrooman, J.Boelhouwer & M.Gijsberts (red.), Verschil in Nederland: Sociaal en cultureel rapport 2014 (pp. 227-250). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wilterdink, N.(2015). Vermogensongelijkheid in Nederland. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.1.005.ROTS
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.1.005.ROTS
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): allocation behavior; allocation principles; distributive justice; pluralism; vignettes

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error