IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v47y2003i3p523-539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Doing Rawls Justice: An Experimental Study of Income Distribution Norms

Author

Listed:
  • Philip A. Michelbach
  • John T. Scott
  • Richard E. Matland
  • Brian H. Bornstein

Abstract

Distributive justice has been the focus of political theory with the postwar rise of the social welfare state, and Rawls' A Theory of Justice (1971) is arguably the most important work of political philosophy during that period. Parallel to this theoretical literature is a body of empirical research into distributive justice. We offer a synthesis of the theoretical and empirical approaches with an experimental study of how individuals use allocation principles in making judgments concerning income distribution under conditions of strict impartiality. Our experiment is designed in part to examine the extent to which they prioritize them consistent with Rawls' theory. We find that distributive justice judgments are complex but structured, with individuals tending to use several principles simultaneously and weighing them according to predictable factors, with sex and race being particularly important. We also find that individuals use several strategies in using competing allocation principles and that a considerable minority prioritize them consistent with a Rawlsian maximin strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip A. Michelbach & John T. Scott & Richard E. Matland & Brian H. Bornstein, 2003. "Doing Rawls Justice: An Experimental Study of Income Distribution Norms," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(3), pages 523-539, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:3:p:523-539
    DOI: 10.1111/1540-5907.00037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00037
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1540-5907.00037?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sen, Amartya, 1997. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292975.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Burri, Susanne & Lup, Daniela & Pepper, Alexander, 2021. "What do business executives think about distributive justice?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 106592, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Sophie Cetre & Max Lobeck & Claudia Senik & Thierry Verdier, 2018. "In search of unanimously preferred income distributions. Evidence from a choice experiment," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-01863359, HAL.
    3. Daniel Müller & Sander Renes, 2021. "Fairness views and political preferences: evidence from a large and heterogeneous sample," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 679-711, May.
    4. Susanne Burri & Daniela Lup & Alexander Pepper, 2021. "What Do Business Executives Think About Distributive Justice?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 15-33, November.
    5. Cetre, Sophie & Lobeck, Max & Senik, Claudia & Verdier, Thierry, 2019. "Preferences over income distribution: Evidence from a choice experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Abatemarco, Antonio, 2016. "Doing rawls justice: Evidence from the PSID," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 10, pages 1-39.
    7. Martin Ravallion, 2016. "Are the world’s poorest being left behind?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 139-164, June.
    8. Cardella, Eric & Roomets, Alex, 2022. "Pay distribution preferences and productivity effects: An experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    9. Müller Daniel & Sander Renes, 2019. "Fairness Views and Political Preferences - Evidence from a representative sample," Working Papers 2019-08, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    10. Alexander Max Bauer & Frauke Meyer & Jan Romann & Mark Siebel & Stefan Traub, 2022. "Need, equity, and accountability," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 769-814, November.
    11. Joshua Chen-Yuan Teng & Joseph Tao-yi Wang & C. C. Yang, 2020. "Justice, what money can buy: a lab experiment on primary social goods and the Rawlsian difference principle," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 45-69, March.
    12. Konow, James, 2008. "The Moral High Ground: An Experimental Study of Spectator Impartiality," MPRA Paper 18558, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ulf Liebe & Heidi Bruderer Enzler & Andreas Diekmann & Peter Preisendörfer, 2024. "One Justice for All? Social Dilemmas, Environmental Risks and Different Notions of Distributive Justice," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-23, July.
    14. Gerald Schneider & Ulrike Sabrina Krämer, 2004. "The Limitations of Fair Division," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 506-524, August.
    15. Bjørnskov, Christian, 2004. "Legal Quality, Inequality, and Tolerance," Working Papers 04-9, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    16. Bernhard Kittel & Sabine Neuhofer & Manuel Schwaninger, 2020. "The impact of need on distributive decisions: Experimental evidence on anchor effects of exogenous thresholds in the laboratory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, April.
    17. Ana Bobinac & Werner Brouwer & Job van Exel, 2011. "Discounting future health gains: an empirical enquiry into the influence of growing life expectancy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 111-119, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andonie, Costel & Kuzmics, Christoph & Rogers, Brian W., 2019. "Efficiency-based measures of inequality," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 60-69.
    2. David Bravo & Dante Contreras & Sergio Urzúa, 2002. "Poverty and Inequality in Chile 1990-1998: Learning from Microeconomic Simulations," Working Papers wp198, University of Chile, Department of Economics.
    3. Juan Luis Londoño & Miguel Székely, 2000. "Persistent Poverty and Excess Inequality: Latin America, 1970-1995," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 3, pages 93-134, May.
    4. Cem Baslevent & Meltem Dayoglu, 2005. "The Effect of Squatter Housing on Income Distribution in Urban Turkey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(1), pages 31-45, January.
    5. Joachim Merz & Tim Rathjen, 2011. "Intensity of Time and Income Interdependent Multidimensional Poverty: Well-Being and Minimum 2DGAP – German Evidence," FFB-Discussionpaper 92, Research Institute on Professions (Forschungsinstitut Freie Berufe (FFB)), LEUPHANA University Lüneburg.
    6. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Bernard Van Praag, 2003. "Income Satisfaction Inequality and its Causes," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 1(2), pages 107-127, August.
    7. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    8. Hendrik Thiel & Stephan L. Thomsen, 2015. "Individual Poverty Paths and the Stability of Control-Perception," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 794, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    9. repec:pru:wpaper:8 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Reiko Gotoh & Naoki Yoshihara, 2018. "Securing basic well-being for all," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(4), pages 422-452, October.
    11. Simone Schneider, 2012. "Income Inequality and its Consequences for Life Satisfaction: What Role do Social Cognitions Play?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 106(3), pages 419-438, May.
    12. Londoño, Juan Luis & Székely, Miguel, 1997. "Persistent Poverty and Excess Inequality: Latin America, 1970-1995," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6092, Inter-American Development Bank.
    13. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Venkatasubramanian, Venkat & Luo, Yu & Sethuraman, Jay, 2015. "How much inequality in income is fair? A microeconomic game theoretic perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 435(C), pages 120-138.
    15. Satya R. Chakravarty & Pietro Muliere, 2003. "Welfare indicators: A review and new perspectives. 1. Measurement of inequality," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(3), pages 457-497.
    16. Constantine Angyridis & Brennan Scott Thompson, 2016. "Negative income taxes, inequality and poverty," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 1016-1034, August.
    17. Sabina Alkire & Maria Emma Santos, 2010. "Acute Multidimensional Poverty: A New Index for Developing Countries," Human Development Research Papers (2009 to present) HDRP-2010-11, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
    18. Alkire, Sabina & Santos, Maria Emma, 2014. "Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 251-274.
    19. Marta Santagata & Enrico Ivaldi & Riccardo Soliani, 2019. "Development and Governance in the Ex-Soviet Union: An Empirical Inquiry," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 157-190, January.
    20. Boris Branisa & Adriana Cardozo, 2009. "Regional Growth Convergence in Colombia Using Social Indicators," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 195, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    21. Benoit Decerf, 2021. "Combining absolute and relative poverty: income poverty measurement with two poverty lines," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 325-362, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:3:p:523-539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.