Volume 59, Issue 1

Social inequality is one of the fundamental themes of sociology and has received increasing attention in recent years, not only in economics but also in the public debate. Alongside the attempt to locate this topic in the context of the current social science research, this paper seeks to introduce broader normative dimensions of social inequality and discuss questions regarding its legitimacy. In Germany, the principle of needs-based justice enjoys high legitimacy, but in many respects, its objectives conflict with those of the principle of meritocratic justice. Based on the examples of education and income, the paper shows that upward mobility has stagnated in Germany in recent years, confirming suspicions that talent reserves are not being developed. The paper ends with a discussion of potential unintended consequences of the growing tendency towards a polarization of social inequality. Zusammenfassung Soziale Ungleichheit zählt zu den Grundlagenthemen der Soziologie und erfreut sich in den letzten Jahren einer wachsenden Aufmerksamkeit nicht nur in der Ökonomie, sondern auch in der öffentlichen Debatte. Neben dem Versuch einer aktuellen sozialwissenschaftlichen Verortung des Themas werden insbesondere normative Erweiterungen vorgestellt sowie Fragen zur Legitimation sozialer Ungleichheit diskutiert. In Deutschland genießt das Prinzip der Bedarfsgerechtigkeit hohe Legitimation, es steht jedoch vielfach in einem Zielkonflikt mit der Einlösung des Prinzips der Leistungsgerechtigkeit. Anhand der Beispiele Bildung sowie Einkommen wird gezeigt, dass in Deutschland in den letzten Jahren die Aufwärtsmobilität gesunken ist und sich der Verdacht erhärtet, dass Begabungsreserven nicht gefördert werden. Der Beitrag schließt mit einer Diskussion möglicher unbeabsichtigter Folgen fortschreitender Polarisierungstendenzen sozialer Ungleichheit.

The paper gives an overview over the discussion about the importance of the market for social cohesion in German economic thought in the 19 th and early 20 th century. During this period close ties were kept between economics and sociology in Germany. As a result, there still was an intense reception of Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments in the late 19 th century. However, after the death of Gustav Schmoller in 1917 the links between economics and sociology became significantly weaker. This might be an explanation for the fact that the fathers of the Social Market Economy have surprisingly little to say about the relationship between the market and social cohesion. Zusammenfassung Der Beitrag zeichnet die Diskussion über die Rolle des Marktes für den sozialen Zusammenhalt der Gesellschaft in der deutschsprachigen Volkswirtschaftskehre nach. Der „deutsche Sonderweg“ in der Volkswirtschaftslehre bestand auch darin, dass eine enge Verbindung zu den anderen Sozialwissenschaften erhalten blieb. Noch im späten 19. Jahrhundert wurde die Smithsche Theorie of Moral Sentiments in der deutschsprachigen VWL intensiv rezipiert. Diese Rezeption brach aber nach dem Tode Schmollers ab. Die Begründer der Sozialen Marktwirtschaft hatten deshalb zum Thema „Markt und soziale Kohäsion“ relativ wenig zu agen.

This paper elucidates several aspects of the liberal discourse concerning the welfare state. It is argued that the basic principles of liberalism (the ahistorical economic concept of the self, the fallacy of a naturalistic notion of competition and a state without the foundation of a sovereignty of the people in the tradition of Immanuel Kant) have to be questioned. Thus, a historical- epistemological consideration of the liberal discourse might attaina richer and more meaningful explanation regarding the difference between liberalism and the welfare state. So the liberal self and its desire for competition are normative imperatives and have to be enlarged in respect of a categorical imperative as the basic principle of the welfare state.

The present article investigates how economic experts and laypersons deal with issues of fairness in the economic area. Most economic experts follow an ethic that can be described as both, deductive and utilitarian. The ethical judgment of an economic system as a whole or a specific economic measure follows its economic consequences. Measures that increase economic wealth are also judged as fair. The putative motives of individuals or institutions are neglected. To the contrary, laypeople follow an ethic that is both, deontic and intuitive. Ethical judgments are heavily influenced by the motives of the acting individuals and institutions. Questions of efficiency are rather neglected. Laypeople tend to accept those measures which are perceived as fair. Using a number of empirical examples we show how these differences in moral reasoning can explain the huge gap between experts and laypeople in their acceptance of different economic policies. Zusammenfassung Der vorliegende Artikel beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, wie Fragen von Gerechtigkeit im wirtschaftlichen Kontext durch ökonomische Experten und ökonomische Laien bewertet werden. Die meisten ökonomischen Experten folgen in ihrem Gerechtigkeitsdenken einer deduktiv utilitaristischen Ethik. Die ethische Bewertung eines Wirtschaftssystems oder einer konkreten wirtschaftspolitischen Maßnahme orientiert sich weitestgehend an seinen wirtschaftlichen Konsequenzen: Maßnahmen, die geeignet sind, den Wohlstand zu steigern, werden auch als gerecht empfunden, wobei die moralischen Intentionen der handelnden Akteure nur eine nachgelagerte Rolle spielen. Ökonomische Laien hingegen folgen einer deontischen und intuitiven Ethik, die sich weitgehend an den Motiven einer Handlung orientiert. Effizienzwirkungen wirtschaftlicher Maßnahmen werden dabei kaum beachtet, was als fair wahrgenommen wird, wird auch akzeptiert. Anhand zahlreicher empirischer Beispiele wird gezeigt, welche unterschiedlichen Urteile durch ökonomische Experten und Laien hieraus erwachsen.

Following the logic of constitutional economics a market economy is not legitimized by its efficiency, but by the agreement of individuals on a specific economic and political order. Consequently, it is plausible that individuals will agree on such orders, which guarantee to a large extent participation in societal life. In the current sociological theory and political practice this aspect is centred in the discussion of “inclusion”. In our paper we will discuss inclusion and its possibilities and constraints in regard to the economic system. We will show that a modern understanding of social policy is an essential and indispensable part of a modern society that will focus on inclusion as its main criterion of legitimization.

Cities in Western Germany seriously suffer from the consequences of the recruitment campaigns for foreign workers in the 1950s. Most of the so called “Gastarbeiter” (“guest workers”) and their families settled down in the inner quarters, thus intensifying social polarisation within the cities. Today, the areas of the cities with the highest percentage of foreign inhabitants turn out to be exactly those, where most of the poor natives and most of all children live. Therefore social local politics gains more and more importance. The structural financial crisis of many cities, which will change for the worse before long, sets a clear limit to the execution of countermeasures.

The interdependence between labour market policy and social policy can be interpreted in different ways. The dualistic approach sees social policy as a counterpart to labour market policy, especially if the latter is exclusively interpreted as the means for achieving an efficient design of factor markets. By contrast, constitutional economics introduces the concept of a “social policy for the market” by emphasizing the mutual gains that can be reaped if the interdependence between social and labour market policies is properly taken into account. Achieving an efficient design of markets thus requires a corresponding social policy framework. This article reminds of a third perspective: The efficient design of markets is never an end in itself. Overcoming social hardship, however, is a respectable goal. The author first develops a concept of social policy that draws on market-based processes to achieve its goals before applying this concept to the problem of structural long-term unemployment.