Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Equality of Opportunity: Fairness Preferences and Beliefs About Inequality

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Equality of Opportunity

Abstract

This chapter reviews the existing literature on fairness preferences and beliefs about inequality. The review is divided into two parts. The first part discusses to what extent individual characteristics and choices are perceived as unfair sources of inequality and assesses the extent to which people endorse fairness conceptions that are in line with responsibility-sensitive egalitarianism. The second part analyzes which individual characteristics and choices are perceived as important determinants of economic outcomes and assesses the extent to which people believe in the existence of equal opportunities for all. In both parts, the chapter discusses the advantages and shortcomings of prevalent methodological approaches to data collection. Furthermore, the chapter presents evidence on heterogeneities in preferences and beliefs across countries and different sociodemographic groups. The review suggests broad support for responsibility-sensitive egalitarianism as a fairness ideal. Furthermore, there is a strong belief in the existence of opportunities and the meritocratic functioning of societies, especially in industrialized countries. Yet, since prevalent modes of data collection are susceptible to framing effects, the literature remains inconclusive on many important aspects that would allow for a more nuanced interpretation of fairness preferences and beliefs about inequality and more robust policy advice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adriaans J, Fourré M (2022) Basic social justice orientations – measuring order-related justice in the European Social Survey Round 9. Meas Instrum Soc Sci 4(1):11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adriaans J, Bohmann S, Targa M, Liebig S, Hinz T, Jasso G, Kittel B, Sabbagh C (2020) Justice and fairness in Europe. ESS topline results series 10. KOPS Universität Konstanz, Konstanz

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldama A, Bicchieri C, Freundt J, Mellers B, Peters E (2021) How perceptions of autonomy relate to beliefs about inequality and fairness. PLoS One 16(1):e0244387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Stantcheva S, Teso E (2018) Intergenerational mobility and preferences for redistribution. Am Econ Rev 108(2):521–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2010) Fairness and the development of inequality acceptance. Science 328(5982):1176–1178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Lind JT, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2011) Measuring unfair (in) equality. J Public Econ 95(7–8):488–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Salvanes KG, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2017) Fairness and family background. Polit Philos Econ 16(2):117–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Tungodden B (2020) Cutthroat capitalism versus cuddly socialism: are Americans more meritocratic and efficiency-seeking than Scandinavians? J Polit Econ 128(5):1753–1788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2022) Global evidence on the selfish rich inequality hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 119(3):e2109690119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almås I, Cappelen AW, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2023) Fairness across the world: a large scale experimental study. Mimeo

    Google Scholar 

  • Andre P (2021) Shallow meritocracy: an experiment on fairness views. ECONtribute discussion paper no. 115

    Google Scholar 

  • Arneson RJ (1989) Equality and equal opportunity for welfare. Philos Stud 56:77–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow KJ (1959) Rational choice functions and orderings. Economica 26(102):121–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auspurg K, Hinz T (2014) Factorial survey experiments, vol 175. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett HC, Bolyanatz A, Crittenden AN, Fessler DM, Fitzpatrick S, Gurven M, … Laurence S (2016) Small-scale societies exhibit fundamental variation in the role of intentions in moral judgment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(17):4688–4693

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry B (2005) Why social justice matters. Polity, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson R, Duffy B, Hesketh R, Hewlett K (2021) Attitudes to inequalities: The IFS Deaton Review

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: a theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Am Econ Rev 91(1):166–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunori P (2017) The perception of inequality of opportunity in Europe. Rev Income Wealth 63(3):464–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen AW, Hole AD, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2007) The pluralism of fairness ideals: an experimental approach. Am Econ Rev 97(3):818–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen AW, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2010) Responsibility for what? Fairness and individual responsibility. Eur Econ Rev 54(3):429–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen AW, Hole AD, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2011) The importance of moral reflection and self-reported data in a dictator game with production. Soc Choice Welf 36(1):105–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen AW, Moene KO, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2013a) Needs versus entitlements – an international fairness experiment. J Eur Econ Assoc 11(3):574–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen AW, Konow J, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2013b) Just luck: an experimental study of risk-taking and fairness. Am Econ Rev 103(4):1398–1413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castillo JC, Palacios D, Joignant A, Tham M (2015) Inequality, distributive justice and political participation: an analysis of the case of Chile. Bull Lat Am Res 34(4):486–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charness G, Cooper M, Reddinger JL (2020) Wage policies, incentive schemes, and motivation. In: Handbook of labor, human resources and population economics. Springer, Cham, pp 1–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng S, Wen F (2019) Americans overestimate the intergenerational persistence in income ranks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116(28):13909–13914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen GA (1989) On the currency of egalitarian justice. Ethics 99(4):906–944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidai S, Gilovich T (2015) Building a more mobile America – one income quintile at a time. Perspect Psychol Sci 10(1):60–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devooght K (2008) To each the same and to each his own: a proposal to measure responsibility-sensitive income inequality. Economica 75(298):280–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114(3):817–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fong C (2001) Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution. J Public Econ 82(2):225–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frohlich N, Oppenheimer J, Kurki A (2004) Modeling other-regarding preferences and an experimental test. Public Choice 119:91–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner W, Schokkaert E (2012) Empirical social choice: questionnaire-experimental studies on distributive justice. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner W, Schwettmann L (2007) Equity, responsibility and the cultural dimension. Economica 74(296):627–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill D, Stone R (2010) Fairness and desert in tournaments. Games Econ Behav 69(2):346–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haaland I, Roth C (2023) Beliefs about racial discrimination and support for pro-black policies. Rev Econ Stat 105(1):40–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, Gintis H, McElreath R (2001) Cooperation, reciprocity and punishment in fifteen small-scale societies. Am Econ Rev 91(2):73–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho EA, Sanbonmatsu DM, Akimoto SA (2002) The effects of comparative status on social stereotypes: how the perceived success of some persons affects the stereotypes of others. Soc Cogn 20(1):36–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hufe P, Kanbur R, Peichl A (2022) Measuring unfair inequality: reconciling equality of opportunity and freedom from poverty. Rev Econ Stud 89(6):3345–3380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hülle S, Liebig S, May MJ (2018) Measuring attitudes toward distributive justice: the basic social justice orientations scale. Soc Indic Res 136:663–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasso G, Webster M Jr (1999) Assessing the gender gap in just earnings and its underlying mechanisms. Soc Psychol Q 62:367–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jo JI (2016) Weapons of the dissatisfied? Perceptions of socioeconomic inequality, redistributive preference, and political protest: evidence from South Korea. Int Area Stud Rev 19(4):285–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluegel JR, Smith ER (1986) Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York: Aldine De Gruyter

    Google Scholar 

  • Konow J (1996) A positive theory of economic fairness. J Econ Behav Organ 31(1):13–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow J (2000) Fair shares: accountability and cognitive dissonance in allocation decisions. Am Econ Rev 90(4):1072–1092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow J (2001) Fair and square: the four sides of distributive justice. J Econ Behav Organ 46:137–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow J, Saijo T, Akai K (2020) Equity versus equality: spectators, stakeholders and groups. J Econ Psychol 77:102171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreidl M (2000) Perceptions of poverty and wealth in western and post-communist countries. Soc Justice Res 13:151–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn A (2019) The subversive nature of inequality: subjective inequality perceptions and attitudes to social inequality. Eur J Polit Econ 59:331–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefranc A, Pistolesi N, Trannoy A (2009) Equality of opportunity and luck: definitions and testable conditions, with an application to income in France. J Public Econ 93(11–12):1189–1207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lei YW (2020) Revisiting China’s social volcano: attitudes toward inequality and political trust in China. Socius 6:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu I, Chanel O, Luchini S, Trannoy A (2013) Responsibility cut in education and income acquisition: an empirical investigation. AMSE WP:2013–2047

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandisodza AN, Jost JT, Unzueta MM (2006) “Tall poppies” and “American dreams” reactions to rich and poor in Australia and the United States. J Cross-Cult Psychol 37(6):659–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mijs JJ (2018) Visualizing belief in meritocracy, 1930–2010. Socius 4:1–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mijs JJ (2021) The paradox of inequality: income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Soc Econ Rev 19(1):7–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (1996) Two cheers for meritocracy. J Polit Philos 4(4):277–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxoby RJ, Spraggon J (2008) Mine and yours: property rights in dictator games. J Econ Behav Organ 65(3–4):703–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira I, McKeown A, Gallacher I (2021) Public perceptions of inequality in the UK: summary of key findings from the qualitative research. Ipsos MORI, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramos X, Van de Gaer D (2016) Approaches to inequality of opportunity: principles, measures and evidence. J Econ Surv 30(5):855–883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds J, Xian H (2014) Perceptions of meritocracy in the land of opportunity. Res Soc Stratif Mobil 36:121–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Roemer JE (1993) A pragmatic theory of responsibility for the egalitarian planner. Philos Public Aff 22:146–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Roemer JE (1998) Equality of opportunity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roemer JE, Trannoy A (2015) Equality of opportunity. In: Handbook of income distribution, vol 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 217–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Rytina JH, Form WH, Pease J (1970) Income and stratification ideology: beliefs about the American opportunity structure. Am J Sociol 75(4, Part 2):703–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson PA (1938) The empirical implications of utility analysis. Econometrica 6:344–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson PA (1948) Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference. Economica 15(60):243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schokkaert E, Devooght K (2003) Responsibility-sensitive fair compensation in different cultures. Soc Choice Welf 21(2):207–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settele S (2022) How do beliefs about the gender wage gap affect the demand for public policy? Am Econ J Econ Pol 14(2):475–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepelak NJ (1989) Ideological stratification: American beliefs about economic justice. Soc Justice Res 3:217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith KB (1985) I made it because of me: beliefs about the causes of wealth and poverty. Sociol Spectr 5(3):255–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IIES, Stockholm University, NHH Bergen, IFS, Stockholm, Sweden

    Ingvild Almås

  2. University of Bristol, CESifo, HCEO, IFS, IZA, Bristol, UK

    Paul Hufe

  3. Center for Economic Studies, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany

    Daniel Weishaar

Authors
  1. Ingvild Almås
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Hufe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Weishaar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Hufe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Mitja Sardoč

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Almås, I., Hufe, P., Weishaar, D. (2023). Equality of Opportunity: Fairness Preferences and Beliefs About Inequality. In: Sardoč, M. (eds) Handbook of Equality of Opportunity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52269-2_85-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52269-2_85-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52269-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52269-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation