Abstract
This chapter aims to give an account of social science’s various contributions to the issue of the different levels of social justice. More specifically, we analyse the ways social justice is applied at each of the (micro, mezzo and macro) social levels. One of the main difficulties the empirical social sciences need to overcome is how they observe or even measure how the moral principles and prevailing ideals arising from moral and political philosophy are concretely embodied in levels and areas where they interact and are disputed within particular groups and in the daily lives of individuals. This distance between the moral norm that is thought to float outside the social world and the numerous more or less developed and more or less contradictory concrete judgements we express every day and that frame our actions in a more or less reflective way raises the question of the levels or degrees of understanding of social justice, if only as a way of appreciating the diversity and complexity that have developed within this field of research in recent decades.
Thanks to: proyecto CONICYT FONDAP 15130009, Fondecyt regular n°1150808 et Programa de Estímulo a la Excelencia Institucional de la Universidad de Chile a través del Fondo de Fortalecimiento de Productividad y Continuidad en Investigación—Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. This document was also developed as part of the INCASI network, a European project (European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie GA No 691004), coordinated by Dr. Pedro López-Roldán. This document is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the Agency’s opinion.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Since all the available works could not be quoted in the text, our selection aims only to illustrate certain points, without claiming to be exhaustive.
- 2.
These results have been reproduced with methodological variations in societies with cultural frameworks that are quite different from those of the United States.
- 3.
A maximal definition or at least a more demanding one, closer to Honneth’s proposition, would be that the capacities and qualities or actions of each individual are often assessed in a “balanced” way, which of course raises a certain number of problems.
- 4.
This collaborative project was launched in 1991. It involves a survey carried out in 12 countries in 1991. A series of surveys were conducted, with the most recent being in 2006–2008 (https://www.sowi.hu-berlin.de/de/lehrbereiche/empisoz/forschung/archiv/isjp).
- 5.
This initiative dates from 1984 and today involves 54 countries around broader subjects than social justice alone (http://www.issp.org/).
- 6.
Macro variables are, in general, GDP, the Gini coefficient, the average economic benefits of education, the percentage of students with access to higher education and the inequalities of educational benefits at the age of 15, among other general indicators.
- 7.
See the data from the International Social Survey Program (Duru-Bellat and Tenret 2012).
References
Adams J. S., 1963, « Towards An Understanding of Inequality », Journal of Abnormal and Normal Social Psychology, 67, pp. 422–436.
Adams J. S., 1965, “Inequity in social exchange”, in Berkowitz, Leonard (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, New York, Academic Press, pp. 267–299.
Alves, Wayne M., and Peter H. Rossi. “Who Should Get What? Fairness Judgments of the Distribution of Earnings.” American Journal of Sociology 84, no. 3 (1978): 541–64.
Bentham, Jeremy, An Introduction to the principles of morals and Legislation, Prometheus Books, Amherst, 1988.
Berger J., Morris Z. Jr., Bo A., Cohen B. P., 1972, “Structural Aspects of Distributive Justice, A Status Value Formulation”, in Joseph Berger, Zelditch Morris Jr, Anderson Bo (eds.), Sociological Theories in Practice, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, pp. 119–146.
Desjeux, D., 2006, « La question des échelles d’observation en sciences humaines appliquées au domaine de la santé », Recherche en Soins Infirmiers, n° 85, pp. 14–21.
Dubet F., 2010, Les places et les chances: repenser la justice sociale, Paris, Seuil.
Durkheim É., Mauss M., 1903, « De quelques formes de classification – Contribution à l’étude des représentations collectives », Année sociologique, 6, pp. 1–72.
Duru-Bellat M., 2014, Pour une planète équitable, Paris, Seuil.
Duru-Bellat M., Tenret E., 2012, « Who’s for Meritocracy? Individual and Contextual Variations in the Faith », Comparative Education Review, vol. 56, n° 2 (May), pp. 223–247.
Forse M., Parodi A., 2010, Une théorie empirique de la justice sociale, Paris, Hermann.
Fraser N., 1995, “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemas of Justice in a “Postsocialist Age”, New Left Review n° 212, pp. 68–93.
Frohlich N., Oppenheimer J., 1990, Choosing justice in experimental democracies with production. The American Political Science Review, 84, pp. 461–477.
Garfinkel H., 1967, Studies in Ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ).
Goffman E., 1959, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday Anchor Books. New York.
Grossetti M., 2011, « L’espace à trois dimensions des phénomènes sociaux », SociologieS en ligne, sans numéros de page.
Guibet-Lafaye C., 2012, Le juste et l’inacceptable. Les sentiments d’injustice contemporains et leurs raisons, Paris, Presses Universitaires de Paris-Sorbonne.
Honneth A., 1992, « Integrity and disrespect: principles of a conception of morality based on the theory of recognition », Political Theory, n° 20, pp. 187–201.
Jasso G., 2006, « Factorial Survey Methods for Studying Beliefs and Judgments », Sociological Methods Research, vol. 34, n° 3, pp. 334–423.
Kant, Emmanuel, La critique de la raison pure, Paris, Gallimard, 1990.
Kant, Emmanuel, Fondements de la métaphysique des mœurs, Le Livre de Poche, Paris, 1992.
Kant, Emmanuel, La critique de la raison pratique, Paris, Flammarion, 2003.
Kellerhals J., Languin, N., 2008, Juste? Injuste? Sentiments et critères de justice dans la vie quotidienne, Paris, Payot.
Liebig S., 2001, « Lessons From Philosophy? Interdisciplinary Justice Research and Two Classes of Justice Judgements », Social Justice Research, vol. 14, n° 3, Septembre, pp. 265–287.
Mailleux S., 2013, « La survie au quotidien: résistance ou mobilisation », Encyclo, Revue des doctorants de l’Ecole Doctorale EESC, Paris Diderot, pp. 23–35.
Milanovic B., 2016, Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.
ONU, 2006, The Role of the United Nations, New York, UN, http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/ifsd/SocialJustice.pdf.
Rawls J., 1987 [1971], Théorie de la justice, Paris, Seuil.
Schwalbe M., Godwin S., Holden D., Schrock D., Thompson S., Wolkomir M., 2000, « Generic Processes in the Reproduction of Inequality: An Interactionist Analysis », Social Forces, n° 79, pp. 419–452.
Simmel G., 1999, Sociologie. Études sur les formes de la socialisation, Paris, PUF.
Taylor C., 1994, Multiculturalism, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Walzer M., 1983, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, New York, Basic Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barozet, E. (2022). The Degrees of Social Justice: Micro, Mezzo and Macro social Levels. In: Barozet, E., Sainsaulieu, I., Cortesero, R., Mélo, D. (eds) Where Has Social Justice Gone?. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93123-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93123-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-93122-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-93123-0
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)