Skip to main content

The Degrees of Social Justice: Micro, Mezzo and Macro social Levels

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Where Has Social Justice Gone?
  • 324 Accesses

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.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 5.

    This initiative dates from 1984 and today involves 54 countries around broader subjects than social justice alone (http://www.issp.org/).

  6. 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. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, Jeremy, An Introduction to the principles of morals and Legislation, Prometheus Books, Amherst, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubet F., 2010, Les places et les chances: repenser la justice sociale, Paris, Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim É., Mauss M., 1903, « De quelques formes de classification – Contribution à l’étude des représentations collectives », Année sociologique, 6, pp. 1–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duru-Bellat M., 2014, Pour une planète équitable, Paris, Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forse M., Parodi A., 2010, Une théorie empirique de la justice sociale, Paris, Hermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser N., 1995, “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemas of Justice in a “Postsocialist Age”, New Left Review n° 212, pp. 68–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frohlich N., Oppenheimer J., 1990, Choosing justice in experimental democracies with production. The American Political Science Review, 84, pp. 461–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel H., 1967, Studies in Ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman E., 1959, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday Anchor Books. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossetti M., 2011, « L’espace à trois dimensions des phénomènes sociaux », SociologieS en ligne, sans numéros de page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guibet-Lafaye C., 2012, Le juste et l’inacceptable. Les sentiments d’injustice contemporains et leurs raisons, Paris, Presses Universitaires de Paris-Sorbonne.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasso G., 2006, « Factorial Survey Methods for Studying Beliefs and Judgments », Sociological Methods Research, vol. 34, n° 3, pp. 334–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Emmanuel, La critique de la raison pure, Paris, Gallimard, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Emmanuel, Fondements de la métaphysique des mœurs, Le Livre de Poche, Paris, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Emmanuel, La critique de la raison pratique, Paris, Flammarion, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellerhals J., Languin, N., 2008, Juste? Injuste? Sentiments et critères de justice dans la vie quotidienne, Paris, Payot.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mailleux S., 2013, « La survie au quotidien: résistance ou mobilisation », Encyclo, Revue des doctorants de l’Ecole Doctorale EESC, Paris Diderot, pp. 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milanovic B., 2016, Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmel G., 1999, Sociologie. Études sur les formes de la socialisation, Paris, PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor C., 1994, Multiculturalism, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer M., 1983, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, New York, Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuelle Barozet .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics