社会杂志 ›› 2012, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (6): 108-134.

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

转型期中国公众的分配公平感:结果公平与机会公平    

  

  1. 孟天广 北京大学政府管理学院
  • 出版日期:2012-11-20 发布日期:2012-11-20
  • 通讯作者: 孟天广 北京大学政府管理学院. E-mail:meng.tianguang@gmail.com. E-mail:meng.tianguang@gmail.com
  • 基金资助:

    本文得到2010年国家社科基金一般项目“我国公民政治心理与政治稳定的关系研究”(10BZZ016)和国家留学基金委“国家建设高水平大学公派研究生项目”的资助.

Chinese People’s Perception of Distributive Justice in Transitional China: Outcome Justice and Opportunity Justice

  1. MENG Tianguang,School of Government,Peking University.
  • Online:2012-11-20 Published:2012-11-20
  • Contact: meng.tianguang@gmail.com. E-mail:meng.tianguang@gmail.com. E-mail:meng.tianguang@gmail.com
  • Supported by:

    This paper was supported by 2010 Project of the National Social Science Foundation of China “The Study on the Relationship between Citizen’s Political Psychology and Political Stability” (10BZZ016) and “National Programs on Cultivating High Level University Graduate Students” of China Scholarship Council.

摘要:

本文考察了中国公众的结果公平感和机会公平感,检验并比较了社会结构解释和相对剥夺解释在中国的适用性。研究发现,大多数公众认可结果公平和机会公平,且机会公平感高于结果公平感,但二者仅微弱相关。结果公平感由收入水平决定,机会公平感主要受教育水平影响。外资和私营单位雇员比国有和集体单位雇员更具机会公平感,城市中下层就业者对结果和机会分配均持批评态度。“个体相对剥夺”而不是“群体相对剥夺”对分配公平感有决定性影响,结果公平感只受横向剥夺影响,而机会公平感则主要受纵向剥夺影响。

关键词: 分配公平感, 结果公平, 机会公平, 社会结构相对剥夺

Abstract:

Perception of distributive justice, or people’s perception of the distribution status of valued resources, is particularly important in a society under transition. Since the implementation of Reform and Opening Policy, China has followed her transitional strategy of “economic development being the center” and the basic principle of “giving priority to efficiency with due consideration to fairness” in the distribution system. However, this strategy for transition has led to unequal growth in China. How people perceive the distribution status in transitional society not only determines the legitimacy of the reform but also affects the design of basic economic and social systems in the country. Considering the multidimensional nature of distributive justice, this paper attempts to explore the public perception of outcome justice and opportunity justice. To be specific, the paper empirically examines the national survey data in 2009 regarding the Chinese people’s perception of outcome justice and opportunity justice, and further analyzes the relationship between the two. Next, the paper provides some explanations from the perspectives of social structure and relative deprivation. Most Chinese people have acknowledged the descriptions of  both outcome justice (58.18%) and opportunity justice (59.07%) as expressed. However, it is worth noting that there is still a considerable proportion of the population who perceive the injustice in both types of justice in current China. Public perception of opportunity justice is better than that of outcome justice but their positive correlation is quite weak. Statistical results show some interesting findings. Firstly, perception of both types of justice is affected by social structure, but their causal mechanisms differ. Pertaining to the perception of outcome justice, it is positively correlated with income, the most significant factor in social structure. Those with higher education are relatively less likely to express perception of outcome justice. Regarding the perception of opportunity justice, it is independent of income but is strongly correlated with education level in the positive direction. Urban lower middle level employed groups, like non-skilled workers, service workers, and self-employed entrepreneurs, are more critical of both outcome justice and opportunity justice. Danwei differences are not related to the perception of outcome justice but to the perception of opportunity justice. Employees of foreign and private owned units are more likely to express opportunity justice than their counterparts in state and collective owned units. In short, perception of outcome justice is determined by income, but perception of opportunity justice is mainly affected by education. Secondly, the paper affirms the importance of relative deprivation explanation. According to the theory of relative deprivation, the effects of four different kinds of relative deprivation along the “individual-group” and “vertical-horizontal” dimensions on perception of outcome justice and opportunity justice are discussed. Generally, the stronger the relative deprivation people feel, the more injustice they perceive in outcome and opportunity distributions. It is the perceived individual relative deprivation, but not group relative deprivation, that has the decisive influence. Horizontal individual relative deprivation is the only significant variable that affects the perceived outcome justice; whereas opportunity justice is associated with both horizontal and vertical individual relative deprivation.

Key words: perception of distributive justice, outcome justice, opportunity justice, social structure, relative deprivation