{"title":"教育奖励的正当性","authors":"M. Evans, J. Kelley","doi":"10.1163/15691330-bja10061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nEverywhere, education is well rewarded, roughly 5% to 15% for each additional year of university, hence a major source of income inequality. Why do ordinary people see income rewards to education as legitimate? Two key theories: (1) their moral views might align with classical equity arguments asserting a moral entitlement to rewards in proportion to contributions. (2) Alternatively, they might see rewards to education as fair returns on investment, a morally infused folk version of human capital. These share almost all their predictions, but they differ if an employer fully finances the education. Analysis of a large representative Australian sample reveals that the public’s ideal returns to education match equity justifications (~80%), not economists’ fair return on investments (~10%).","PeriodicalId":46584,"journal":{"name":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Legitimation of Rewards to Education\",\"authors\":\"M. Evans, J. Kelley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15691330-bja10061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nEverywhere, education is well rewarded, roughly 5% to 15% for each additional year of university, hence a major source of income inequality. Why do ordinary people see income rewards to education as legitimate? Two key theories: (1) their moral views might align with classical equity arguments asserting a moral entitlement to rewards in proportion to contributions. (2) Alternatively, they might see rewards to education as fair returns on investment, a morally infused folk version of human capital. These share almost all their predictions, but they differ if an employer fully finances the education. Analysis of a large representative Australian sample reveals that the public’s ideal returns to education match equity justifications (~80%), not economists’ fair return on investments (~10%).\",\"PeriodicalId\":46584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10061\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Everywhere, education is well rewarded, roughly 5% to 15% for each additional year of university, hence a major source of income inequality. Why do ordinary people see income rewards to education as legitimate? Two key theories: (1) their moral views might align with classical equity arguments asserting a moral entitlement to rewards in proportion to contributions. (2) Alternatively, they might see rewards to education as fair returns on investment, a morally infused folk version of human capital. These share almost all their predictions, but they differ if an employer fully finances the education. Analysis of a large representative Australian sample reveals that the public’s ideal returns to education match equity justifications (~80%), not economists’ fair return on investments (~10%).
期刊介绍:
Comparative Sociology is a quarterly international scholarly journal dedicated to advancing comparative sociological analyses of societies and cultures, institutions and organizations, groups and collectivities, networks and interactions. All submissions for articles are peer-reviewed double-blind. The journal publishes book reviews and theoretical presentations, conceptual analyses and empirical findings at all levels of comparative sociological analysis, from global and cultural to ethnographic and interactionist. Submissions are welcome not only from sociologists but also political scientists, legal scholars, economists, anthropologists and others.