IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifodre/v27y2019i02p06-11.html

Soziale Ungleichheit in Deutschland – Wahrnehmung und Wirklichkeit

Author

Listed:
  • Judith Niehues

Abstract

Die Mehrheit der Deutschen empfindet die Verteilungsverhältnisse als eher ungerecht und wünscht sich einen stärkeren sozialen Ausgleich. Umfragen deuten allerdings darauf hin, dass das Ausmaß gesellschaftlicher Ungleichheit in Deutschland tendenziell überschätzt wird: Die Mehrheit der Bundesbürger sieht die Gesellschaft als eine Pyramide, mit den meisten Menschen im unteren Bereich. Schichtanalysen identifizieren hingegen eindeutig die Mittelschicht als größte Bevölkerungsgruppe. Auch bei subjektiver Selbsteinordnung stufen sich die meisten Bundesbürger in die Mitte ein, viele mittlerweile auch in höhere Schichten. Nimmt man den abstrakten Wunsch nach Umverteilung genauer in den Blick, sind es dann auch eher diese Gruppen als die unteren Schichten, die von einer Umsetzung der konkreten Umverteilungspräferenzen der Bevölkerung profiteren würden.

Suggested Citation

  • Judith Niehues, 2019. "Soziale Ungleichheit in Deutschland – Wahrnehmung und Wirklichkeit," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 27(02), pages 06-11, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifodre:v:27:y:2019:i:02:p:06-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/ifoDD_19-02_06-11_Niehues.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niehues, Judith, 2014. "Subjektive Ungleichheitswahrnehmung und Umverteilungspräferenzen: Ein internationaler Vergleich," IW-Trends – Vierteljahresschrift zur empirischen Wirtschaftsforschung, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW) / German Economic Institute, vol. 41(2), pages 75-91.
    2. Carina Engelhardt & Andreas Wagener, 2016. "What do Germans think and know about income inequality? A survey experiment," Working Papers 389, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    3. Engelhardt, Carina & Wagener, Andreas, 2014. "Biased Perceptions of Income Inequality and Redistribution," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100395, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philipp Poppitz, 2016. "Does self-perceptions and income inequality match?," IMK Working Paper 173-2016, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    2. Frederich Kirsten & Ilse Botha & Mduduzi Biyase & Marinda Pretorius, 2023. "Determinants of Subjective Social Status in South Africa," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Windsteiger, Lisa, 2022. "The redistributive consequences of segregation and misperceptions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Kris‐Stella Trump, 2023. "Income inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality and support for redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(2), pages 180-188, March.
    5. El Rafhi, Bilal & Darcillon, Thibault, 2024. "The evolution of affluent support for redistribution in Germany in the context of rising inequalities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    6. Attila Gáspár & Carmen Cervone & Federica Durante & Anne Maass & Caterina Suitner & Roberta Rosa Valtorta & Michela Vezzoli, 2023. "A Twofold Subjective Measure of Income Inequality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 25-43, August.
    7. Bublitz, Elisabeth, 2016. "Misperceptions of income distributions: Cross-country evidence from a randomized survey experiment," HWWI Research Papers 178, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    8. Leo Ahrens, 2020. "Unfair Inequality and the Demand for Redistribution," LIS Working papers 771, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    9. Antonino Callea & Dalila De Rosa & Giovanni Ferri & Francesca Lipari & Marco Costanzi, 2022. "Can Emotional Intelligence promote Individual Wellbeing and protect from perceptions' traps?," CERBE Working Papers wpC39, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    10. Tiaan MEIRING & Catherine KANNEMEYER & Elnari POTGIETER, 2018. "The Gap Between Rich and Poor: South African Society’s Biggest Divide Depends on Where You Think You Fit In," Working Paper ffd19ae8-4b12-4b82-b218-8, Agence française de développement.
    11. Bofinger, Peter & Schnabel, Isabel & Feld, Lars P. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Wieland, Volker, 2014. "Mehr Vertrauen in Marktprozesse. Jahresgutachten 2014/15 [More confidence in market processes. Annual Report 2014/15]," Annual Economic Reports / Jahresgutachten, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, volume 127, number 201415.
    12. Eiji Yamamura, 2021. "Information of income position and its impact on perceived tax burden and preference for redistribution: An Internet Survey Experiment," Papers 2106.11537, arXiv.org.
    13. John Knight & Ramani Gunatilaka, 2020. "Income inequality and happiness: perceived or actual, widely or narrowly defined, fair or unfair, self- or community-centred inequality?," Economics Series Working Papers 922, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    14. Andreas Kuhn, 2020. "The individual (mis-)perception of wage inequality: measurement, correlates and implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 2039-2069, November.
    15. Colagrossi, Marco & Karagiannis, Stelios & Raab, Roman, 2019. "The Median Voter Takes it All: Preferences for Redistribution and Income Inequality in the EU-28," JRC Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2019-06, Joint Research Centre, European Commission.
    16. Choi, Gwangeun, 2019. "Revisiting the redistribution hypothesis with perceived inequality and redistributive preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 220-244.
    17. Lin Yang, 2018. "The net effect of housing-related costs and advantages on the relationship between inequality and poverty," CASE Papers /211, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    18. Aboozar Hadavand, 2017. "Misperceptions and mismeasurements: An analysis of subjective economic inequality," Working Papers 449, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    19. Busemeyer, Marius R. & Lergetporer, Philipp & Woessmann, Ludger, 2018. "Public opinion and the political economy of educational reforms: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 161-185.
    20. Knight, John & Gunatilaka, Ramani, 2022. "Income inequality and happiness: Which inequalities matter in China?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ifodre:v:27:y:2019:i:02:p:06-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.