This article provides a comparison between scientific approaches to understanding the economic and social efficiency of market income distribution. Based on multidisciplinary approaches the essence of the concepts of fairness and efficiency in the distribution; explored approaches to combining efficiency and equity used in policy income distribution at different levels of management; the possible social and economic consequences of ineffective regulation of income in today’s economy. The analysis is based on comparing the four concepts of justice that are considered socially efficient. Considered: utilitarian, formulated by J. Bentham; egalitarian, which provides for equal distribution; market (liberal) approach – to polar egalitarian and roulzianskyy that treats justice as fairness, approaches. Based on the generalization of existing approaches analyzed method of estimating social justice in the distribution and the possibility of its application. The structure of the article includes the following sections: 1.Views on terms of efficiency and equity in the distribution of resources and income; 2. Classical and modern approaches to combining efficiency and equity in the distribution; 3. Conflicts combination of the principles of fairness and efficiency in the distribution of incomes policy. The authors also noted that the uneven distribution of income acts as an objective reality, and the question is to prevent dangerous indicators of this unevenness. Market income distribution does not guarantee every person an acceptable level of income. The causes of irregularity are: differences in abilities, mental as well as physical; differences in possession of the property, in the educational level and group reasons associated with luck, chance, surprise win more. This is a definite social injustice market. State, taking a significant share of responsibility for maintaining a basic human right to a dignified life, organizes redistribution.

Keywords: economic efficiency; social justice; market income distribution; contradictions income distribution.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/1728-2667.2015/167-2/2

References

1. Bronfenbrenner M. Desyat’ problem sovremennoy teorii raspredeleniya, М. Bronfenbrenner. Available at
http://elib.org.ua/economics/ua_readme.php?subaction=showfull&id=1103636627&archive=&startfrom=&ucat=18&.
2. Sepetiy D.P. Problema sotsíal’noí̈ spravedlivostí v perspektiví obmínnoí̈ ta zrívnyuval’noí̈ kontseptsíy Available at http://dsepetij.ho.ua/justice.htm.
3. Pindayk R. Mikroekonomika, M., Ekonomika, 1992., 509 s., ISBN: 5-318-00548-9 ; Rolz
Dzh. Teoriya spravedlivosti., Novosibirsk. Izdvo NGU, 1995., 535 s., ISBN 5-7615-0365-4. Аvailable at
http://www.musa.narod.ru/rawls1.htm.
4. Blaug M. Ekonomicheskaya mysl’ v retrospektive, M. “Delo” Ltd”, 1994., 720 s. ISBN : 0-521-31644-8
5. Effektivnost’ i spravedlivost’. 2010-2013 Sovremennaya ekonomicheskaya teoriya. Available at
http://modern-econ.ru.
6. Gubín K.G. Formuvannya sistemi regulyuvannya dokhodív naselennya v transformatsíyníy yekonomítsí
Available at http://library.nulau.edu.ua.
7. Kotenok A. G. Formi proyavu díalektiki rinkovoí̈ í sotsíal’noí̈ spravedlivostí u rozvitku suchasnikh sistem, Strategíya yekonomíchnogo rozvitku Ukraí̈ni., 2012., № 31 2012 . S.17-23.
8. Nerívníst’ v Ukraí̈ní masshtabi ta mozhlivostí vplivu, K. Ínstitut demografíí̈ ta sotsíal’nikh
doslídzhen’ ímení M. V. Ptukhi NAN Ukraí̈ni, 2012., 404 s., ISBN 978-966-304-005-9.
9. Myuller D. Obshchestvennyy vybor, Gos . un – t Vysshaya shkola ekonomiki, Institut”Ekonomicheskaya shkola, M. 2007, 994s. Available at https://sites.google.com/site/seinstitutespb/dennis-muller-obsestvennyj-vybor.
10. Atkinson, A. B., L. Rainwater and T. Smeeding. Income Distribution in OECD Сountries,
1995. No. 18., 164 с.
11. Na shlyakhu do zelenogo zrostannya: monítoring progresu v Ukraí̈ní, Andrusevich A., Andrusevich N., Kozak Z., Khomyakova O., L’vív., 2014., 76s., Available at http://www.rac.org.ua/fileadmin/user_upload/
publications/GGI_Ukraine_final.pdf.