Meritocracy, while commanding wide public assent, has been at the center of policy and scholarly controversies. In the US, meritocratic principles are often invoked in debates over workplace hiring policies, university admissions and aid procedures, and K–12 classroom tracking. Advocates view the meritocratic ideal as just, giving individuals what they deserve, and efficient, matching opportunities with those who will make the most of them. Critics of meritocracy contend that it rationalizes injustices and causes social harms by reinforcing inequalities, stigmatizing those who are less successful, and posing arbitrary barriers for otherwise qualified applicants. At the same time, advocates and critics alike rarely engage with how meritocracy is perceived and practiced in other cultures and societies.
This volume is the first of a two-volume collection that aims to synthesize the state of knowledge about meritocracy and explore different perspectives on its viability. Articles in this first part address the complexities involved in defining merit and meritocracy, consider normative criticisms and defenses of the meritocratic ideal, and explore the concept in the history of political and social thought.
