Peripheral regions commonly appear to be less attractive to live in and policymakers all over the world are applying various measures to make them more attractive. This paper analyzes the effects of two very different measures: The German municipal fiscal equalization scheme and the German structural funds for economically weak areas (GRW). It focusses on the impact on perceived quality of life, measured through interregional migration between German labor market regions. Using a spatial vector autoregressive panel model, we find evidence that equalization transfers have a significant positive impact on regional net migration and contribute to the aim of regional equity. These effects are especially found for regions with low endogenous fiscal capacities. GRW funding reveals no significant effects on net migration rates in total, but short‐term effects in rural regions.

Zusammenfassung Obwohl zur Angleichung regionaler Unterschiede in den Wirtschafts- und Lebensverhältnissen von der Politik regelmäßig Fördermaßnahmen eingesetzt werden, legen empirische Befunde nahe, dass deren Wirkung aus verschiedenen Perspektiven heraus beurteilt werden muss. Unter Rückgriff auf unterschiedliche Datenquellen zeigen wir empirisch, dass sich die Legitimität regionaler Umverteilungsmaßnahmen weniger aus ihrer (ökonomischen) Effizienz als der auf Gerechtigkeitsnormen beruhenden Einstellung der Bevölkerung speist. Vor dem Hintergrund der Befragungsergebnisse können die Effizienzeinbußen einer auf die schwächeren Regionen ausgerichteten Ausgleichspolitik allerdings als in der Bevölkerung mehrheitlich akzeptierte Kosten gewünschter Bedarfsgerechtigkeit angesehen werden. Abstract: Justice Beats Efficiency: Principles of Regional Redistribution Although policy makers have used various place-based policies to reduce regional differences in economic and living conditions, it has been empirically proven that their impact should be reflected from different perspectives. Using various sources of data, we empirically show that the legitimacy of regional redistributive measures derives less from their (economic) efficiency than from the attitudes of the population based on fairness norms. The results of our survey show that the loss of efficiency of a redistributive policy aimed at the weaker regions can be considered as the costs of social justice that are generally accepted by the public.