Amid a widespread public vilification of bankers as the “fat cat” architects of last year’s credit crisis, UK think tank New Economics Foundation has published a new paper claiming that hospital cleaners are worth more to society - in terms of social value - than City bankers.

In attempting to calculate what it regards as the true value to society of various professions, NEF examined each in terms of what it calls “social return on investment” – a quantification of their social, environmental and economic impact. On this basis, NEF found that “elite” bankers (those earning in excess of £1 million plus bonuses) destroy £7 of value for every £1 they create; this compares to the ringing endorsement given to hospital cleaners, who NEF say create over £10 in value for every £1 they receive in pay.

It was however tax accountants which emerged worst of the six professions assessed by NEF. According to the report, tax accountants destroy £47 of social value for every £1 they create.

In publishing its report NEF emphasised that the study was not about targeting those in highly paid jobs, nor about raising the pay of society’s lowest earners. “The point we are making is more fundamental – that there should be a relationship between what we are paid and the value our work generates for society. We’ve found a way to calculate that,” said Eilís Lawlor, head of the Valuing What Matters team at NEF.

As recent political moves such as proposed taxes specifically for bankers’ bonuses confirm, it is easy to scapegoat high earning segments of society in times of economic woe. Globally, politicians are certainly tapping into popular feeling against the banking sector and NEF’s study would seem to endorse current public views. But of course any condemnation of bankers, or any other profession, as net destroyers of social value should obviously be viewed with a certain degree of scepticism.

Critics of NEF’s study, A Bit Rich?, will no doubt question the methodology used to calculate the social value created or destroyed by an individual profession. While the study’s methodology is claimed to incorporate variables ranging from economic returns and job creation, through to environmental degradation and changes to the well-being of both individuals and communities, any attempt to pull these together in a quantitative assessment is hugely complex, and more importantly must necessitate a fair amount of subjective judgement.

Moreover, those who would use such studies in an attempt to curb bankers’ compensation are neglecting the effect of simple market forces. Regardless of the “social return on investment” bankers (or indeed any other high-earning profession) produce, there is little to be said for attempting to artificially limit their pay in a capitalist society. Bankers, like footballers, another much-maligned profession, are paid what they are worth - to their employers.