Distributive justice

Distributive justice concerns what some consider to be socially just allocation of goods in a society. A society in which incidental inequalities in outcome do not arise would be considered a society guided by the principles of distributive justice^{[citation needed]}. They take into account the available quantities of goods, the process by which goods are to be distributed, and the resulting allocation of the goods to the members of the society.^{[citation needed]}

Often contrasted with just process, which is concerned with the administration of law, distributive justice concentrates on outcomes. A prominent contemporary theorist of distributive justice is the philosopher John Rawls. This subject has been given considerable attention in philosophy and social sciences (see James Konow, 2003).

Distributive Justice in Organizations

In the context of organizational justice, distributive justice is conceptualized as fairness associated with outcomes decisions and distribution of resources. The outcomes or resources distributed may be tangible (e.g., pay) as well as intangible (e.g., praise). Perceptions of distributive justice can be fostered when outcomes are perceived to be equally applied (Adams, 1965).

Outcomes of Distributive Justice Perceptions in Organizations

Distributive justice affects performance when efficiency and productivity are involved (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Improving perceptions of justice increases performance (Karriker & Williams, 2009). Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) are emloyee's actions in support of the organization that are outside the scope of their job description. Such behaviors depend on the degree to which organization is perceived to be distributively just (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Karriker & Williams, 2009). As organizational actions and decisions are perceived as more just, employees are more likely to engage in OCBs. Perceptions of distributive justice are strongly related also to withdrawal of employees from the organization (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).

Distributive Justice and Wealth

See also: Redistribution (economics)

Distributive justice considers whether the distribution of goods among the members of society at a given time is subjectively acceptable^{[citation needed]}.

Not all advocates of consequentialist theories are concerned with an equitable society. What unites them is the mutual interest in achieving the best possible results or, in terms of the example above, the best possible distribution of wealth^{[citation needed]}.

Distributive Justice in Real Life Policies

Proponents of distributive justice link it to human rights:

• Resources that are available to the society. This includes financial and market considerations.
• Everyone in society will receive equitable access to basic health care needs.

Distributive justice theory argues that societies have a duty to individuals in need and that all individuals have duties to help others in need. Many governments are known for dealing with issues of Distributive justice, especially countries with ethnic tensions and geographically distinctive minorities^{[citation needed]}. Post-apartheid South Africa is an example of a country that deals with issues of re-allocating resources with respect to the distributive justice framework^{[citation needed]}.

See also

Philosophy portal

• Retributive justice
• Restorative justice
• Interactional justice
• Redistributive justice
• Injustice
• Utilitarianism and/or Consequentialism
• Extended sympathy
• Constitutional economics
• Distribution (economics)
• Justice (economics)
• Rule of law
• Rule According to Higher Law
• Wikileaks
• Teaching for social justice

References

• Edmund S. Phelps (1987): "Distributive justice,"The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 1, pp. 886–88.
• James Konow (2003): "Which is the fairest one of all?: A positive analysis of justice theories," Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1188–1239. [1]
• Laczniak, Gene R.; Murphy, Patrick E. (2008): “Distributive Justice: Pressing Questions, Emerging Directions, and the Promise of Rawlsian Analysis,” Journal of Macromarketing; Mar2008, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p5-11, 7p, 1 diagram.
• "Principle of Distributive Justice", Ascension Health. 28 Feb 2009
• Maiese , Michelle . "The Notion of Fair Distribution" Beyond Intractability. June 2003

• Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P.E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278-321.

• Karriker, JH; Williams ML (2009). Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Mediated Multifoci Model. Journal of Management 35, 112.

Further reading

• Hegtvedt, Karen A.; Markovsky, Barry (1995), "Justice and Injustice", in Cook, Karen S.; Fine, Gary Alan; House, James S., Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology (1 ed.), Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1994, pp. 257–280, ISBN 0205137164 
• Leventhal, Gerald S.; Karuza, Jurgis Jr.; Fry, William R. (1980), "Beyond Fairness: A Theory of Allocation Preferences", in Mikula, Gerald, Justice and Social Interaction: Experimental and Theoretical Contributions from Psychological Research, New York City, NY: Plenum, pp. 167–218, ISBN 3456807872 

External links

• Distributive Justice on The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• An essay comparing Rawls and Nozick on Distributional Justice (focused on Nozick, but useful to see main arguments)

{{ de:Justicia distributiva}}