Distributive Justice

From GM-RKB
(Redirected from Distributive justice)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A Distributive Justice is a social justice for the allocation of goods in a society.



References

2015

  • (Wikipedia, 2015) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_justice Retrieved:2015-3-28.
    • Distributive justice concerns the nature of a 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. The concept includes 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.

      Often contrasted with just process, which is concerned with the administration of law, distributive justice concentrates on outcomes. This subject has been given considerable attention in philosophy and the social sciences.

      In social psychology, distributive justice is defined as perceived fairness of how rewards and costs are shared by (distributed across) group members. For example, when workers of the same job are paid different salaries, group members may feel that distributive justice has not occurred.

      To determine whether distributive justice has taken place, individuals often turn to the distributive norms of their group.[1] A norm is the standard of behaviour that is required, desired, or designated as normal within a particular group. [2] If rewards and costs are allocated according to the designated distributive norms of the group, distributive justice has occurred. [3]

  1. Forsyth, D. R. (2006). Conflict. In Forsyth, D. R. , Group Dynamics (5th Ed.) (P. 388 - 389) Belmont: CA, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
  2. Farlex (2013) Norm. Farlex clipart collection. Retrieved March 13, 2013 from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/norm
  3. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.

2001

1971