MODULE 10: JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS

Justice is one of the most important moral and political concepts. The word comes
from the Latin jus, meaning right or law. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the
“just” person as one who typically “does what is morally right” and is disposed to
“giving everyone his or her due,” offering the word “fair” as a synonym. But
philosophers want to get beyond etymology and dictionary definitions to consider,
for example, the nature of justice as both a moral virtue of character and a
desirable quality of political society, as well as how it applies to ethical and social
decision-making. This article will focus on Western philosophical conceptions of
justice. These will be the greatest theories of ancient Greece (those
of Plato and Aristotle) and of medieval Christianity (Augustine and Aquinas), two
early modern ones (Hobbes and Hume), two from more recent modern times (Kant
and Mill), and some contemporary ones (Rawls and several successors). Typically
the article considers not only their theories of justice but also how philosophers
apply their own theories to controversial social issues—for example, to civil
disobedience, punishment, equal opportunity for women, slavery, war, property
rights, and international relations.
For Plato, justice is a virtue establishing rational order, with each part performing its
appropriate role and not interfering with the proper functioning of other parts.
Aristotle says justice consists in what is lawful and fair, with fairness
involving equitable distributions and the correction of what is inequitable. For
Augustine, the cardinal virtue of justice requires that we try to give all people their
due; for Aquinas, justice is that rational mean between opposite sorts of injustice,
involving proportional distributions and reciprocal transactions. Hobbes believed
justice is an artificial virtue, necessary for civil society, a function of the voluntary
agreements of the social contract; for Hume, justice essentially serves public utility
by protecting property (broadly understood). For Kant, it is a virtue whereby we
respect others’ freedom, autonomy, and dignity by not interfering with their
voluntary actions, so long as those do not violate others’ rights; Mill said justice is a
collective name for the most important social utilities, which are conducive to
fostering and protecting human liberty. Rawls analyzed justice in terms of
maximum equal liberty regarding basic rights and duties for all members of society,
with socio-economic inequalities requiring moral justification in terms of equal
opportunity and beneficial results for all; and various post-Rawlsian philosophers
develop alternative conceptions.
Western philosophers generally regard justice as the most fundamental of all virtues
for ordering interpersonal relations and establishing and maintaining a stable
political society. By tracking the historical interplay of these theories, what will be
advocated is a developing understanding of justice in terms of respecting persons
as free, rational agents. One may disagree about the nature, basis, and legitimate
application of justice, but this is its core.

Philosophical Foundations
The philosophical foundations of justice and fairness ethics center on the concepts
of impartiality, equal treatment, and the fair distribution of resources and
opportunities. Key thinkers like Aristotle and John Rawls have contributed
significantly to these ideas, emphasizing that equals should be treated equally, and
that social and economic inequalities should be arranged to benefit everyone,
especially the least advantaged.
Key Concepts and Theories:
 Justice as Fairness:
This concept, particularly associated with John Rawls, emphasizes the importance of
a just social structure where individuals can pursue their own conceptions of the
good life without conflict. Rawls's theory suggests that principles of justice should
be chosen from behind a "veil of ignorance," where individuals are unaware of their
own social position or natural talents, ensuring impartiality.
 Aristotle's Principle of Equality:
Aristotle argued that equals should be treated equally, and unequals unequally, but
that the relevant differences must be justified. This principle is foundational to many
understandings of justice and fairness, and it highlights the importance of
considering relevant characteristics when determining how to treat individuals.
 Fairness in Distribution:
Justice and fairness often involve the distribution of resources and
opportunities. Principles of justice require that these distributions be fair, meaning
that they are based on relevant criteria and not on arbitrary factors.
 Ethics and Justice:
Ethics, or moral philosophy, provides a framework for evaluating the rightness or
wrongness of actions, and many ethical systems incorporate principles of justice
and fairness. For example, utilitarianism, a prominent ethical theory, aims to
maximize overall well-being, which can intersect with considerations of justice and
fairness when distributing resources.
Historical and Contemporary Perspectives:
 Ancient Greek Philosophy:
Ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle laid the groundwork for Western
understandings of justice, emphasizing concepts like virtue and the importance of a
just social order.
 Modern Philosophy:
Enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Rousseau, and Montesquieu championed ideas of
individual rights, equality, and the importance of democratic institutions in ensuring
justice.
 Contemporary Debates:
Ongoing philosophical debates explore various aspects of justice and fairness,
including issues of global justice, intergenerational equity, and the ethical
implications of emerging technologies.
In essence, the philosophical foundation of justice and fairness ethics provides a
framework for evaluating social structures, distributions of resources, and individual
actions to ensure that they are impartial, equitable, and promote the well-being of
all members of society.

Legal and Judicial Justice

Legal justice refers to the fair application and interpretation of laws, while judicial
justice specifically concerns the role of the courts in upholding the law and ensuring
a fair legal process. The judiciary, as one of the three branches of government,
plays a crucial role in interpreting laws, settling disputes, and ensuring
accountability within the legal system.
Legal Justice:
 Definition:
Legal justice encompasses the principles and practices of fairness, impartiality, and
reasonableness in the application of laws.
 Focus:
It emphasizes the importance of laws that protect individuals, promote public
welfare, and provide remedies for harm.
 Example:
Laws that protect property rights, ensure contracts are honored, and provide a
framework for resolving disputes are examples of legal justice.

Judicial Justice:
 Definition:
Judicial justice refers to the role of the courts in upholding the law and ensuring a
fair legal process.
 Focus:
It involves the courts' power to interpret laws, adjudicate disputes, and hold
individuals and institutions accountable for their actions under the law.
 Examples:
 The Supreme Court of the Philippines, the highest court in the country,
has the power to interpret laws and settle disputes.
 Judges ensure a fair trial process for both the prosecution and the
defense in criminal cases.
 Courts can review government actions to ensure they are lawful and do
not violate individual rights.
 Key Elements:
Judicial justice includes upholding judicial independence, integrity, and impartiality.
Interrelation:
 Legal justice provides the framework, while judicial justice provides the
mechanism for its application.
 A strong and independent judiciary is essential for ensuring legal justice.
 The judiciary's role in interpreting laws and holding power accountable helps
to maintain the rule of law and protect individual rights.

Social Justice
Social justice refers to a fair and equitable division of resources, opportunities, and
privileges in society. Originally a religious concept, it has come to be conceptualized
more loosely as the just organization of social institutions that deliver access to
economic benefits. It is sometimes referred to as "distributive justice."
Social justice is a broad term, and there are many variations in how advocates apply
the perspective. However, social determinants like the racial wealth gap or
inequitable access to health care feature heavily in social justice analysis. Some
applications related to social justice, such as critical race theory, have become a
battleground for American politics.
Key Takeaways
 Social justice refers to the fair division of resources, opportunities, and
privileges in society.
 It emphasizes fairness in how society divides its social resources.
  One of the most famous examinations of social justice is John Rawls’ A Theory
of Justice (1971).
 Gender inequality, racism, and LGBTQ+ discrimination are frequent subjects
of social justice advocacy.
 Some applications of social justice, like critical race theory, have become
embattled in the American culture wars.
Understanding Social Justice
The phrase "social justice" draws its roots from Christian theology, with the first
noted use occurring in the early 1840s in "Theoretical Treatise on Natural Law" by
Luigi Taparelli. Taparelli was an Italian Jesuit priest writing during the rise
of Risorgimento, a 19th-century Italian nationalist movement, and debates
around the unification of Italy.
Taparelli’s version of social justice was simply an application of justice to social
affairs and held that people should do what’s right based on a conceptualization of
morality based on natural theology and religion, and for much of its history social
justice has been a religious concept.
Not all notions of social justice emphasized religion, though. With the social impact
of the Industrial Revolution, the term grew. Later theorists would focus on social
justice as a moral obligation for people within a society to work for the common
good; the most famous example is discussed below.
The term, which has been historically contentious, has become more popular since
the end of the 20th century. Some scholars point toward the neoliberal policies of
the Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan administrations as a possible reason for
this change.
Important
Though the phrase is attributed to Luigi Taparelli, social justice builds on older
concepts. Taparelli relied heavily on the work of Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas
(who was relying on the work of the Macedonian philosopher Aristotle).
One of the most influential explorations of social justice comes from the 20th-
century American philosopher John Rawls. In "A Theory of Justice" (1971), which he
labeled as a theory of social justice, Rawls outlined his vision of “justice as fairness.”
For Rawls, this meant that people ought to consider the rules for a fair allotment of
social goods within a society as well as the levels of inequality that can be allowed
within a society. Rawls famously used the concept of a "veil of ignorance," a
pretense of ignorance about where one will end up in any given society that Rawls
thought ought to be used to arrange society, as well as the "principle of difference,"
which holds that social and economic inequalities can be acceptable if they benefit
the whole of society.
The basic element of fairness is crucial, especially in the access to social resources,
sometimes called “social goods.” While it may sound abstract, how social goods are
distributed is immensely impactful. Importantly, the “social determinants” of
outcomes are considered central to whether or not a system is just.
In public health, for example, the place of birth can alter what healthcare options a
person has and, therefore, also how long that person lives. To account for this, social
justice advocates in healthcare might focus on extending the probability that people
will be healthy despite resource inadequacies they may face for historical or
economic reasons.

Main Principles of Social Justice

While there is no single definition of social justice, most approaches share the broad
goals of inclusion and fairness. In order to achieve those goals, they establish a set
of ethical principles for a just society.
These principles may include:
1. Access
Equal access to social goods is one of the most fundamental principles of social
justice. This holds that society's resources should be equally available to all. For
example, many social justice theorists believe that people should have equal access
to education, health care, and employment opportunities. Public servants can
uphold this principle by ensuring that everyone has access to these resources.
2. Equity
Equity is the principle that people should have the same opportunities to succeed,
despite any past injustices or systemic discrimination. This may mean that
resources are distributed in a way that addresses the specific needs of
underprivileged communities or people.
3. Diversity
Diversity is the principle that government and business leaders should be broadly
representative of the communities they serve. This means that not only should
there be women and people of color in positions of power, but also that minority
communities should be equally represented in public institutions. On a policy level,
this principle may entail prohibitions on discrimination or providing resources in
multiple languages.
4. Participation
Participation is the principle that everyone in a community should have a voice in
making important decisions. In many societies, public policies are set by a small
group of powerful people, without consulting the communities they represent. This
may have the unintended effect of excluding a large part of the community.
Public policymakers can address this shortcoming by consulting the advocates of
minority communities and considering their needs.6
5. Human Rights
The final principle of social justice, and arguably the most fundamental, is human
rights. In addition to political rights, such as freedom of conscience, it also requires
freedom from police abuse and respect for one's reproductive rights and bodily
autonomy.

Careers in Social Justice

The most common jobs relating to social justice are related to public administration
and social work since these occupations deal directly with providing access to social
and government resources. People who work in these professions should be
conscious of the explicit and implicit biases that may reduce access to these
resources for some members of society.
But it is also possible to advocate for social justice in other fields. For example,
lawyers can help ensure equitable access to the justice system by representing
clients who are traditionally underserved by existing institutions, and lobbyists can
push for legislation that addresses community injustices. Other social justice-
oriented occupations include mental health workers, victim advocates, and
community developers.

Areas of Focus
While social justice seeks to ensure equality and fairness for all, it may focus on
those groups that have been the victims of historical oppression. The following are
some areas of focus for social justice workers:
1. Racial Equality
Racial equality is one of the most common issues in social justice, and many
countries have a history of discrimination or oppression of minority ethnic or racial
groups. Members of these groups may be at an economic disadvantage or suffer
from unequal access to education, health services, or other essential institutions.
2. Gender Equality
Almost every country suffers from some sort of gender inequality, whether in the
form of wage gaps, glass ceilings, or other forms of gender-based discrimination. In
addition, women are also more likely to suffer from violence or sexual assault. or
face threats to reproductive rights. Gender equality also affects other rights, such as
racial equality. Many social justice advocates consider this a key aspect of social
reform.
3. LGBTQ+ Equality
Starting in the 20th century, LGBTQ+ rights emerged as another issue for social
justice advocates. Members of the LGBTQ+ community face high levels of violence
and discrimination and may be denied access to healthcare or employment.

Equity vs. Equality

Although they are both related to the distribution of social goods and privileges
within a society, equality and equity have taken on slightly different meanings in
conversations around social justice. Equality, in this context, means that people are
given the same access to opportunities, regardless of historical or other forms of
injustice that may alter how much someone can access those opportunities. Equity,
in contrast, tries to account for an imbalanced social system by providing the
resources to create an equal outcome.9
It is social justice’s adoption of equity that most of its critics focus on, but those in
favor of the concept suggest that equity is a vital part of ensuring a just society.
Paula Braveman, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, for
instance, has commented that “health equity” and social justice in health are
interchangeable. The goal of social justice in health care, she implies, “[is that] no
one is denied the possibility to be healthy for belonging to a group that has
historically been economically/socially disadvantaged.”

Social Justice in Law

In law, social justice perspectives have become a touchpoint for the American
culture wars. Critical race theory (CRT), an approach to law that actively seeks to
account for how racial prejudices affect legal outcomes, has drawn particular outcry.
The term was developed by American legal theorists such as Kimberlé Crenshaw to
analyze how racism is advanced by American legal structures, even in some cases
in the absence of racist individuals. Central to CRT is the notion that race is not
validated by science, and that the law has maintained an unjust order.

The Critics
Detractors of critical race theory have claimed that it is merely a way of permitting
discrimination. According to the Brookings Institute, a public policy think tank,
opponents of critical race theory tend to view the claim that American institutions
are racist as a way of accusing White people of being individually racist, rather than
as an attempt at broad analysis about the effect of institutions on social outcomes.
Campaigns against CRT have become increasingly vocal in state legislatures across
the U.S., with many banning its teaching in primary and secondary schools. To date,
36 states have moved to install legislation to ban teaching about racial bias in the
U.S., and 17 have moved to expand that teaching, according to a state legislative
tracker created by Chalkbeat, a nonprofit newsroom focused on the American
education system.
In 2020, President Donald Trump had also forbidden diversity and equity training
from federal contracts, which has been described as an "equity gag order." That
executive order conflated diversity training and CRT, calling both "divisive." The ban
was reversed in 2021 under then-President Joe Biden.
UCLA Law. "Biden Reverses Trump Executive Order Banning Diversity Training."
However, upon retaking office in January 2025, President Trump once again signed
executive orders terminating existing DEI programs and banning future DEI efforts
by the federal government.

What Does Social Justice Mean?

Social justice is the belief that the social benefits and privileges of a society ought
to be divided fairly.
Why Is Social Justice Important?
Advocates say that social justice is worth pursuing because it defends people from
suffering deprivations due to unfair prejudices and because it tries to provide
everyone with the essentials for a good life.16
How Is Social Justice Related to Equity?
The concept of equity focuses on outcomes. It’s related to the belief that social
determinants massively affect how people’s lives turn out and that, therefore, a
truly fair arrangement of society will account for the tangible ways that this harms
socially and economically disadvantaged groups.

The Bottom Line

Social justice is a political and philosophical movement aiming for a more division of
resources and opportunities. By addressing historical injustices and directing
resources to underserved communities, social justice advocates hope to establish a
more fair and equal society.

Economic Justice
Economic justice refers to the principles and practices that aim to create a fair and
equitable economic system where everyone has the opportunity to thrive. It
encompasses various aspects like fair wages, equal access to resources, and the
absence of discrimination in economic opportunities. Ultimately, economic justice
seeks to ensure that prosperity and justice go hand-in-hand, rather than being seen
as opposing forces.
Key aspects of economic justice include:
 Equal economic opportunities:
This means providing all individuals with the chance to participate in the economy,
regardless of their background, race, gender, or other factors.
 Fair wages and working conditions:
Ensuring that workers receive a living wage and have access to safe and healthy
working environments.
  Access to resources:
This includes access to education, healthcare, affordable housing, and financial
services, which are essential for economic well-being.
 Social safety nets:
Providing support for those who are vulnerable or marginalized, such as
unemployment benefits, social security, and welfare programs.
 Addressing systemic inequalities:
Recognizing and working to dismantle the structures and systems that perpetuate
economic disparities.
Examples of economic justice initiatives:
 Minimum wage laws:
Setting a minimum wage floor to ensure that workers earn a basic living wage.
 Progressive taxation:
Taxing higher earners at a higher rate to fund social programs and reduce income
inequality.
 Affordable housing initiatives:
Providing subsidies and support to make housing more accessible to low-income
individuals and families.
 Job training and workforce development programs:
Equipping individuals with the skills and knowledge needed to participate in the
modern economy.
 Promoting fair trade practices:
Ensuring that international trade benefits all countries and workers, not just a select
few.
 Community-led development:
Empowering local communities to identify and address their own economic needs
and challenges.
Why is economic justice important?
Economic justice is not just a matter of fairness; it's also essential for a healthy and
stable society. When people have access to economic opportunities and resources,
they are more likely to be healthy, educated, and engaged citizens. This, in turn,
leads to stronger communities, a more vibrant economy, and a more just and
equitable world.

Ethical Implications
Ethical implications refer to the potential moral considerations and consequences
that arise from actions, decisions, or situations. These implications involve
evaluating the rightness or wrongness of actions, considering potential harms and
benefits, and understanding the impact on individuals and society. In essence, it's
about examining the ethical dimensions of a particular issue or scenario.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:

Key Aspects of Ethical Implications:

 Moral Considerations:
Ethical implications delve into what is considered right or wrong, good or bad, in a
given context. They involve applying moral principles and values to evaluate actions
and their potential consequences.
 Potential Harms and Benefits:
A crucial part of assessing ethical implications is considering the potential harms
and benefits that might result from a particular course of action. This includes
physical, psychological, social, and financial harms, as well as potential benefits to
individuals, groups, or society.
 Impact on Individuals and Society:
Ethical implications extend beyond the immediate impact on individuals involved in
a situation. They also consider the broader societal consequences, including
potential effects on social structures, cultural norms, and public trust.
 Examples in Various Fields:
 Research: Ethical implications in research involve issues like informed
consent, confidentiality, potential harm to participants, and the
responsible communication of findings.
 Artificial Intelligence: Ethical implications in AI include bias, privacy
concerns, job displacement, and the potential for misuse of AI
technologies.
 Business: Ethical implications in business involve issues like fair labor
practices, environmental sustainability, data privacy, and responsible
marketing.
 Healthcare: Ethical implications in healthcare include issues like
patient autonomy, informed consent, end-of-life care, and access to
healthcare.
In essence, understanding ethical implications is vital for making responsible
decisions and ensuring actions align with moral principles and societal values.

Promoting the Common Good

Promoting the common good involves actions and policies that benefit all members
of a community, prioritizing collective well-being over individual interests. It's about
creating social conditions that enable individuals and groups to reach their full
potential and live fulfilling lives.
Key aspects of promoting the common good:
 Inclusivity and Equity:
Ensuring that all members of society have access to essential resources,
opportunities, and a voice in decision-making.
 Social Justice:
Addressing systemic inequalities and promoting fairness in the distribution of
resources and opportunities.
 Shared Responsibility:
Recognizing that individuals have a role to play in contributing to the well-being of
their community and the wider world.
 Sustainable Development:
Considering the long-term impact of actions on the environment and future
generations.
 Civic Engagement:
Participating in the democratic process, volunteering, and working together to
address community challenges.
Examples of promoting the common good:
 Volunteering time and resources to support local initiatives: This
could include cleaning up parks, volunteering at a library or food bank, or
participating in community events.
 Advocating for policies that benefit the community: This could involve
supporting initiatives that promote affordable housing, access to healthcare,
or environmental protection.
  Practicing ethical and responsible behavior in daily life: This could
include being a good neighbor, driving safely, and respecting public spaces.
 Promoting dialogue and understanding across different groups: This
can help to build trust and foster collaboration.
 Supporting local businesses and economies: This helps to create jobs
and strengthen the community.
 Investing in education and public services: This ensures that everyone
has access to the resources they need to thrive.
 Protecting the environment: This involves making conscious choices to
reduce our impact on the planet.
In essence, promoting the common good is about creating a society where everyone
has the opportunity to flourish and where the well-being of the whole is prioritized.

Community and Social Welfare

Promoting the common good in community and social welfare involves creating
conditions that benefit all members of society, ensuring their well-being and
allowing them to reach their full potential. This requires a commitment to justice,
equality, and inclusivity, while also balancing individual rights with the needs of the
community.
Here's a breakdown of key aspects:
What is the Common Good?
 Social Conditions:
The common good encompasses the sum of social conditions that enable
individuals to flourish and achieve their potential according to the Council for the
Restoration of Filipino Values (CRFV).
 Collective Well-being:
It's not just about individual benefits, but about ensuring the well-being of the entire
community, including those who are disadvantaged or marginalized.
 Shared Resources:
The common good includes access to essential resources and services like
healthcare, education, public safety, and a clean environment.
 Inclusivity:
It emphasizes creating a society where everyone feels valued, respected, and has
opportunities to participate fully.
How to Promote the Common Good:
 Community Engagement:
 Participating in local initiatives and volunteering time to support
community needs according to She Should Run.
 Forming relationships with people from diverse backgrounds and
working together to address common challenges.
 Supporting local businesses and organizations that contribute to the
community.
 Social Responsibility:
 Being mindful of the impact of individual actions on the community
and striving to make positive contributions.
 Practicing empathy and compassion towards others, especially those
who are vulnerable.
 Promoting fairness, justice, and equality in all interactions.
 Advocacy and Action:
  Supporting policies and initiatives that promote social welfare and
address systemic inequalities.
 Raising awareness about important social issues and encouraging
others to get involved.
 Holding leaders accountable for promoting the common good.
 Personal Actions:
 Being a responsible and active member of society.
 Paying taxes, voting, and participating in civic activities.
 Treating others with respect and dignity.
 Being mindful of one's own impact on the environment.
By actively participating in these ways, individuals can contribute to a more just,
equitable, and thriving community for all.
Environmental Stewardship
Promoting the common good through environmental stewardship involves actions
that benefit both the environment and society, ensuring a healthy planet for current
and future generations. This includes reducing our environmental impact,
conserving resources, and actively participating in initiatives that protect and
restore ecosystems. It's about recognizing the interconnectedness of environmental
health and human well-being.
Here's a breakdown of how environmental stewardship promotes the common good:
1. Protecting Natural Resources:
 Sustainable Use:
Stewardship encourages responsible use of resources like water, energy, and land,
preventing depletion and ensuring their availability for future needs.
 Ecosystem Preservation:
Protecting ecosystems like forests, wetlands, and oceans is crucial for maintaining
biodiversity, clean air and water, and regulating climate.
2. Reducing Pollution and Waste:
 Waste Reduction:
Minimizing waste generation through recycling, composting, and reducing
consumption helps to reduce pollution in our air, water, and land.
 Pollution Prevention:
Stewardship promotes practices that minimize the release of pollutants from
industrial processes, transportation, and other human activities.
3. Fostering a Healthy Environment:
 Clean Air and Water:
Protecting our natural environment directly contributes to cleaner air and water,
essential for human health.
 Climate Change Mitigation:
By reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable practices, we can
help mitigate the effects of climate change, which disproportionately impacts
vulnerable populations.
4. Promoting Social Equity:
 Access to Nature:
Creating green spaces and ensuring access to nature for all communities, regardless
of socioeconomic status, promotes well-being and reduces health disparities.
 Environmental Justice:
Stewardship recognizes that environmental problems disproportionately affect
marginalized communities. It encourages addressing these inequities by promoting
environmental justice.
5. Building a Sustainable Future:
 Long-Term Vision:
Environmental stewardship requires a long-term perspective, considering the needs
of future generations.
 Community Engagement:
Engaging communities in environmental initiatives fosters a sense of shared
responsibility and empowers individuals to make a difference.
Examples of Environmental Stewardship:
 Individual Actions:
Reducing energy and water consumption, recycling, composting, using public
transportation, and choosing sustainable products.

 Community Initiatives:
Organizing local clean-up events, participating in tree planting projects, supporting
local farmers markets, and advocating for environmental policies.
 Business Practices:
Adopting sustainable business practices, reducing waste and pollution, and
investing in renewable energy.
By embracing environmental stewardship, we can collectively work towards a more
sustainable and equitable future where both people and the planet can thrive.

Distributive Justice
The economic, political, and social frameworks that each society has—its laws,
institutions, policies, etc.—result in different distributions of benefits and burdens
across members of the society. These frameworks are the result of human political
processes and they constantly change both across societies and within societies
over time. The structure of these frameworks is important because the distributions
of benefits and burdens resulting from them fundamentally affect people’s lives.
Arguments about which frameworks and/or resulting distributions are morally
preferable constitute the topic of distributive justice. Principles of distributive justice
are therefore best thought of as providing moral guidance for the political processes
and structures that affect the distribution of benefits and burdens in societies, and
any principles which do offer this kind of moral guidance on distribution, regardless
of the terminology they employ, should be considered principles of distributive
justice.
This entry is structured in the following way. After outlining the scope of the entry
and the role of distributive principles, the first relatively simple principle of
distributive justice examined is Strict Egalitarianism, which calls for the allocation of
equal material goods to all members of society. John Rawls’ alternative distributive
principle, which he calls the Difference Principle, is examined next. The Difference
Principle permits diverging from strict equality so long as the inequalities in
question would make the least advantaged in society materially better off than they
would be under strict equality. Some have thought that neither strict equality nor
Rawls’ Difference Principle capture the important moral roles of luck and
responsibility. The “Luck Egalitarianism” literature comprises varying attempts to
design distributive principles that are appropriately sensitive to considerations of
responsibility and luck. Desert-based principles similarly emphasize the moral roles
of responsibility and luck but are distinct because they approach these factors
through claims about what people deserve because of their work.
Advocates of welfare-based principles (of which utilitarianism is the most famous)
do not believe the primary distributive concern should be material goods and
services. They argue that material goods and services have no intrinsic value but
are valuable only in so far as they increase welfare. Hence, they argue, distributive
principles should be designed and assessed according to how they affect welfare,
either its maximization or distribution. Advocates of libertarian principles, by
contrast to each of the principles so far mentioned, generally criticize any
distributive ideal that requires the pursuit of specific ‘patterns’, such as
maximization or equality of welfare or of material goods. They argue that the
pursuit of such patterns conflicts with the more important moral demands of liberty
or self-ownership. Finally, feminist critiques of existing distributive principles note
that they tend to ignore the particular circumstances of women, so feminists tend to
argue for principles which are more sensitive to facts such as that women often
have primary responsibility for child-rearing and on average, spend less of their
lifetimes than men in the market economy.
Distributive justice principles guide how society distributes resources and
burdens. Key principles include: equality (equal distribution), equity (distribution
based on contribution or need), and need (prioritizing those with greater
requirements). Other principles include meritocracy (distribution based on merit),
and libertarianism (emphasizing individual liberty and property rights).
Elaboration:
 Equality:
This principle suggests that all members of a society should have equal access to
resources and opportunities.
 Equity:
Equity recognizes that individuals may have different needs and contributions,
advocating for a distribution that reflects these differences. For example, those who
work harder or contribute more might receive a larger share of resources.
 Need:
This principle prioritizes the allocation of resources to those who require them most,
ensuring basic needs are met.
 Merit:
Meritocracy suggests that individuals should be rewarded based on their merits,
abilities, and achievements.
 Libertarianism:
This principle emphasizes individual freedom and property rights, with limited
government intervention in the distribution of resources. Libertarians often argue
that individuals are entitled to what they acquire through voluntary exchange and
that redistribution is unjust.
 Utilitarianism:
This principle focuses on maximizing overall well-being for the greatest number of
people. In the context of distributive justice, a utilitarian approach might prioritize
policies that lead to the greatest overall happiness, even if it means some
inequality.
 Other Considerations:
Principles of distributive justice also involve balancing these different approaches,
considering factors like efficiency, fairness, and intergenerational equity.
These principles are not mutually exclusive and can be applied in different contexts
and situations. The specific principles that guide a society's approach to distributive
justice can vary depending on its values, priorities, and the specific context.
Economic Inequality
Economic inequality, the unequal distribution of wealth and resources, is closely
linked to the philosophical concept of distributive justice, which focuses on fair
allocation of societal goods. Distributive justice seeks to address inequalities by
examining how resources, opportunities, and benefits are allocated among
individuals and groups within a society. Various theories of distributive justice
propose different approaches to achieve fairness, such as equal distribution,
distribution based on need, or distribution based on contribution.
Key aspects of distributive justice related to economic inequality:
 Equality vs. Equity:
Distributive justice considers both equality (everyone gets the same) and equity
(everyone gets what they need, which may not be the same) in resource allocation.
 Fairness and Opportunity:
Distributive justice emphasizes fair access to opportunities and resources, such as
education, healthcare, and employment, to mitigate the effects of economic
inequality.
 Social Mobility:
A key concern of distributive justice is to create a society where individuals have a
chance to improve their economic standing, rather than being trapped in poverty
due to inequality.
 Social Cohesion:
Distributive justice recognizes that economic inequality can lead to social unrest
and instability, and aims to create a more cohesive society through fair resource
allocation.
 Economic Efficiency:
Some perspectives argue that a certain degree of economic inequality can be
beneficial for economic growth, while others suggest that excessive inequality can
hinder growth and efficiency.
 Ethical Considerations:
Distributive justice raises ethical questions about the responsibility of society to
address inequalities and the extent to which it should intervene to ensure fairness.
 Examples:
Public healthcare programs, progressive taxation, and social safety nets are
examples of policies that aim to promote distributive justice by redistributing
resources to address economic inequality.
In essence, distributive justice provides a framework for analyzing and addressing
economic inequality by exploring what constitutes a fair distribution of societal
resources and opportunities, and how to achieve it.

Welfare State and Social Safety Nets

he welfare state is a system where the government plays a key role in protecting
and promoting the economic and social well-being of its citizens. A social safety net
is a collection of policies and programs designed to protect individuals and families
from poverty and economic shocks. These two concepts are closely related, with the
welfare state often providing the framework and resources for the social safety net.
Key aspects of the welfare state and social safety nets:
 Welfare state:
A welfare state aims to ensure a basic standard of living for all citizens, often
through social security, healthcare, education, and social assistance programs.
  Social safety nets:
These are specific programs within the welfare state that provide targeted
assistance to vulnerable populations, including cash transfers, food assistance, and
access to services like healthcare and education.
 Examples:
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and food assistance
programs like SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) in the US are all
examples of social safety net programs within the framework of the welfare state.
 Purpose:
Social safety nets are designed to mitigate the negative impacts of economic
hardship, unemployment, illness, and other life events that can lead to poverty or
destitution.
 Goals:
Social safety nets aim to reduce poverty, inequality, and social exclusion, while also
promoting economic stability and human capital development.
 Challenges:
Social safety nets face challenges such as funding limitations, administrative
complexities, potential for fraud and abuse, and the need to balance individual
needs with broader economic goals.
 Benefits:
Well-designed social safety nets can reduce poverty, improve health and
educational outcomes, and enhance the resilience of individuals and communities
to economic shocks.
In essence, the welfare state provides the overarching structure, while social safety
nets are the specific tools and programs that help individuals and families navigate
difficult times and build a more secure future.

Healthcare and Education Access

Healthcare and education access are intertwined ethical considerations. Ensuring
equitable access to both is crucial for social justice and well-being, as both
significantly impact individuals' life opportunities and overall health.
Healthcare Access Ethics:
 Distributive Justice:
This principle in healthcare ethics asserts that all individuals should have fair and
equitable access to healthcare services, regardless of their socioeconomic status,
background, or other factors.
 Beneficence and Non-maleficence:
Healthcare professionals have an ethical obligation to act in their patients' best
interests (beneficence) and to avoid causing harm (non-maleficence).
 Autonomy:
Patients have the right to make informed decisions about their own healthcare,
including the right to refuse treatment.
 Confidentiality:
Healthcare providers must protect patient privacy and confidentiality.
 Resource Allocation:
In situations of limited resources, healthcare ethics guides decisions about how to
fairly distribute care.
Education Access Ethics:
 Equality of Opportunity:
Education is a fundamental human right, and all individuals should have the
opportunity to access quality education regardless of their background.
 Social Justice:
Ensuring equitable access to education promotes social mobility and reduces
inequalities.
 Impact on Health:
Education significantly impacts health outcomes, with higher levels of education
often associated with better health and longer lifespans.
 Critical Thinking and Citizenship:
Education fosters critical thinking skills and prepares individuals to be responsible
citizens.
Intertwined Nature:
 Education as a Social Determinant of Health:
Education is a key social determinant of health, meaning that it influences health
outcomes.
 Healthcare Access as a Foundation for Education:
Access to quality healthcare is essential for children to attend school regularly and
to be able to learn effectively.

 Ethical Imperative:
Providing equitable access to both healthcare and education is an ethical imperative
for creating a just and healthy society.
In essence, healthcare and education access are not separate issues but rather
interconnected aspects of social justice. Ethical frameworks guide efforts to ensure
that all individuals have the opportunity to thrive, both in terms of their health and
their ability to reach their full potential through education.

Global Distributive Justice

Global distributive justice refers to the fair allocation of resources, benefits, and
burdens across the world, addressing issues like global poverty, inequality, and the
impact of globalization. It grapples with the question of whether principles of justice,
typically applied within a nation's borders, should extend to the global arena and
how to address inequalities between countries.
Key aspects of global distributive justice:
 Scope of Justice:
A central debate revolves around whether principles of justice should be applied
globally or if they are confined to national borders.
 Global Poverty and Inequality:
Addressing the vast disparities in wealth and living conditions between nations is a
core concern.
 Duties of Assistance:
Some argue for a "duty of assistance" to help those in need, while others advocate
for a more comprehensive approach to global redistribution.
 International Cooperation:
Achieving global distributive justice requires international cooperation and
potentially new global institutions or norms.
 Specific Issues:
Climate change, trade justice, migration, and human rights are among the specific
issues connected to global distributive justice.
Different Perspectives:
 Rawlsian Approach:
John Rawls, in his work "The Law of Peoples," argued for a duty of assistance to
ensure basic subsistence but did not extend his principles of domestic justice to the
global level.
 Cosmopolitanism:
Cosmopolitan perspectives argue that moral obligations extend to all individuals,
regardless of nationality, and support principles of global equality.
 Statism:
Statists argue that there is something special about the state that grounds
obligations of distributive justice within its borders, but not necessarily globally.
In essence, global distributive justice seeks to answer the question of how to create
a more just and equitable world by addressing the challenges of global inequality
and poverty, considering the diverse perspectives and complexities involved.

REFERENCES:
 https://iep.utm.edu/justwest/
 https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/justice-
and-fairness/
 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/social-justice.asp
 https://www.larksuite.com/en_us/topics/ai-glossary/ethical-implications-of-
artificial-intelligence
 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/economic-justice.asp
 https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/the-
common-good/
 https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/common-good/
 https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-distributive
 https://publichealth.tulane.edu/blog/ethics-in-healthcare/
 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/welfare-state.asp
 https://oxfordre.com/internationalstudies/display/10.1093/acrefore/
9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore-9780190846626-e-89