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. 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.
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).
Contents |
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).
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 considers whether the distribution of goods among the members of society at a given time is subjectively acceptable .
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.
Proponents of distributive justice link it to human rights:
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. 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.
|
|||||
{{ de:Justicia distributiva}}