distributive justice


Also found in: Legal, Wikipedia.

distributive justice

(dis-trib′yŭ-tiv)
The ethical concept that favors the value of doing some good for a community, as opposed to doing great good for an individual. It may be illustrated by the dilemma of providing a costly organ transplant to save the life of one person versus providing vaccination against polio to thousands of others. When monetary resources are limited, health care planners, providers, and patients compete for those resources and must decide whether to concentrate them on a single major task or distribute them broadly to the population at large.
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
The study found that procedural and distributive justice indicated significant and positive relationship with employee work outcomes of organizational commitment and job satisfaction.
Matt Matravers contradicts the commonly accepted claim that the Rawlsian approach to distributive justice should not be applied to retributive justice.
But this has nothing to do with distributive justice.
Hence, I wrote, Similarly, Professor Finn misstated distributive justice, writing: "Distributive justice requires that actions and institutions related to owning and using the goods of the earth must ensure that the needs of all are met." Again the Catechism corrects this: distributive justice "regulates what the community owes its citizens in proportion to their contributions and needs." In other words, distributive justice applies to common, i.e., jointly owned goods, not all goods.
They drew on the Rawlsian ideas of distributive justice, need, maximin theory, and the principle of redress to promote humane management in the context of scarce resources.
(19) Regardless of the version of the EER thesis, all such approaches treat mitigation as fundamentally a distributive justice problem that requires egalitarian distributive principles in order to solve.
Research in organizational justice began with distributive justice as attempts were made to understand employees' perceptions of fairness for the distribution of outcomes (Hegtvedt, 1995).
Scholars of philosophy generally follow the work of John Rawls on distributive justice, but some explain how they depart from his notions.
A central way to do so is by offering equitable outcomes (i.e., distributive justice) and enacting fair policies and procedures (i.e., procedural justice) (Colquitt et al, 2005).
This last point is important, because where the equality entailed by commutative justice is absolute, taking no account of the particular circumstances or attributes of the persons involved, distributive justice seeks a proportionate equality.
The demand for more distributive justice - especially in terms of taxing income from capital and wealth - did not gain a majority, especially since the governing parties argued that the recent decision to lower unemployment insurance contributions and the Family Bonus Plus would benefit lower income groups.