Social position,ideology, and distributive justice

This paper addresses two important questions regarding distributive justice. First we ask whether people use standards or principles of distributive justice regarding the allocation of income. The study confirms our expectation that there are at least two principles, viz., the merit and the need principle. Our data show that there is no generally held consensus about the applicability of these two principles. Second, we looked for explanations to explain variations in adherence to these principles. The literature suggests five different theses: 1. self-interest; 2. ideology; 3. enlightenment; 4. historical shift; and 5. gender. Results provide qualified support for the Theses 1, 2 and 4. Class, ideology, and age affect the preferences for the principles of justice. Further elaboration suggests the data point to a specific version of the self-interest thesis, viz., the underdog thesis. Theses 3 and 5 are not confirmed. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Differentiation or federalisation: Which democracy for the future of Europe?

Differentiation has become a central topic of debate in the EU. Generally, it is considered a positive device for advancing integration in crucial policies, letting the unwilling states opt out from the new regimes. However, the debate has not sufficiently acknowledged that policy differentiation has been made possible by governance differentiation. It was the 1992 Maastricht Treaty's decision to inaugurate an intergovernmental regime for core state power policies, distinct from the supranational regime regulating single market policies, that allowed differentiation to flourish. Differentiation and intergovernmentalism are thus inter-connected. During multiple crises of the last decade, intergovernmental governance has shown its undemocratic effects, thus soliciting a critical reappraisal of the differentiation logic. The federalisation of the EU appears a more promising alternative strategy for advancing integration and, at the same time, meeting the democratic expectations of the EU.     

Understanding gender differences in distributive and procedural justice

Gender differences in treatment and in judgments of distributive and procedural justice were examined. Three hundred nine litigants who had been involved in arbitrated auto negligence lawsuits responded to exit surveys. Two mechanisms by which gender might influence justice perceptions were explored. First, we examined whether a “chivalry bias” might be operating, in which the procedures systematically favor women over men. If such biases occur, women might feel they had been treated more fairly because of egocentric biases. Results provided only modest support for the chivalry bias. While women received slightly better awards and perceived somewhat more control than men, these differences had no effect on perceptions of distributive or procedural justice. Second, we examined whether men and women differ systematically in the factors they use as indicators of distributive and procedural justice. On the basis of group-value theory we predicted that women might place more emphasis on standing or on outcome favorability. The study revealed that men and women did differ in how they defined distributive justice, with women placing more emphasis on their perceived standing and on their perceptions of the favorability of their outcomes. There were no substantial gender differences in how procedural justice was defined. Results are interpreted in terms of how women might be responding to insecurity about facing a justice system historically dominated by men. An erratum to this article is available at .     

徘徊于矫正正义与分配正义之间——刑事被告人补偿制度之提倡

刑事司法赔偿是为了填补基于国家违法行为而发生的损害,其最初是以私法领域中的侵权行为概念与理论为参照,并建立在矫正正义思想上的制度。刑事司法补偿则是为了填补因合法司法行为所造成的公民损失,其以宪法基本人权保障的观念为根本,并且以分配正义为基本原理。刑事赔偿责任与刑事补偿责任有着不同的正当性基础。我国《国家赔偿法》第十七条第(二)、(三)项属于刑事补偿责任性质,刑事补偿责任应以被告人没有刑事责任、权利侵害以及侵害程度达到特别牺牲的逻辑递进式三要件作为成立条件。     

The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior

To investigate the relationship between fairness and organizational outcomes, the present study examined the survey responses of government employees at six Federal installations. Indices of procedural and distributive fairness were factor-analytically derived. Multiple regression analyses indicated that both the procedural measures and the distributive measures were significantly related to measures of job satisfaction, evaluation of supervisor, conflict/harmony, trust in management, and turnover intention. Procedural fairness accounted for significantly more variance than distributive fairness in each of these criterion measures, except for turnover intention. These findings are related to conceptual and methodological issues concerning procedural fairness and organizational behavior.     

Child soldiers and distributive justice: addressing the limits of law?

This paper discusses the limitations of legal responses to the problem of child soldiery, beginning from the premise that the crime of using child soldiers is comprised of both the recruiter and the recruit. While legal approaches are addressed to the recruiter, because of the dearth of enforcement mechanisms, the protections established in international law have failed to prevent the recruitment of under-aged combatants. It remains to be seen how efficacious a deterrent the precedent-setting recent and on-going prosecutions of recruiters will be. Nonetheless, legal approaches do not address the recruit, and thus they fail to account for the complex of social reasons that prompt many children to join armed groups “voluntarily”. This paper argues that the conditions that lead children to join armed groups are structural and, thus, must be addressed structurally through developing greater “distributive justice”.     

Self-interest,distributive justice,and the income distribution: A theoretical fragment based on St. Anselm's postulate

The Mertonian starting idea for this paper is St. Anselm's idea that the will has two inclinations: an affection for what is to the person's own advantage and an affection for justice. We show that in decision-making situations, where the individual must choose a course of action from among a set of alternatives, the individual, subject to the two inclinations and thus guided by the twin considerations of own good and the common good as he/she forms the preference orderings for the alternatives, is in one of three states: (i) the state of Harmony, defined by perfect coincidence of the orderings induced by the two criteria; (ii) the state of Conflict, defined by perfect reversal of the orderings; and (iii) the state of Ambiguity, defined by ordering-pairs which are neither identical nor exactly opposite. The most general result states that if the number of alternatives is two, then the individual is in either Harmony or Conflict; if, however, the number of alternatives exceeds two, then Ambiguity is also a possible outcome. We then apply the framework to the case of choosing an income distribution, letting the own-good and common-good criteria dictate orderings based on personal outcomes (such as own income or own income rank) and social outcomes (such as mean income or income inequality), respectively, and examining the relation between the two orderings in five families of probability distributions. In the special case where own good is an increasing function of own income and the common good is a decreasing function of income inequality, our results show that each society has a group in Harmony (the poorest group) and one additional group, either in Conflict or in Ambiguity. Finally, we speculate about the behavioral and social implications of the three states and their configurations in the population.     

Analyzing conflict severity: Predictions of distributive justice theory for the two-subgroup case

This paper formulates a model of conflict based on the theory of distributive justice. The model begins with a condition we termcleavage: There is a perfect correlation between the distribution of a valued good and a grouping variable such as race, ethnicity, or sex. Cleavage sets the stage for conflict. Two key elements are specified—conflict severity and subgroup effectiveness—and their mathematical representation described. The paper analyzes the special case where the conflict involves two subgroups, and focuses on conflict severity. Analysis identifies several sources of variability in conflict severity: the relative sizes of the two subgroups; whether the advantaged subgroup is the smaller or larger; whether the collectivity values personal attributes (such as noble birth or athletic skill) or instead values material possessions; and the extent and shape of inequality in the distribution of material possessions. Results indicate, among other things, that, in a collectivity which values personal attributes, the smaller is the disadvantaged subgroup, the greater is the conflict severity. In contrast, in a collectivity which values material wealth, the direction of the effect of subgroup relative size on conflict severity depends on the distributional form of the valued material possessions. Results also indicate that, for given subgroup relative size, conflict severity is higher the greater the inequality in the distribution of valued material possessions.     

The impact of distributive and procedural justice on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment

Correctional staff are the heart and soul of any correctional facility. While there was a significant body of research on the impact of the work environment on correctional staff, this study sought to expand that knowledge by examining the effects of distributive and procedural justice on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Multivariate models were estimated. Both forms of organizational justice had negative effects on job stress and organizational commitment; however, only procedural justice, but not distributive justice, had a significant impact on job satisfaction.     

Why study the future of criminal justice?

To a large, extent criminal justice agencies arereactive in nature and thus are at the mercy of evants beyond their control. The author suggest that use of futures research and forecasting methods, followed by development of policy alternatives through futures planning techniques, will aid agencies in becomingproactive —being able to anticipate future trends and develop and choose among alternative policies demed most beneficial to achievement of the goals and objectives of the agency. Some techniques of futures research are discussed as is the efficacy of presentation of findings in the form of scenarios.     

The relationship among distributive and procedural justice and correctional life satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intent: An exploratory study

Distributive and procedural justice, two dimensions of organizational justice, have been found to be salient antecedents of many correctional staff attitudes, such as job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment; however, little correctional research has examined their relationships with the life satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intent. Multivariate regression equations were estimated to determine the association of personal characteristics, distributive justice, and procedural justice with the life satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intent of correctional employees based on a survey of 160 staff at a private midwestern maximum security institution. Both distributive and procedural justice had a statistically significant inverse association with burnout and turnover intent, while procedural justice had a significant positive relationship with life satisfaction. Additionally, the results indicated that the association of procedural justice was larger than the association for distributive justice. Similar results were obtained using only responses from correctional officers.     

International criminal justice: reflections on the past and the future

While Nuremberg constitutes a watershed in the evolution of international law with its establishment of the fundamental principle of individual criminal responsibility under international law it has not left much else by way of precedent for the subsequent international criminal tribunals. The adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 827 establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and Resolution 955 (1994) establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, set the groundwork for a new model of hybrid tribunals, with the establishment of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in 2002, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia in 2006, and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in 2007. Perhaps one of the greatest legacies of these ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals has been paving the way for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. However, they have also brought about the development of international criminal law through judicial interpretation, elaborating, inter alia, the elements of the crime of genocide as detailed in the 1948 Genocide Convention, the judicial recognition of the concept of joint criminal enterprise and the principle that national arrangements for amnesties in respect of international crimes are no bar to prosecution for such crimes at an international tribunal. In view of the completion strategies of the ad hoc Tribunals, as well as of the SCSL, this article delves into some of their legacies and outlines some of the difficulties and challenges they have faced, while identifying areas of best practice in order for the newly‐operational International Criminal Court to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past or even reinventing new wheels.