Theoretical Unification in Justice and Beyond

The goal of scientific work is to understand more and more by less and less. In this effort, theoretical unification plays a large part. There are two main types of theoretical unification—unification of different theories of the same field of phenomena and unification of theories of different fields of phenomena. Both types are usually a surprise; even when vigorously pursued, their form, when they finally appear, may differ radically from preconceptions. This paper examines a series of 21 unification surprises in the study of justice and beyond, 16 in the study of justice and 5 in the unification of 3 fundamental sociobehavioral forces—justice, status, and power—and the subsequent unification of the three sociobehavioral forces with identity and with happiness.

The Limits of Theoretical Integration

The integration of theoretical knowledge is often seen as the ultimate goal of research activity in the social sciences. In this article I explore limits in the form and degree to which our knowledge can be integrated, as well as limits in the worth and desirability of some kinds of integration. Most of the analysis depends on drawing two kinds of distinctions in theoretical activity—between theoretical and metatheoretical work and among different types of integration in each kind of work. Using primarily examples from theory and research on justice issues, I articulate three different ways in which work at the theoretical level can be integrated. Each type represents a distinct kind of knowledge development, requires different criteria of evaluation, and involves a varying degree of difficulty to achieve. Nevertheless, each of these types of integration is well worth pursuing. Justice research shows evidence of work involving all three types. Using a somewhat broader range of examples, I also distinguish three different ways in which metatheoretical work might be integrated. Again, each type is quite distinct and should be evaluated in different ways. However, each of these types is significantly more difficult to achieve than any of the types of theoretical integration. Moreover, I suggest that the last metatheoretical type—involving the integration of entire strategies, perspectives or schools of thought—is probably not even a desirable goal. As a consequence of these analyses, I recommend (1) that social scientists in general (and justice researchers in particular) focus most of our attention on one or another of the types of theoretical integration, and (2) that we articulate clearly which type of integration we are pursuing and evaluate our success at the effort using only the appropriate criteria. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Social Justice Conference in Bremen, Germany, 10–12 March 2005.

---

Representing Theory and Theorising in Criminal Justice Studies: Practising Theory Considered

The author considers the role and place of theory in criminal justice studies. The argument is that the operation and interrogation of fundamental categories is integral to social scientific enquiry and if criminal justice studies is to resist a technocratic “protective service” orientation it must promote theorising and thinking conceptually via the texts which represent the discipline to undergraduates. Although theory is situated at the core of social science curricula, there is little or no agreement on its role or place in research and pedagogy. The dominant understanding of theory within criminal justice studies (including its sociological and criminological incarnation) is that it is something to be referred to. What is seldom emphasised in theory or methods texts is the practice of theorising. Texts that are designed to be the student’s first contact with the field of criminal justice studies, and which reflect broader attitudes toward social enquiry, seldom consider the methodological and pedagogical issues related to the production and role of analytic concepts and do not present social science as an imaginative or reflexive practice. Drawing on critical realist metatheory, this paper advances a distinction between social and sociological problems and social science and protective service toward illustrating that a social science approach to the study of criminal justice demands the operation and interrogation of analytic categories and explicit consideration of issues of epistemology and ontology. Works which seek to avoid this serve only to foster a passive rather than active engagement with their subject matter.     

Toward “Safer” and “Better” Communities?: Canada’s Youth Criminal Justice Act,Aboriginal Youth and the Processes of Exclusion

After a decade of high incarceration rates, the Canadian Department of Justice has revised its approach to juvenile justice. Enshrined in the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), the renewed youth justice system stresses the importance and responsibility of community for crime control. While on the surface the state’s appeals to such programmes as restorative justice seem laudable, caution should be exercised in fully endorsing this approach. While community initiatives have been criticized for “widening the net of social control” and intruding state control deeper into social life, their exclusionary potential is perhaps more troubling. Following Derrida’s metaphysics of presence, I suggest that ‘community’ perpetually finds meaning in opposition to the other. In this environment, Aboriginal youth, who are among the most marginalized in Canadian society, will likely be the most unfavourably effected. This paper does not, however, entirely reject the Act’s appeal to community. Nevertheless, I argue that for meaningful challenges to contemporary constructions of community and youth justice to occur the discursive limits forced upon ‘community’ must be fractured and fashioned in ways that renounce homogeneity. We strongly believe the solution to youth crime is in the community. Give the community the ability to deal with it and they will (Canada 1997).     

Ten tendencies of criminal justice

A study of the global tendencies of criminal justice will help us design a more scientific and rational pathway for the reformation of existing criminal justice system of China. In the forthcoming several hundred years to come, the world’s criminal justice is to take on ten tendencies, that is, the tendency toward unity, civilization, science, rule of law, human rights, justice, efficiency, specialization, standardization and harmony. __________ Translated from Yanshan Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexueban) 燕山大学学报 (哲学社会科学版) (Journal of Yanshan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)), 2005, (1): 1–11     

‘Schooling’ and the ‘Naturalization’ of racial injustice

Despite various government initiatives that have emerged in response to Canada's increasing racial diversification, the unjust treatment of racial minorities remains a problem. By examining the contracdictions between ideology and practice within an educational context, this paper provides an explanation of why government efforts direced towards the eradication of racial injustice have been relatively ineffective. The continued mistreatment of racial minorities is, in part, attributable to the promotion of a particular form of justice that ‘naturalizes’ racism. First, a reformulation of the relationship among the concepts of justice, ideology, and complementarity generates an analytical framework within which to address the problem of ‘naturalization’. The latter part of the paper examines the ‘naturalization’ of inequality generally, and racial inequality specifically, within education. A critical review of the teaching of Canadian history and Philippe Rushton's controversial theory demonstrates how education currently—but not inevitably—reinforces negative racial stereotypes, inviting the unjust treatment of racial minorities to remain unquestioned.     

From Interactional Justice to Citizenship Behaviors: Role Enlargement or Role Discretion?

An organizational field study examined the mechanisms through which supervisors’ interactional justice influences employees’ individual-directed organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). Although, previous research supports the relationship between interactional fairness and OCBs, the mechanisms of operation remain unclear. Separate frameworks, based on role enlargement and role discretion exist, with no prior attempts to compare them. In this study, I examine two competitive models, (a) a role enlargement model, using employees’ role definitions as a mediator and (b) a role discretion model, using employees’ role definitions as a moderator. The results, based on data collected from 141 employee-manager dyads in a work organization, confirm that role definitions moderate the relationships between interactional justice and OCBs. The findings are discussed to derive theoretical and practical implications and directions for future research.     

Interpersonal Aspects of Justice in Relationships Between Consumers and Service Providers: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis

There is a controversy in the justice literature as to whether interpersonal aspects of justice are best represented as one construct (interactional justice) or two (interpersonal justice and informational justice). Using confirmatory factor analysis, we tested competing models of these constructs on a sample of healthcare consumers (n = 1919) with respect to their justice judgments of primary care physicians. We found that the single factor model (interactional justice) represented a better fit to the data. Our results do not necessarily contradict those of prior studies that have found a better fit for a bi-dimensional model in organizational settings, however. Instead, we are suggesting a contingency approach: the results may be due in part to the halo effect, which may manifest itself where consumers are unfamiliar with the service provider and with the complexities of that person’s role.     

The Intensification of Hating: A Theory

Hate, a simple word, is easily understood by young children. But as a concept, hate is vast, complex, and slippery. The study of hate is not limited to one discipline; it is studied throughout the humanities and social sciences. This paper, which presents a psychological theory of hating, argues that hate is an understudied psychological construct and has particular relevance to justice research. Hate can trigger injustice, and injustice has the capacity to trigger derogation, violence, and hate. Relying on four literatures—justice, psychology, psychoanalysis, and criminal justice—we present a theory of hating that describes the formation, perpetuation, and expression of this influential emotional state. The Intensification Theory of Hating describes hate as a dynamic process that moves from antecedents to emotions, cognitions, morals, and behaviors. Hate, we argue, is not only an emotion; it becomes systemic when interactions among its components unfold over time to intensify hate. We conclude by proposing research approaches and questions that could address hate in psychological and justice research. Submitted to David De Cremer and Kees van den Bos, “Justice and feelings: An emotional revolution”. Social Justice Research, December 11, 2006     

In Defense of Kant’s League of States

This article presents a defense of Kant’s idea of a league of states. Kant’s proposal that rightful or just international relations can be achieved within the framework of such a league is often criticized for being at odds with his overall theory. In view of the analogy he draws between an interpersonal and an international state of nature, it is often argued that he should have opted for the idea of a state of states. Agreeing with this standard criticism that a league of states cannot establish the institutional framework for international justice, others also suggest an alternative stage model interpretation. According to this interpretation, Kant’s true ideal is in fact a state of states, whereas the league is merely introduced as a temporary and second best solution. In contrast to both the standard criticism and the stage model interpretation, I argue that fundamental normative concerns count in favour of a league rather than a state of states. I also argue that Kant’s defense of such a league is consistent with his position on the institutional preconditions for just interaction in the domestic case because of crucial relevant differences between the state of nature among individuals and the external relations between states.     

An Integrative Perspective on Social Justice: Distributive and Procedural Fairness Evaluations of Positive and Negative Outcome Allocations

This paper presents a theoretical framework for the integration of distributive and procedural justice in positive and negative outcome allocations. The framework consists of seven basic assumptions, seven propositions, and seven groups of interrelated hypotheses. The expected outcome offers a coherent program for future justice research based on the realization that distributive and procedural aspects of fairness cannot be meaningfully treated (1) in isolation from one another, and (2) without taking into account the valence of the allocated outcome. The framework should also reveal the need to reassess existing distributive and procedural justice study conclusions that neglected to examine the interactive effects of the allocation outcome (distribution) and the procedure and the outcome valence.     

The evolution of European legal integration

This article contributes to the development of theories on European integration by testing and exploring statistical models on the long-term development of legislative activity of the European Commission. Drawing on legal information gained from the European Union’s PreLex database and analyzing it with the help of statistical analyses, we map out growth patterns of EU law between 1976 and 2003. We construct time-series models and models based on non-linear regression. While the performance of models based on the traditional theoretical approaches, intergovernmentalism and neo-functionalism, is rather poor, the analysis suggests that nonlinear dynamic models might be an interesting avenue for future conceptualizations of the EU integration process. This article is based on a paper presented at the ECPR Standing Group on the European Union Second Pan-European Conference on EU Politics, “Implications of a Wider Europe: Politics, Institutions and Diversity”, 24–26 June 2004, Bologna, Italy. We would like to thank the seminar participants for useful comments.     

On Justice

This paper returns to the question of how to think of justice through Teubner’s recent definition of what he calls juridical justice. Juridical justice is defined as distinct from political, moral, social and theological conceptions of justice. Teubner attempts to think of an imaginary space for a juridical justice ‘beyond the sites of natural and positive law’ and searches for a conception of justice as the ‘law’s self-subversive principle’. This article reviews Teubner’s conception of juridical justice and further proposes a distinction between juridical and non-juridical understandings of justice.     

The Process Matters: Fairness in Repository Siting For Nuclear Waste

Siting contested infrastructure such as repositories for nuclear waste very often faces strong local resistance. One major reason for this opposition may arise because siting processes do not appropriately consider fairness issues such as transparency, the availability of options, or the sufficient involvement of concerned and affected people. The aim of this study was to analyze people’s concerns related to justice in siting nuclear waste. Besides procedural aspects, both distributive justice and outcome valence are considered important and therefore the “total fairness model” by T?rnblom and Vermunt (Soc Justice Res 12:39–64, 1999) was used as a framework. In three quasi-experimental studies (N ₁ = 53; N ₂ = 56; N ₃ = 83) applying conjoint analysis, respondents ranked 11 vignettes with the three attributes procedural justice, distributional justice, and outcome valence. Each vignette represents a realistic scenario of a site selection process for the disposal of nuclear waste in Switzerland. All the three studies yield a consistent result: vignettes representing a situation with a fair process are top-ranked by respondents; situations with negative outcome valence are ranked lowest; distributive issues turned out to be of minor importance. We conclude that procedural fairness should be given more attention in any kind of contested infrastructure siting and that real-world examples like the one discussed here can inform justice research.     

Animal rights is a social justice issue

The literature on social justice, and social justice movements themselves, routinely ignore nonhuman animals as legitimate subjects of social justice. Yet, as with other social justice movements, the contemporary animal liberation movement has as its focus the elimination of institutional and systemic domination and oppression. In this paper, I explicate the philosophical and theoretical foundations of the contemporary animal rights movement, and situate it within the framework of social justice. I argue that those committed to social justice – to minimizing violence, exploitation, domination, objectification, and oppression – are equally obligated to consider the interests of all sentient beings, not only those of human beings.     

On the unification of legal rules in the European Union

Unification of legal rules in Europe is not a new phenomenon. However, nowadays, Europe is still an area with many different jurisdictions. This paper studies the process of unification of legal rules in the European Union within a non-cooperative game-theoretical framework. This paper contributes to the understanding of the process by concentrating on the role of the European Commission. In the law-and-economics literature, it is argued that national legal rules will converge more or less spontaneously through the works of legislators and judges. But legal convergence in the European Union is not inevitable: preferences toward legal rules differ across nation-states; substituting a legal system for another one is costly; a coordination problem may arise. We first study the interactions of two nation-states who choose non-cooperatively their legal rules. We shall argue that the action of the Commission is, at first sight, likely to eliminate the coordination problem (under certain conditions). Two factors are at work. First, the Commission has a certain expertise which enables it to propose new and perhaps more efficient rules (so that the choice of unification does not reduce to select a particular nation-state legal system). Second, the Commission may use a system of fines that induces nation-states to abide by its rules (once these rules are adopted by nation-states). Next, we refine our first model: the process of legal unification is viewed as a game where nation-states choose the game that they will play. They choose if they will try to reach an agreement without resorting to the actions of the Commission, or if they will play the game implicitely proposed by the Commission. This captures more precisely the action of the Commission, its ‘right of initiative’’, the publication of proposals in ‘green’’ or ‘white papers’’. In this second model, a coordination problem may arise. JEL Classification C72 · K00     

The basic concepts of re-modifying the criminal procedure law

Re-modifying China’s Criminal Procedure Law has become an important topic within theoretical circles. Many scholars discuss the question of how to modify Criminal Procedure Law. The author considers re-modifying Criminal Procedure Law based on basic scientific ideas; if these ideas contain paying equal attention to fighting crime and protecting human rights, initially setting up a procedural idea and a view of legal truthfulness, giving priority to justice with due consideration to efficiency, and obeying and consulting the international criminal judiciary justness guidelines that will be followed in re-modifying Criminal Procedure Law, then this re-modifying will be successful. __________ Translated from People Justice, 2005, (5) (in Chinese)