Distributive justice concerns what is just or right with respect to the allocation of goods (or utility) in a society. It is often contrasted with procedural justice. Distributive justice concentrates on just outcomes, while procedural justice concentrates on just processes. The most prominent contemporary theorist of distributive justice is John Rawls.

Distributive justice looks at the distribution of goods among members of society at a specific time, and on that basis decides whether the distribution is just. For example, someone who looks at standard of living, absolute wealth, differences in wealth, or any such utilitarian standard to judge justice is thinking in terms of distributive justice. People who hold equality to be important generally, if implicitly, rely on notions of distributive justice. However, not all advocates of end-state theories are concerned with equality. What unites them is their concern with achieving the best results, the best distribution of wealth.

External links

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry
• An essay comparing Rawls and Nozick on Distributional Justice (focused on Nozick, but useful to see main arguments)

Ethics | Philosophical concepts | Justice

Ergebnisgerechtigkeit