Need Based Distributive Justice

This book explores the foundations and potential of a theory of need-based distributive justice, supported by experimental evidence. The core idea is that need-based distributive justice may have some legitimatory advantages over other important principles of distribution, like equality and equity, and therefore involves less dispute over the distribution and redistribution of scarce resources. In seven chapters, eleven scholars from the fields of philosophy, psychology, sociology, political science and economics outline the normative and positive building blocks of such a theory by critically reviewing the literature on distributive justice from their respective disciplinary perspectives. They address important theoretical and practical issues concerning the rationality of needs identification at the individual level and the recognition of needs at the societal level. They also investigate whether and how the dynamics of distribution procedures that allocate resources according to the need principle leads to social stability, focusing on the economic incentives that arise from need-based redistribution. The final chapter provides a synthesis and outlines a framework for a theory of justice based on ten hypotheses derived from the insights presented.

This book explores the foundations and potential of a theory of need-based distributive justice, supported by experimental evidence. The core idea is that need-based distributive justice may have some legitimatory advantages over other important principles of distribution, like equality and equity, and therefore involves less dispute over the distribution and redistribution of scarce resources. In seven chapters, eleven scholars from the fields of philosophy, psychology, sociology, political science and economics outline the normative and positive building blocks of such a theory by critically reviewing the literature on distributive justice from their respective disciplinary perspectives. They address important theoretical and practical issues concerning the rationality of needs identification at the individual level and the recognition of needs at the societal level. They also investigate whether and how the dynamics of distribution procedures that allocate resources according to the need principle leads to social stability, focusing on the economic incentives that arise from need-based redistribution. The final chapter provides a synthesis and outlines a framework for a theory of justice based on ten hypotheses derived from the insights presented.

Though the revised edition of A Theory of Justice, published in 1999, is the definitive statement of Rawls's view, so much of the extensive literature on Rawls's theory refers to the first edition. This reissue makes the first edition once again available for scholars and serious students of Rawls's work.

Distributive justice has come to the fore in political philosophy: how should we arrange our social and economic institutions so as to distribute benefits and burdens fairly? Thirty-eight leading figures from philosophy and political theory present specially written critical assessments of the key issues in this flourishing area of research.

This book develops a novel approach to distributive justice by building a theory based on a concept of desert. As a work of applied political theory, it presents a simple but powerful theoretical argument and a detailed proposal to eliminate unmerited inequality, poverty, and economic immobility, speaking to the underlying moral principles of both progressives who already support egalitarian measures and also conservatives who have previously rejected egalitarianism on the grounds of individual freedom, personal responsibility, hard work, or economic efficiency. By using an agnostic, flexible, data-driven approach to isolate luck and ultimately measure desert, this proposal makes equal opportunity initiatives both more accurate and effective as it adapts to a changing economy. It grants to each individual the freedom to genuinely choose their place in the distribution. It provides two policy variations that are perfectly economically efficient, and two others that are conditionally so. It straightforwardly aligns outcomes with widely shared, fundamental moral intuitions. Lastly, it demonstrates much of the above by modeling four policy variations using 40 years of survey data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics.

How should we design our economic systems? Should we tax the rich at a higher rate than the poor? Should we have a minimum wage? Should the state provide healthcare for all? These and many related questions are the subject of distributive justice, and different theories of distributive justice provide different ways to think about and answer such questions. This book provides a thorough introduction to the main theories of distributive justice and reveals the underlying sources of our disagreements about economic policy. It argues that the universe of theories of distributive justice is surprisingly simple, yet complicated. It is simple in that the main theories of distributive justice are just four in number, and in that these theories each offer a distinct, well-defined theoretical approach to distributive justice; yet it is complicated in that the main theories disagree at several distinct, fundamental levels, and in that it is possible to spin innumerable new theories from the elements of the four main theories. Key Features: Covers the four major theories of distributive justice and their leading philosophers, elucidating the attractions and drawbacks of each: Friedrich A. von Hayek and right-liberalism; John Rawls and left-liberalism; Robert Nozick and libertarianism; Gerald A. Cohen and socialism. Explains why these four theories have come to dominate most philosophical discussions on distributive justice, highlighting the essential answer provided in each that is lacking in other theories. Written for any reader interested in the topic, with an annotated reading list at the end of each chapter and helpful glossary at the back of the book.

Samuel Freeman is a leading political philosopher and one of the foremost authorities on the works of John Rawls. Liberalism and Distributive Justice offers a series of Freeman's essays in contemporary political philosophy on three different forms of liberalism-classical liberalism, libertarianism, and the high liberal tradition--and their relation to capitalism, the welfare state, and economic justice.

Two questions often shape our view of the world. On the one hand, we ask what there is, on the other hand, we ask what there ought to be. Empirical research and normative theory, the methodological traditions concerned with these questions, entered a difficult relationship, from at least as early as around the time of the advent of modern sciences. To this day, there remains a strong separation between the two domains, with both tending to neglect discourses and results from the other. Contrary to a verdict of strict segregation between "is" and "ought," there are, nowadays, various attempts to integrate both theoretical approaches. This calls for a discourse on the relation between empirical research and normative theory. In this volume, scholars from different disciplines – including psychology, sociology, economics, and philosophy – discuss the possible desired or undesired influences on, and limits of, the integration of these two approaches.