Social Justice Activism

Page 2 of 161

Walk by Faith; Serve with Abandon

Expect to Win!

Page 3 of 161

Page 4 of 161

The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.

Helping Individuals, Organizations & Communities

Achieve Their Full Potential

Since its founding in 2003, The Advocacy Foundation has become recognized as an effective

provider of support to those who receive our services, having real impact within the communities

we serve. We are currently engaged in community and faith-based collaborative initiatives,

having the overall objective of eradicating all forms of youth violence and correcting injustices

everywhere. In carrying-out these initiatives, we have adopted the evidence-based strategic

framework developed and implemented by the Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP).

The stated objectives are:

1. Community Mobilization;

2. Social Intervention;

3. Provision of Opportunities;

4. Organizational Change and Development;

5. Suppression [of illegal activities].

Moreover, it is our most fundamental belief that in order to be effective, prevention and

intervention strategies must be Community Specific, Culturally Relevant, Evidence-Based, and

Collaborative. The Violence Prevention and Intervention programming we employ in

implementing this community-enhancing framework include the programs further described

throughout our publications, programs and special projects both domestically and

internationally.

www.Advocacy.Foundation

ISBN: ......... ../2020

......... Printed in the USA

Advocacy Foundation Publishers

Philadelphia, PA

(878) 222-0450 | Voice | Data | SMS

Page 5 of 161

Page 6 of 161

Dedication

______

Every publication in our many series’ is dedicated to everyone, absolutely everyone, who by

virtue of their calling and by Divine inspiration, direction and guidance, is on the battlefield dayafter-day

striving to follow God’s will and purpose for their lives. And this is with particular affinity

for those Spiritual warriors who are being transformed into excellence through daily academic,

professional, familial, and other challenges.

We pray that you will bear in mind:

Matthew 19:26 (NLT)

Jesus looked at them intently and said, “Humanly speaking, it is impossible.

But with God everything is possible.” (Emphasis added)

To all of us who daily look past our circumstances, and naysayers, to what the Lord says we will

accomplish:

Blessings!!

- The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.

Page 7 of 161

Page 8 of 161

The Transformative Justice Project

Eradicating Juvenile Delinquency Requires a Multi-Disciplinary Approach

The Juvenile Justice system is incredibly

overloaded, and Solutions-Based programs are

woefully underfunded. Our precious children,

therefore, particularly young people of color, often

get the “swift” version of justice whenever they

come into contact with the law.

Decisions to build prison facilities are often based

on elementary school test results, and our country

incarcerates more of its young than any other

nation on earth. So we at The Foundation labor to

pull our young people out of the “school to prison”

pipeline, and we then coordinate the efforts of the

legal, psychological, governmental and

educational professionals needed to bring an end

to delinquency.

We also educate families, police, local businesses,

elected officials, clergy, schools and other

stakeholders about transforming whole communities, and we labor to change their

thinking about the causes of delinquency with the goal of helping them embrace the

idea of restoration for the young people in our care who demonstrate repentance for

their mistakes.

The way we accomplish all this is a follows:

1. We vigorously advocate for charges reductions, wherever possible, in the

adjudicatory (court) process, with the ultimate goal of expungement or pardon, in

order to maximize the chances for our clients to graduate high school and

progress into college, military service or the workforce without the stigma of a

criminal record;

2. We then endeavor to enroll each young person into an Evidence-Based, Data-

Driven Transformative Justice program designed to facilitate their rehabilitation

and subsequent reintegration back into the community;

3. While those projects are operating, we conduct a wide variety of ComeUnity-

ReEngineering seminars and workshops on topics ranging from Juvenile Justice

to Parental Rights, to Domestic issues to Police friendly contacts, to Mental

Health intervention, to CBO and FBO accountability and compliance;

Page 9 of 161

4. Throughout the process, we encourage and maintain frequent personal contact

between all parties;

5 Throughout the process we conduct a continuum of events and fundraisers

designed to facilitate collaboration among professionals and community

stakeholders; and finally

6. 1 We disseminate Monthly and Quarterly publications, like our e-Advocate series

Newsletter and our e-Advocate Monthly and Quarterly Electronic Compilations to

all regular donors in order to facilitate a lifelong learning process on the everevolving

developments in both the Adult and Juvenile Justice systems.

And in addition to the help we provide for our young clients and their families, we also

facilitate Community Engagement through the Transformative Justice process,

thereby balancing the interests of local businesses, schools, clergy, social

organizations, elected officials, law enforcement entities, and other interested

stakeholders. Through these efforts, relationships are built, rebuilt and strengthened,

local businesses and communities are enhanced & protected from victimization, young

careers are developed, and our precious young people are kept out of the prison

pipeline.

Additionally, we develop Transformative “Void Resistance” (TVR) initiatives to elevate

concerns of our successes resulting in economic hardship for those employed by the

penal system.

TVR is an innovative-comprehensive process that works in conjunction with our

Transformative Justice initiatives to transition the original use and purpose of current

systems into positive social impact operations, which systematically retrains current

staff, renovates facilities, creates new employment opportunities, increases salaries and

is data-proven to enhance employee’s mental wellbeing and overall quality of life – an

exponential Transformative Social Impact benefit for ALL community stakeholders.

This is a massive undertaking, and we need all the help and financial support you can

give! We plan to help 75 young persons per quarter-year (aggregating to a total of 250

per year) in each jurisdiction we serve) at an average cost of under $2,500 per client,

per year. *

Thank you in advance for your support!

* FYI:

1 In addition to supporting our world-class programming and support services, all regular donors receive our Quarterly e-Newsletter

(The e-Advocate), as well as The e-Advocate Quarterly Magazine.

Page 10 of 161

1. The national average cost to taxpayers for minimum-security youth incarceration,

is around $43,000.00 per child, per year.

2. The average annual cost to taxpayers for maximum-security youth incarceration

is well over $148,000.00 per child, per year.

- (US News and World Report, December 9, 2014);

3. In every jurisdiction in the nation, the Plea Bargaining rate is above 99%.

The Judicial system engages in a tri-partite balancing task in every single one of these

matters, seeking to balance Rehabilitative Justice with Community Protection and

Judicial Economy, and, although the practitioners work very hard to achieve positive

outcomes, the scales are nowhere near balanced where people of color are involved.

We must reverse this trend, which is right now working very much against the best

interests of our young.

Our young people do not belong behind bars.

- Jack Johnson

Page 11 of 161

Page 12 of 161

The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.

Helping Individuals, Organizations & Communities

Achieve Their Full Potential

…a compendium of works on

Social Justice

Activism

“Turning the Improbable Into the Exceptional”

Atlanta

Philadelphia

______

Dea. John C Johnson III, J.D.

Founding Partner & CEO

(878) 222-0450

Voice | Data | SMS


Page 13 of 161

Page 14 of 161

Biblical Authority

______

Psalm 89:14 (NIV)

14

Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne; love and faithfulness go before

you.

Isaiah 1:17

17

Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead

the case of the widow.

Micah 6:8

8

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act

justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

Deuteronomy 32:4

4

He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no

wrong, upright and just is he.

Psalm 82:3

3

Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.

Zechariah 7:9-10

9

“This is what the LORD Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to

one another. 10 Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor. Do not plot

evil against each other.’

Proverbs 31:8-9

8

Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.

9

Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.

Jeremiah 22:3

3

This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor

the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the

widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.

Page 15 of 161

Matthew 7:12

12

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law

and the Prophets.

Luke 10:30-37

30

In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked

by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A

priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the

other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other

side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took

pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put

the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took

out two denarii [a] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I

will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36

“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of

robbers?”

37

The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Page 16 of 161

Table of Contents

…a compilation of works on

Social Justice

Activism

Biblical Authority

I. Introduction: Social Justice……….………………………………….. 19

II. Activism………………………………………………………………….. 35

III. Economic Injustice & Inequality…………………………………….. 43

IV. Educational Injustice…………….……………………………………. 65

V. Environmental Injustice…………………….………………………… 85

VI. Resource & Distributive Injustice.………………………………….. 115

VII. Social Justice Warriors…………..……………………………......... 121

VIII. References………………………………………….……………...... 125

______

Attachments

A. Social Justice Theory

B. Defining Social Justice In A Socially Unjust World

C. Social Justice and The Formal Principle of Freedom

Copyright © 2003 – 2020 The Advocacy Foundation, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Page 17 of 161

This work is not meant to be a piece of original academic

analysis, but rather draws very heavily on the work of

scholars in a diverse range of fields. All material drawn upon

is referenced appropriately.

Page 18 of 161

I. Introduction

Social Justice

Social Justice is a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society,

as measured by the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity, and social

privileges. In Western as well as in older Asian cultures, the concept of social justice

has often referred to the process of ensuring that individuals fulfill their societal roles

and receive what was their due from society. In the current global grassroots

movements for social justice, the emphasis has been on the breaking of barriers for

social mobility, the creation of safety nets and economic justice.

Social justice assigns rights and duties in the institutions of society, which enables

people to receive the basic benefits and burdens of cooperation. The relevant

institutions often include taxation, social insurance, public health, public school, public

services, labor law and regulation of markets, to ensure fair distribution of wealth, and

equal opportunity.

Interpretations that relate justice to a reciprocal relationship to society are mediated by

differences in cultural traditions, some of which emphasize the individual responsibility

toward society and others the equilibrium between access to power and its responsible

use. Hence, social justice is invoked today while reinterpreting historical figures such as

Bartolomé de las Casas, in philosophical debates about differences among human

Page 19 of 161

beings, in efforts for gender, ethnic, and social equality, for advocating justice for

migrants, prisoners, the environment, and the physically and developmentally disabled.

While the concept of social justice can be traced through the theology of Augustine of

Hippo and the philosophy of Thomas Paine, the term "social justice" became used

explicitly in the 1780s. A Jesuit priest named Luigi Taparelli is typically credited with

coining the term, and it spread during the revolutions of 1848 with the work of Antonio

Rosmini-Serbati. However, recent research has proved that the use of the expression

"social justice" is older (even before the 19th century). For example, in Anglo-America,

the term appears in The Federalist Papers, No. 7: "We have observed the disposition to

retaliation excited in Connecticut in consequence of the enormities perpetrated by the

Legislature of Rhode Island; and we reasonably infer that, in similar cases, under other

circumstances, a war, not of parchment, but of the sword, would chastise such atrocious

breaches of moral obligation and social justice."

In the late industrial revolution, progressive American legal scholars began to use the

term more, particularly Louis Brandeis and Roscoe Pound. From the early 20th century

it was also embedded in international law and institutions; the preamble to establish the

International Labor Organization recalled that "universal and lasting peace can be

established only if it is based upon social justice." In the later 20th century, social justice

was made central to the philosophy of the social contract, primarily by John Rawls in A

Theory of Justice (1971). In 1993, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action

treats social justice as a purpose of human rights education.

Some authors such as Friedrich Hayek criticize the concept of social justice, arguing the

lack of objective, accepted moral standard; and that while there is a legal definition of

what is just and equitable "there is no test of what is socially unjust", and further that

social justice is often used for the reallocation of resources based on an arbitrary

standard which may in fact be inequitable or unjust.

History

The different concepts of justice, as discussed in ancient Western philosophy, were

typically centered upon the community.

An Artist's rendering of what Plato might have looked like, From Raphael's early 16th

century painting, Scuola di Atene

Page 20 of 161

Plato wrote in The Republic that it would be an ideal state that "every member of the

community must be assigned to the class for which he finds himself best fitted." In an

article for J.N.V University, author D.R. Bhandari says, "Justice is, for Plato, at once a

part of human virtue and the bond, which joins man together in society. It is the identical

quality that makes good and social. Justice is an order and duty of the parts of the soul,

it is to the soul as health is to the body. Plato says that justice is not mere strength, but

it is a harmonious strength. Justice is not the right of the stronger but the effective

harmony of the whole. All moral conceptions revolve about the good of the wholeindividual

as well as social".

Roman copy in marble of a Greek bronze bust of Aristotle by Lysippos, c. 330 BC.The

alabaster mantle is modern.

Plato believed rights existed only between free people, and the law should take

"account in the first instance of relations of inequality in which individuals are treated in

proportion to their worth and only secondarily of relations of equality." Reflecting this

time when slavery and subjugation of women was typical, ancient views of justice

tended to reflect the rigid class systems that still prevailed. On the other hand, for the

privileged groups, strong concepts of fairness and the community existed. Distributive

justice was said by Aristotle to require that people were distributed goods and assets

according to their merit.

Page 21 of 161

Socrates

Socrates (through Plato's dialogue Crito) is attributed with developing the idea of a

social contract, whereby people ought to follow the rules of a society, and accept its

burdens because they have accepted its benefits. During the Middle Ages, religious

scholars particularly, such as Thomas Aquinas continued discussion of justice in various

ways, but ultimately connected being a good citizen to the purpose of serving God.

After the Renaissance and Reformation, the modern concept of social justice, as

developing human potential, began to emerge through the work of a series of authors.

Baruch Spinoza in On the Improvement of the Understanding (1677) contended that the

one true aim of life should be to acquire "a human character much more stable than

[one's] own", and to achieve this "pitch of perfection... The chief good is that he should

arrive, together with other individuals if possible, at the possession of the aforesaid

character." During the enlightenment and responding to the French and American

Revolutions, Thomas Paine similarly wrote in The Rights of Man (1792) society should

give "genius a fair and universal chance" and so "the construction of government ought

to be such as to bring forward... all that extent of capacity which never fails to appear in

revolutions."

Social justice has been traditionally credited to be coined by Jesuit priest Luigi Taparelli

in the 1840s, but the expression is older

Although there is no certainty about the first use of the term "social justice", early

sources can be found in Europe in the 18th century. Some references to the use of the

expression are in articles of journals aligned with the spirit of the Enlightenment, in

which social justice is described as an obligation of the monarch; also the term is

present in books written by Catholic Italian theologians, notably members of the Society

of Jesus. Thus, according to this sources and the context, social justice was another

term for "the justice of society", the justice that rules the relations among individuals in

society, without any mention to socio-economic equity or human dignity.

The usage of the term started to become more frequent by Catholic thinkers from the

1840s, including the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in Civiltà Cattolica, based on the work of St.

Thomas Aquinas. He argued that rival capitalist and socialist theories, based on

subjective Cartesian thinking, undermined the unity of society present in Thomistic

metaphysics as neither were sufficiently concerned with moral philosophy. Writing in

1861, the influential British philosopher and economist, John Stuart Mill stated in

Utilitarianism his view that "Society should treat all equally well who have deserved

equally well of it, that is, who have deserved equally well absolutely. This is the highest

abstract standard of social and distributive justice; towards which all institutions, and the

efforts of all virtuous citizens, should be made in the utmost degree to converge."

In the later 19th and early 20th century, social justice became an important theme in

American political and legal philosophy, particularly in the work of John Dewey, Roscoe

Pound and Louis Brandeis. One of the prime concerns was the Lochner era decisions of

Page 22 of 161

the US Supreme Court to strike down legislation passed by state governments and the

Federal government for social and economic improvement, such as the eight-hour day

or the right to join a trade union. After the First World War, the founding document of the

International Labor Organization took up the same terminology in its preamble, stating

that "peace can be established only if it is based on social justice". From this point, the

discussion of social justice entered into mainstream legal and academic discourse.

Thus, in 1931, the Pope

Pius XI stated the

expression for the first time

in the Catholic Social

Teaching in the encyclical

Quadragesimo Anno. Then

again in Divini Redepmtoris,

the Church pointed out that

the realization of social

justice relied on the

promotion of the dignity of

human person. The same

year, and because of the documented influence of Divini Redemptoris in its drafters, the

Constitution of Ireland was the first one to establish the term as a principle of the

economy in the State, and then other countries around the world did the same

throughout the 20th century, even in Socialist regimes such as the Cuban Constitution

in 1976.

In the late 20th century, a number of liberal and conservative thinkers, notably Friedrich

von Hayek rejected the concept by stating that it did not mean anything, or meant too

many things. However the concept remained highly influential, particularly with its

promotion by philosophers such as John Rawls. Even though the meaning of social

justice varies, at least three common elements can be identified in the contemporary

theories about it: a duty of the State to distribute certain vital means (such as economic,

social, and cultural rights), the protection of human dignity, and affirmative actions to

promote equal opportunities for everybody.

Cosmic Values

Contemporary Theory

Philosophical Perspectives

Hunter Lewis' work promoting natural healthcare and sustainable economies advocates

for conservation as a key premise in social justice. His manifesto on sustainability ties

the continued thriving of human life to real conditions, the environment supporting that

life, and associates injustice with the detrimental effects of unintended consequences of

human actions. Quoting classical Greek thinkers like Epicurus on the good of pursuing

Page 23 of 161

happiness, Hunter also cites ornithologist, naturalist, and philosopher Alexander Skutch

in his book Moral Foundations:

The common feature which unites the activities most consistently forbidden by the moral

codes of civilized peoples is that by their very nature they cannot be both habitual and

enduring, because they tend to destroy the conditions which make them possible.

Pope Benedict XVI cites Teilhard de Chardin in a vision of the cosmos as a 'living host'

embracing an understanding of ecology that includes humanity's relationship to others,

that pollution affects not just the natural world but interpersonal relations as well.

Cosmic harmony, justice and peace are closely interrelated:

If you want to cultivate peace, protect creation.

In The Quest for Cosmic Justice, Thomas Sowell writes that seeking utopia, while

admirable, may have disastrous effects if done without strong consideration of the

economic underpinnings that support contemporary society.

John Rawls

Political philosopher John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights of Bentham and Mill,

the social contract ideas of John Locke, and the categorical imperative ideas of Kant.

His first statement of principle was made in A Theory of Justice where he proposed that,

"Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of

society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of

freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others." A deontological

proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice in absolutist terms. His

views are definitively restated in Political Liberalism where society is seen "as a fair

system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next".

All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, both

formal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit and work together, Rawls

based a key test of legitimacy on the theories of social contract. To determine whether

any particular system of collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he

argued that one must look for agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not

necessarily to an objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding.

Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to determine his or her

consent to every proposal in which some degree of coercion is involved, so one has to

assume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stage

process to determine a citizen's hypothetical agreement:

The citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes, and, to that

extent, X holds these powers as a trustee for the citizen.

Page 24 of 161

X agrees that enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate. The citizen,

therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee to

represent the citizen in this way.

This applies to one person who represents a small group (e.g., the organizer of a social

event setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments, which are

ultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within their

territorial boundaries. Governments that fail to provide for welfare of their citizens

according to the principles of justice are not legitimate. To emphasize the general

principle that justice should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making

powers of governments, Rawls asserted that, "There is ... a general presumption

against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient reason. But

this presumption creates no special priority for any particular liberty." This is support for

an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states should respect and

uphold — to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches the normative human

rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states

where the citizens need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of

equality of outcome. According to Rawls, the basic liberties that every good society

should guarantee are:

Freedom of thought;

Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion,

philosophy, and morality;

Political liberties (e.g., representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech

and the press, and freedom of assembly);

Page 25 of 161

Freedom of association;

Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (namely: freedom

from slavery, freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to

choose one's occupation); and

Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law.

Thomas Pogge

Thomas Pogge's arguments pertain to a standard of social justice that creates human

rights deficits. He assigns responsibility to those who actively cooperate in designing or

imposing the social institution, that the order is foreseeable as harming the global poor

and is reasonably avoidable. Pogge argues that social institutions have a negative duty

to not harm the poor.

Pogge speaks of "institutional cosmopolitanism" and assigns responsibility to

institutional schemes for deficits of human rights. An example given is slavery and third

parties. A third party should not recognize or enforce slavery. The institutional order

should be held responsible only for deprivations of human rights that it establishes or

authorizes. The current institutional design, he says, systematically harms developing

economies by enabling corporate tax evasion, illicit financial flows, corruption, trafficking

of people and weapons. Joshua Cohen disputes his claims based on the fact that some

poor countries have done well with the current institutional design. Elizabeth Kahn

argues that some of these responsibilities should apply globally.

United Nations

The United Nations calls social justice "an underlying principle for peaceful and

prosperous coexistence within and among nations.

The United Nations’ 2006 document Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the

United Nations, states that "Social justice may be broadly understood as the fair and

compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth ..."

The term "social justice" was seen by the U.N. "as a substitute for the protection of

human rights [and] first appeared in United Nations texts during the second half of the

1960s. At the initiative of the Soviet Union, and with the support of developing countries,

the term was used in the Declaration on Social Progress and Development, adopted in

1969."

The same document reports, "From the comprehensive global perspective shaped by

the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, neglect of

the pursuit of social justice in all its dimensions translates into de facto acceptance of a

future marred by violence, repression and chaos." The report concludes, "Social justice

is not possible without strong and coherent redistributive policies conceived and

implemented by public agencies."

Page 26 of 161

The same UN document offers a concise history: "[T]he notion of social justice is

relatively new. None of history’s great philosophers—not Plato or Aristotle, or Confucius

or Averroes, or even Rousseau or Kant—saw the need to consider justice or the

redress of injustices from a social perspective. The concept first surfaced in Western

thought and political language in the wake of the industrial revolution and the parallel

development of the socialist doctrine. It emerged as an expression of protest against

what was perceived as the capitalist exploitation of labor and as a focal point for the

development of measures to improve the human condition. It was born as a

revolutionary slogan embodying the ideals of progress and fraternity. Following the

revolutions that shook Europe in the mid-1800s, social justice became a rallying cry for

progressive thinkers and political activists.... By the mid-twentieth century, the concept

of social justice had become central to the ideologies and programs of virtually all the

leftist and centrist political parties around the world ..."

Methodism

Religious Perspectives

Abrahamic Religions

Christianity

From its founding, Methodism was a Christian social justice movement. Under John

Wesley's direction, Methodists became leaders in many social justice issues of the day,

including the prison reform and abolition movements. Wesley himself was among the

first to preach for slaves rights attracting significant opposition.

Today, social justice plays a major role in the United Methodist Church. The Book of

Discipline of the United Methodist Church says, "We hold governments responsible for

Page 27 of 161

the protection of the rights of the people to free and fair elections and to the freedoms of

speech, religion, assembly, communications media, and petition for redress of

grievances without fear of reprisal; to the right to privacy; and to the guarantee of the

rights to adequate food, clothing, shelter, education, and health care." The United

Methodist Church also teaches population control as part of its doctrine.

Catholicism

Catholic social teaching consists of those aspects of Roman Catholic doctrine which

relate to matters dealing with the respect of the individual human life. A distinctive

feature of Catholic social doctrine is its concern for the poorest and most vulnerable

members of society. Two of the seven key areas of "Catholic social teaching" are

pertinent to social justice:

Life and dignity of the human person: The foundational principle of all "Catholic

Social Teaching" is the sanctity of all human life and the inherent dignity of every

human person, from conception to natural death. Human life must be valued

above all material possessions.

Preferential option for the poor and vulnerable: Catholics believe Jesus taught

that on the Day of Judgement God will ask what each person did to help the poor

and needy: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers

of mine, you did for me." The Catholic Church believes that through words,

prayers and deeds one must show solidarity with, and compassion for, the poor.

The moral test of any society is "how it treats its most vulnerable members. The

poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. People

are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor."

Even before it was propounded in the Catholic social doctrine, social justice appeared

regularly in the history of the Catholic Church:

Pope Leo XIII, who studied under Taparelli, published in 1891 the encyclical

Rerum novarum (On the Condition of the Working Classes; lit. "On new things"),

rejecting both socialism and capitalism, while defending labor unions and private

property. He stated that society should be based on cooperation and not class

conflict and competition. In this document, Leo set out the Catholic Church's

response to the social instability and labor conflict that had arisen in the wake of

industrialization and had led to the rise of socialism. The Pope advocated that the

role of the State was to promote social justice through the protection of rights,

while the Church must speak out on social issues in order to teach correct social

principles and ensure class harmony.

The encyclical Quadragesimo anno (On Reconstruction of the Social Order,

literally "in the fortieth year") of 1931 by Pope Pius XI, encourages a living wage,

subsidiarity, and advocates that social justice is a personal virtue as well as an

Page 28 of 161

attribute of the social order, saying that society can be just only if individuals and

institutions are just.

Pope John Paul II added much to the corpus of the Catholic social teaching,

penning three encyclicals which focus on issues such as economics, politics,

geo-political situations, ownership of the means of production, private property

and the "social mortgage", and private property. The encyclicals Laborem

exercens, Sollicitudo rei socialis, and Centesimus annus are just a small portion

of his overall contribution to Catholic social justice. Pope John Paul II was a

strong advocate of justice and human rights, and spoke forcefully for the poor.

He addresses issues such as the problems that technology can present should it

be misused, and admits a fear that the "progress" of the world is not true

progress at all, if it should denigrate the value of the human person. He argued in

Centesimus annus that private property, markets, and honest labor were the

keys to alleviating the miseries of the poor and to enabling a life that can express

the fullness of the human person.

Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Deus caritas est ("God is Love") of 2006 claims

that justice is the defining concern of the state and the central concern of politics,

and not of the church, which has charity as its central social concern. It said that

the laity has the specific responsibility of pursuing social justice in civil society

and that the church's active role in social justice should be to inform the debate,

using reason and natural law, and also by providing moral and spiritual formation

for those involved in politics.

Page 29 of 161

The official Catholic doctrine on social justice can be found in the book

Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, published in 2004 and

updated in 2006, by the Pontifical Council Iustitia et Pax.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (§§ 1928–1948) contains more detail of the

Church's view of social justice.

Islam

In Muslim history, Islamic governance has often been associated with social justice.

Establishment of social justice was one of the motivating factors of the Abbasid revolt

against the Umayyads. The Shi'a believe that the return of the Mahdi will herald in "the

messianic age of justice" and the Mahdi along with the Isa (Jesus) will end plunder,

torture, oppression and discrimination.

For the Muslim Brotherhood the implementation of social justice would require the

rejection of consumerism and communism. The Brotherhood strongly affirmed the right

to private property as well as differences in personal wealth due to factors such as hard

work.

However, the Brotherhood held Muslims had an obligation to assist those Muslims in

need. It held that zakat (alms-giving) was not voluntary charity, but rather the poor had

the right to assistance from the more fortunate. Most Islamic governments therefore

enforce the zakat through taxes.

Judaism

In To Heal a Fractured World: The Ethics of Responsibility, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks

states that social justice has a central place in Judaism. One of Judaism's most

distinctive and challenging ideas is its ethics of responsibility reflected in the concepts of

simcha ("gladness" or "joy"), tzedakah ("the religious obligation to perform charity and

philanthropic acts"), chesed ("deeds of kindness"), and tikkun olam ("repairing the

world").

Hinduism

Eastern Religions

The present-day Jāti hierarchy is undergoing changes for a variety of reasons including

'social justice', which is a politically popular stance in democratic India. Institutionalized

affirmative action has promoted this. The disparity and wide inequalities in social

behavior of the jātis – exclusive, endogamous communities centered on traditional

occupations – has led to various reform movements in Hinduism. While legally

outlawed, the caste system remains strong in practice.

Page 30 of 161

Traditional Chinese Religion

The Chinese concept of Tian Ming has occasionally been perceived as an expression of

social justice. Through it, the deposition of unfair rulers is justified in that civic

dissatisfaction and economical disasters is perceived as Heaven withdrawing its favor

from the Emperor. A successful rebellion is considered definite proof that the Emperor is

unfit to rule.

Social Justice Movements

Social justice is also a concept that is used to describe the movement towards a socially

just world, e.g., the Global Justice Movement. In this context, social justice is based on

the concepts of human rights and equality, and can be defined as "the way in which

human rights are manifested in the everyday lives of people at every level of society".

A number of movements are working to achieve social justice in society. These

movements are working toward the realization of a world where all members of a

Page 31 of 161

society, regardless of background or procedural justice, have basic human rights and

equal access to the benefits of their society.

Liberation Theology

Liberation theology is a movement in Christian theology which conveys the teachings of

Jesus Christ in terms of a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions.

It has been described by proponents as "an interpretation of Christian faith through the

poor's suffering, their struggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith

and Christianity through the eyes of the poor", and by detractors as Christianity

perverted by Marxism and Communism.

Although liberation theology has grown into an international and inter-denominational

movement, it began as a movement within the Catholic Church in Latin America in the

1950s–1960s. It arose principally as a moral reaction to the poverty caused by social

injustice in that region. It achieved prominence in the 1970s and 1980s. The term was

coined by the Peruvian priest, Gustavo Gutiérrez, who wrote one of the movement's

most famous books, A Theology of Liberation (1971). According to Sarah Kleeb, "Marx

would surely take issue," she writes, "with the appropriation of his works in a religious

context...there is no way to reconcile Marx's views of religion with those of Gutierrez,

they are simply incompatible. Despite this, in terms of their understanding of the

necessity of a just and righteous world, and the nearly inevitable obstructions along

such a path, the two have much in common; and, particularly in the first edition of [A

Theology of Liberation], the use of Marxian theory is quite evident."

Other noted exponents are Leonardo Boff of Brazil, Carlos Mugica of Argentina, Jon

Sobrino of El Salvador, and Juan Luis Segundo of Uruguay.

Healthcare

Social justice has more recently made its way into the field of bioethics. Discussion

involves topics such as affordable access to health care, especially for low income

households and families. The discussion also raises questions such as whether society

should bear healthcare costs for low income families, and whether the global

marketplace is the best way to distribute healthcare. Ruth Faden of the Johns Hopkins

Berman Institute of Bioethics and Madison Powers of Georgetown University focus their

analysis of social justice on which inequalities matter the most. They develop a social

justice theory that answers some of these questions in concrete settings.

Social injustices occur when there is a preventable difference in health states among a

population of people. These social injustices take the form of health inequities when

negative health states such as malnourishment, and infectious diseases are more

prevalent in impoverished nations. These negative health states can often be prevented

by providing social and economic structures such as primary healthcare which ensures

the general population has equal access to health care services regardless of income

level, gender, education or any other stratifying factors. Integrating social justice with

Page 32 of 161

health inherently reflects the social determinants of health model without discounting the

role of the bio-medical model.

Human Rights Education

The Vienna Declaration and Program of Action affirm that "Human rights education

should include peace, democracy, development and social justice, as set forth in

international and regional human rights instruments, in order to achieve common

understanding and awareness with a view to strengthening universal commitment to

human rights."

Ecology and Environment

Social justice principles are embedded in the larger environmental movement. The third

principle of The Earth Charter is Social and economic justice, which is described as

seeking to 1) Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and environmental imperative 2)

Ensure that economic activities and institutions at all levels promote human

development in an equitable and sustainable manner 3) Affirm gender equality and

equity as prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to

education, health care, and economic opportunity, and 4) Uphold the right of all, without

discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily

health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples

and minorities.

The Climate Justice and Environmental Justice movements also incorporate social

justice principles, ideas, and practices. Climate justice and environmental justice, as

Page 33 of 161

movements within the larger ecological and environmental movement, each incorporate

social justice in a particular way. Climate justice includes concern for social justice

pertaining to greenhouse gas emissions, climate-induced environmental displacement,

as well as climate change mitigation and adaptation. Environmental justice includes

concern for social justice pertaining to either environmental benefits or environmental

pollution based on their equitable distribution across communities of color, communities

of various socio/economic stratification, or any other barriers to justice.

Criticism

Many authors criticize the idea that there exists an objective standard of social justice.

Moral relativists deny that there is any kind of objective standard for justice in general.

Non-cognitivists, moral skeptics, moral nihilists, and most logical positivists deny the

epistemic possibility of objective notions of justice. Political realists believe that any

ideal of social justice is ultimately a mere justification for the status quo.

Many other people accept some of the basic principles of social justice, such as the

idea that all human beings have a basic level of value, but disagree with the elaborate

conclusions that may or may not follow from this. One example is the statement by H.

G. Wells that all people are "equally entitled to the respect of their fellowmen."

Friedrich Hayek of the Austrian School of economics rejects the very idea of social

justice as meaningless, religious, self-contradictory, and ideological, believing that to

realize any degree of social justice is unfeasible, and that the attempt to do so must

destroy all liberty:

There can be no test by which we can discover what is 'socially unjust' because there is

no subject by which such an injustice can be committed, and there are no rules of

individual conduct the observance of which in the market order would secure to the

individuals and groups the position which as such (as distinguished from the procedure

by which it is determined) would appear just to us. [Social justice] does not belong to the

category of error but to that of nonsense, like the term 'a moral stone'.

Ben O'Neill of the University of New South Wales argues that, for proponents of "social

justice":

the notion of "rights" is a mere term of entitlement, indicative of a claim for any possible

desirable good, no matter how important or trivial, abstract or tangible, recent or ancient.

It is merely an assertion of desire, and a declaration of intention to use the language of

rights to acquire said desire.

In fact, since the program of social justice inevitably involves claims for government

provision of goods, paid for through the efforts of others, the term actually refers to an

intention to use force to acquire one's desires. Not to earn desirable goods by rational

thought and action, production and voluntary exchange, but to go in there and forcibly

take goods from those who can supply them!

Page 34 of 161

II. Social Activism

Activism consists of efforts to promote, impede, direct, or intervene

in social, political, economic, or environmental reform with the desire to make changes

in society. Forms of activism range from mandate building in the community (including

writing letters to newspapers), petitioning elected officials, running or contributing to

a political campaign, preferential patronage (or boycott) of businesses, and

demonstrative forms of activism like rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, or hunger

strikes.

Activism may be performed on a day-to-day basis in a wide variety of ways, including

through the creation of art (artivism), computer hacking (hacktivism), or simply in how

one chooses to spend their money (economic activism). For example, the refusal to buy

clothes or other merchandise from a company as a protest against the exploitation of

workers by that company could be considered an expression of activism. However, the

most highly visible and impactful activism often comes in the form of collective action, in

which numerous individuals coordinate an act of protest together in order to make a

bigger impact. Collective action that is purposeful, organized, and sustained over a

period of time becomes known as a social movement.

Historically, activists have used literature, including pamphlets, tracts, and books to

disseminate or propagate their messages and attempt to persuade their readers of

the justice of their cause. Research has now begun to explore how contemporary

Page 35 of 161

activist groups use social media to facilitate civic engagement and collective action

combining politics with technology.

Definitions of Activism

The Online Etymology Dictionary records the English words "activism" and "activist" as

in use in the political sense from the year 1920 or 1915 respectively. The history of the

word activism traces back to earlier understandings of collective behavior and social

action. As late as 1969 activism was defined as "the policy or practice of doing things

with decision and energy", without regard to a political signification, whereas social

action was defined as "organized action taken by a group to improve social conditions",

without regard to normative status. Following the surge of so-called "new social

movements" in the United States in the 1960s, a new understanding of activism

emerged as a rational and acceptable democratic option of protest or appeal. However,

the history of the existence of revolt through organized or unified protest in recorded

history dates back to the slave revolts of the 1st century BC(E) in the Roman Empire,

where under the leadership of former gladiator Spartacus 6,000 slaves rebelled and

were crucified from Capua to Rome in what became known as the Third Servile War.

In English history, the Peasants' Revolt erupted in response to the imposition of a poll

tax, and has been paralleled by other rebellions and revolutions in Hungary, Russia,

and more recently, for example, Hong Kong. In 1930 under the leadership of Mahatma

Gandhi thousands of protesting Indians participated in the Salt March, as a protest

against the oppressive taxes of their government, resulting in the imprisonment of

60,000 people and eventually independence of their nation. In nations throughout Asia,

Africa and South America, the prominence of activism organized by social

movements and especially under the leadership of civil activists or social

revolutionaries has pushed for increasing national self-reliance or, in some parts of the

developing world, collectivist communist or socialist organization and affiliation. Activism

has had major impacts on Western societies as well, particularly over the past century

through social movements such as the Labor movement, the Women's Rights

movement, and the civil rights movement.

Types of Activism

Activists can function in a number of roles, including judicial, environmental, internet

(technological) and design (art). Historically, most activism has focused on creating

substantive changes in the policy or practice of a government or industry. Some

activists try to persuade people to change their behavior directly (see also direct action),

rather than to persuade governments to change laws. For example, the cooperative

movement seeks to build new institutions which conform to cooperative principles, and

generally does not lobby or protest politically. Other activists try to persuade people or

government policy to remain the same, in an effort to counter change.

Activism is not an activity always performed by those who profess activism as a

profession. The term ″activist″ may apply broadly to anyone who engages in activism, or

Page 36 of 161

narrowly limited to those who choose political or social activism as a vocation or

characteristic practice.

Judicial and Citizen Activism

Judicial activism involves the efforts of public officials. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. -

American historian, public intellectual, and social critic - introduced the term "judicial

activism" in a January 1946 Fortune magazine article titled "The Supreme Court:

1947". Activists can also be public watchdogs and whistle blowers, attempting to

understand all the actions of every form of government that acts in the name of the

people and hold it accountable to oversight and transparency. Activism involves an

engaged citizenry.

Environmental Activism

Environmental activism takes quite a few forms:

the protection of nature or the natural environment driven by a utilitarian

conservation ethic or a nature oriented preservationist ethic

the protection of the human environment (by pollution prevention or the

protection of cultural heritage or quality of life)

the conservation of depletable natural resources

Page 37 of 161

the protection of the function of critical earth system elements or processes such

as the climate.

Internet Activism

The power of Internet activism came into a global lens with the Arab Spring protests

starting in late 2010. People living in the Middle East and North African countries that

were experiencing revolutions used social networking to communicate information about

protests, including videos recorded on smart phones, which put the issues in front of an

international audience. This was the one of the first occasions in which social

networking technology was used by citizen-activists to circumvent state-controlled

media and communicate directly with the rest of the world. These types of practices of

Internet activism were later picked up and used by other activists in subsequent mass

mobilizations, such as the 15-M Movement in Spain in 2011, Occupy Gezi in Turkey in

2013, and more.

Internet activism may also refer to activism which focuses on protecting or changing the

Internet itself, also known as digital rights. The Digital Rights movement consists of

activists and organizations, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who work to

protect the rights of people in relation to new technologies, particularly concerning the

Internet and other information and communications technologies.

Activism in Literature

Activism in literature (not to be confused with literary activism) includes the expression

of intended or advocated reforms, realized or unachieved, through published, written or

verbally promoted or communicated forms.

Economic Activism

Economic activism involves using the economic power of government, consumers, and

businesses for social and economic policy change. Both conservative and liberal groups

use economic activism to as a form of pressure to influence companies and

organizations to oppose or support particular political, religious, or social values and

behaviors. This is typically done either through preferential patronage to reinforce

"good" behavior and support companies one would like to succeed, or

through boycott or divestment to penalize "bad" behavior and pressure companies to

change or go out of business.

Consumer activism consists of activism carried out on behalf

of consumers for consumer protection or by consumers themselves. For instance,

activists in the free produce movement of the late 1700s protested against slavery by

boycotting goods produced with slave labor. Today, vegetarianism, veganism,

and freeganism are all forms of consumer activism which boycott certain types of

products. Other examples of consumer activism include simple living, a minimalist

lifestyle intended to reduce materialism and conspicuous consumption, and tax

Page 38 of 161

resistance, a form of direct action and civil disobedience in opposition to the

government that is imposing the tax, to government policy, or as opposition to taxation

in itself.

Shareholder activism involves shareholders using an equity stake in a corporation to put

pressure on its management. The goals of activist shareholders range from financial

(increase of shareholder value through changes in corporate policy, financing structure,

cost cutting, etc.) to non-financial (disinvestment from particular countries, adoption

of environmentally friendly policies, etc.).

Visual Activism

Design Activism locates design at the center

of promoting social change, raising

awareness on social/political issues, or

questioning problems associated with mass

production and consumerism. Design

Activism is not limited to one type of design.

commentary.

Art Activism or Artivism utilizes the medium of

visual art as a method of social or political

Science Activism

While scientists have been traditionally less likely to be politically active as scientists yet

aware of the need to better communicate the benefits of science, perception of

increased politicized discrediting of science has motivated some scientists and science

advocates to embrace an activist approach, such as that demonstrated in the March for

Science. Some see activism as a way to get "out of the lab" and enhance

communication efforts. Approaches to science activism vary from more aggressive

protests to suggestions that such activism should also include a more psychological,

marketing-oriented component that takes into account such factors as individual sense

of self, aversion to solutions to problems, and social perceptions.

Methods

Activists employ many different methods, or tactics, in pursuit of their goals. Decisions

over what tactics to use or not may be planned carefully in advance, result from

negotiations with law enforcement such as when and where to hold a rally, or be made

in the heat of the moment. The tactics chosen are significant because they can

determine how activists are perceived and what they are capable of accomplishing. For

example, nonviolent tactics generally tend to garner more public sympathy than violent

ones and are more than twice as effective in achieving stated goals.

Page 39 of 161

Charles Tilly developed the concept of a “repertoire of contention,” which describes the

full range of tactics available to activists at a given time and place. This repertoire

consists of all of the tactics which have been proven to be successful by activists in the

past, such as boycotts, petitions, marches, and sit-ins, and can be drawn upon by any

new activists and social movements. Activists may also innovate new tactics of protest.

These may be entirely novel, such as Douglas Schuler's idea of an "activist road trip", or

may occur in response to police oppression or countermovement resistance. New

tactics then spread to others through a social process known as diffusion, and if

successful, may become new additions to the activist repertoire.

Many contemporary activists now utilize new tactics through the Internet and other

information and communication technologies (ICTs), also known as Internet activism or

cyber-activism. Some scholars argue that many of these new tactics are digitally

analogous to the traditional offline tools of contention. Other digital tactics may be entire

new and unique, such as certain types of hacktivism. Together they form a new "digital

repertoire of contention" alongside the existing offline one. The rising use of digital tools

and platforms by activists has also increasingly led to the creation of decentralized

networks of activists that are self-organized and leaderless, or what is known

as franchise activism.

Common methods used for activism include:

Community building

o Artivism

o Communities of practice

o Conflict transformation

o Cooperative

o Cooperative movement

o Craftivism

o Grassroots

o Guerrilla gardening

o Transition movement

Lobbying

Media activism

o Culture jamming

o Hacktivism

o Internet activism

Peace activism

o Non-violent resistance

o Peace camps

o Peace vigil

o Moral purchasing

Petition

Political campaigning

Propaganda

Page 40 of 161

o Guerrilla communication

Protest

o Boycott

o Demonstration

o Direct action

o Performance Theater

o Protest songs

o Sit-in

Strike action

o Hunger strike

Activism Industry

Some groups and organizations participate in activism to such an extent that it can be

considered as an industry. In these cases, activism is often done full-time, as part of an

organization's core business. Many organizations in the activism industry are either nonprofit

organizations or non-governmental organizations with specific aims and objectives

in mind. Most activist organizations do not manufacture goods, but rather mobilized

personnel to recruit funds and gain media coverage.

The term activism industry has often been used to refer to

outsourced fundraising operations. However, activist organizations engage in other

activities as well. Lobbying, or the influencing of decisions made by government, is

another activist tactic. Many groups, including law firms, have designated staff assigned

specifically for lobbying purposes. In the United States, lobbying is regulated by the

federal government.

Page 41 of 161

Many government systems encourage public support of non-profit organizations by

granting various forms of tax relief for donations to charitable organizations.

Governments may attempt to deny these benefits to activists by restricting the political

activity of tax-exempt organizations.

Page 42 of 161

III. Economic Injustice &

Inequality

Justice in economics is a subcategory of welfare economics with models

frequently representing the ethical-social requirements of a given theory, whether "in the

large", as of a just social order, or "in the small", as in the equity of "how institutions

distribute specific benefits and burdens". That theory may or may not elicit acceptance.

In the Journal of Economic Literature classification codes 'justice' is scrolled to at JEL:

D63, wedged on the same line between 'Equity' and 'Inequality' along with 'Other

Normative Criteria and Measurement'. Categories above and below the line

are Externalities and Altruism.

Some ideas about justice and ethics overlap with the origins of economic thought, often

as to distributive justice and sometimes as to Marxian analysis. The subject is a topic

of normative economics and philosophy and economics. In early welfare economics,

where mentioned, 'justice' was little distinguished from maximization of all

individual utility functions or a social welfare function. As to the latter, Paul

Samuelson (1947), expanding on work of Abram Bergson, represents a social welfare

function in general terms as any ethical belief system required to order any

(hypothetically feasible) social states for the entire society as "better than", "worse

than", or "indifferent to" each other. Kenneth Arrow (1963) showed a difficulty of trying to

extend a social welfare function consistently across different hypothetical ordinal utility

functions even apart from justice. Utility maximization survives, even with the rise

of ordinal-utility/Pareto theory, as an ethical basis for economic-policy judgments in the

wealth-maximization criterion invoked in law and economics.

Amartya Sen (1970), Kenneth Arrow (1983), Serge-Christophe Kolm (1969, 1996,

2000), and others have considered ways in which utilitarianism as an approach to

justice is constrained or challenged by independent claims of equality in

the distribution of primary goods, liberty, entitlements, opportunity, exclusion of

antisocial preferences, possible capabilities, and fairness as non-envy plus Pareto

efficiency. Alternate approaches have treated combining concern for the worst off

with economic efficiency, the notion of personal responsibility and (de)merits of leveling

individual benefits downward, claims of intergenerational justice, and other nonwelfarist/Pareto

approaches. Justice is a subarea of social choice theory, for example

as to extended sympathy, and more generally in the work of Arrow, Sen, and others.

A broad reinterpretation of justice from the perspective of game theory, social contract

theory, and evolutionary naturalism is found in works of Ken Binmore (1994, 1998,

2004) and others. Arguments on fairness as an aspect of justice have been invoked to

explain a wide range of behavioral and theoretical applications,supplementing earlier

emphasis on economic efficiency (Konow, 2003).

________

Page 43 of 161

Economic Inequality

There are a wide variety of types of economic inequality, most notably measured

using the distribution of income (the amount of money people are paid) and

the distribution of wealth (the amount of wealth people own). Besides economic

inequality between countries or states, there are important types of economic inequality

between different groups of people.

Important types of economic measurements focus on wealth, income, and consumption.

There are many methods for measuring economic inequality, with the Gini

coefficient being a widely used one. Another type of measure is the Inequality-adjusted

Human Development Index, which is a statistic composite index that takes inequality

into account. Important concepts of equality include equity, equality of outcome,

and equality of opportunity.

Research suggests that greater inequality hinders economic growth, with land

and human capital inequality reducing growth more than inequality of income. Whereas

globalization has reduced global inequality (between nations), it has increased

inequality within nations.

Measurements

Share of income of the top 1% for selected

developed countries, 1975 to 2015

In 1820, the ratio between the income of the

top and bottom 20 percent of the world's

population was three to one. By 1991, it

was eighty-six to one. A 2011 study titled

"Divided we Stand: Why Inequality Keeps

Rising" by the Organisation for Economic

Co-operation and Development (OECD)

sought to explain the causes for this rising

inequality by investigating economic

inequality in OECD countries; it concluded

that following factors had a role:

Changes in the structure of households can play an important role. Singleheaded

households in OECD countries have risen from an average of 15% in the

late 1980s to 20% in the mid-2000s, resulting in higher inequality.

Assortative mating refers to the phenomenon of people marrying people with

similar background, for example doctors marrying doctors rather than nurses.

OECD found out that 40% of couples where both partners work belonged to the

same or neighboring earnings deciles compared with 33% some 20 years before.

Page 44 of 161

In the bottom percentiles number of hours worked has decreased.

The main reason for increasing inequality seems to be the difference between

the demand for and supply of skills.

The study made the following conclusions about the level of economic inequality:

Income inequality in OECD countries is at its highest level for the past half

century. The ratio between the bottom 10% and the top 10% has increased from

1:7, to 1:9 in 25 years.

There are tentative signs of a possible convergence of inequality levels towards a

common and higher average level across OECD countries.

With very few exceptions (France, Japan, and Spain), the wages of the 10%

best-paid workers have risen relative to those of the 10% lowest paid.

A 2011 OECD study investigated economic inequality

in Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia and South Africa. It concluded that

key sources of inequality in these countries include "a large, persistent informal sector,

widespread regional divides (e.g. urban-rural), gaps in access to education, and barriers

to employment and career progression for women."

Countries by total wealth (trillions USD),

Credit Suisse

World map of countries by the inequalityadjusted

Human Development Index.

A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research at United Nations

University reports that the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the

year 2000. The three richest people in the world possess more financial assets than the

lowest 48 nations combined. The combined wealth of the "10 million dollar millionaires"

grew to nearly $41 trillion in 2008. A January 2014 report by Oxfam claims that the 85

wealthiest individuals in the world have a combined wealth equal to that of the bottom

50% of the world's population, or about 3.5 billion people. According to a Los Angeles

Times analysis of the report, the wealthiest 1% owns 46% of the world's wealth; the 85

Page 45 of 161

richest people, a small part of the wealthiest 1%, own about 0.7% of the human

population's wealth, which is the same as the bottom half of the population. In January

2015, Oxfam reported that the wealthiest 1 percent will own more than half of the global

wealth by 2016. An October 2014 study by Credit Suisse also claims that the top 1%

now own nearly half of the world's wealth and that the accelerating disparity could

trigger a recession.

In October 2015, Credit Suisse published a study which shows global inequality

continues to increase, and that half of the world's wealth is now in the hands of those in

the top percentile, whose assets each exceed $759,900. A 2016 report by Oxfam claims

that the 62 wealthiest individuals own as much wealth as the poorer half of the global

population combined. Oxfam's claims have however been questioned on the basis of

the methodology used: by using net wealth (adding up assets and subtracting debts),

the Oxfam report, for instance, finds that there are more poor people in the United

States and Western Europe than in China (due to a greater tendency to take on

debts). Anthony Shorrocks, the lead author of the Credit Suisse report which is one of

the sources of Oxfam's data, considers the criticism about debt to be a "silly argument"

and "a non-issue … a diversion." Oxfam's 2017 report says the top eight billionaires

have as much wealth as the bottom half of the global population, and that rising

inequality is suppressing wages, as businesses are focused on delivering higher returns

to wealthy owners and executives. In 2018, the Oxfam report said that the wealth gap

continued to widen in 2017, with 82% of global wealth generated going to the wealthiest

1%. The 2019 Oxfam report said that the poorest half of the human population has been

losing wealth (around 11%) at the same time that a billionaire is minted every two

days. The 2020 report, while noting that 2,153 billionaires owned as much wealth as the

bottom 4.6 billion people in 2019, highlighted the widening gap between genders largely

as the result of unpaid care work performed by women, and stated that "our economic

system was built by rich and powerful men, who continue to make the rules and reap

the lion’s share of the benefit. Worldwide men own 50% more wealth than women."

Wealth inequality in the United States

increased from 1989 to 2013.

According to PolitiFact, the top 400 richest

Americans "have more wealth than half of all

Americans combined." According to The New York

Times on July 22, 2014, the "richest 1 percent in

the United States now own more wealth than the

bottom 90 percent". Inherited wealth may help

explain why many Americans who have become rich may have had a "substantial head

start". In September 2012, according to the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), "over 60

percent" of the Forbes richest 400 Americans "grew up in substantial privilege". A 2017

report by the IPS said that three individuals, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett,

own as much wealth as the bottom half of the population, or 160 million people, and that

the growing disparity between the wealthy and the poor has created a "moral crisis",

noting that "we have not witnessed such extreme levels of concentrated wealth and

Page 46 of 161

power since the first gilded age a century ago." In 2016, the world's billionaires

increased their combined global wealth to a record $6 trillion. In 2017, they increased

their collective wealth to 8.9 trillion. Income inequality in the US is significantly worse

than people think. In 2018, U.S. income inequality reached the highest level ever

recorded by the Census Bureau.

The existing data and estimates suggest a large increase in international (and more

generally inter-macroregional) component between 1820 and 1960. It might have

slightly decreased since that time at the expense of increasing inequality within

countries. The United Nations Development Programme in 2014 asserted that greater

investments in social security, jobs and laws that protect vulnerable populations are

necessary to prevent widening income inequality.

There is a significant difference in the measured wealth distribution and the public's

understanding of wealth distribution. Michael Norton of the Harvard Business

School and Dan Ariely of the Department of Psychology at Duke University found this to

be true in their research, done in 2011. The actual wealth going to the top quintile in

2011 was around 84% where as the average amount of wealth that the general public

estimated to go to the top quintile was around 58%.

Two researchers claim that global income inequality is decreasing, due to strong

economic growth in developing countries. However, the OECD reported in 2015 that

income inequality is higher than it has ever been within OECD member nations and is at

increased levels in many emerging economies. According to a June 2015 report by

the International Monetary Fund:

Widening income inequality is the defining challenge of our time. In advanced economies,

the gap between the rich and poor is at its highest level in decades. Inequality trends

have been more mixed in emerging markets and developing countries (EMDCs), with

some countries experiencing declining inequality, but pervasive inequities in access to

education, health care, and finance remain.

In October 2017, the IMF warned that inequality within nations, in spite of global

inequality falling in recent decades, has risen so sharply that it threatens economic

growth and could result in further political polarization. The Fund's Fiscal Monitor report

said that "progressive taxation and transfers are key components of efficient fiscal

redistribution." In October 2018 Oxfam published a Reducing Inequality Index which

measured social spending, tax and workers' rights to show which countries were best at

closing the gap between rich and poor.

Wealth Distribution within Individual Countries

The following table shows information about individual wealth distribution in different

countries, from a 2018 report by Crédit Suisse.

Page 47 of 161

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Median and mean wealth per adult, in US dollars. Countries and subnational areas.

Initially in rank order by median wealth.

Country or

subnational area

Median

wealth

per adult.

US dollars

Mean

wealth

per adult.

US dollars

Ratio (%)

of

median

to mean

Adults.

thousands

Iceland 203,847 555,726 36.68 248

Australia 191,453 411,060 46.58 18,433

Switzerland 183,339 530,244 34.58 6,811

Luxembourg 164,284 412,127 39.86 456

Belgium 163,429 313,045 52.21 8,869

Netherlands 114,935 253,205 45.39 13,260

France 106,827 280,580 38.07 49,478

Canada 106,342 288,263 36.89 28,858

Japan 103,861 227,235 45.71 105,108

New Zealand 98,613 289,798 34.03 3,486

United Kingdom 97,169 279,048 34.82 50,919

Singapore 91,656 283,118 32.37 4,552

Spain 87,188 191,177 45.61 37,410

Norway 80,054 291,103 27.50 4,057

Italy 79,239 217,787 36.38 48,527

Taiwan 78,177 212,375 36.81 19,139

Malta 76,116 140,629 54.13 347

Ireland 72,473 232,952 31.11 3,460

Austria 70,074 231,368 30.29 7,075

South Korea 65,463 171,739 38.12 41,381

United States 61,667 403,974 15.27 242,972

Denmark 60,999 286,712 21.28 4,450

Qatar 59,978 121,638 49.31 2,177

Hong Kong 58,905 244,672 24.08 6,224

Israel 54,966 174,129 31.57 5,405

Finland 45,606 161,062 28.32 4,327

Greece 40,789 108,127 37.72 9,019

Page 48 of 161

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

Sweden 39,709 249,765 15.90 7,689

Germany 35,169 214,893 16.37 67,470

Slovenia 34,043 79,097 43.04 1,676

Portugal 31,313 109,362 28.63 8,377

Libya 26,939 61,701 43.66 4,085

Kuwait 26,278 91,374 28.76 3,045

United Arab Emirates 25,267 88,173 28.66 7,752

Chile 23,812 62,222 38.27 13,166

Seychelles 21,349 48,652 43.88 68

Slovakia 21,203 34,781 60.96 4,339

Estonia 18,895 57,806 32.69 1,034

Croatia 17,131 35,951 47.65 3,342

Czech Republic 17,018 61,489 27.68 8,529

Mauritius 16,472 35,668 46.18 943

China 16,333 47,810 34.16 1,085,003

Hungary 15,026 37,594 39.97 7,826

Aruba 14,901 45,612 32.67 79

Oman 14,304 41,804 34.22 3,450

Brunei 14,154 42,925 32.97 298

Bahrain 13,385 38,882 34.42 1,153

Saudi Arabia 12,847 43,174 29.76 22,629

Uruguay 12,556 39,194 32.04 2,484

Montenegro 12,060 24,746 48.74 475

Bahamas 11,385 47,822 23.81 288

Lithuania 11,161 24,600 45.37 2,306

Bulgaria 11,013 23,984 45.92 5,752

Poland 10,572 31,794 33.25 30,626

Cyprus 10,384 100,308 10.35 909

Costa Rica 9,813 31,717 30.94 3,490

Barbados 8,522 28,762 29.63 213

Panama 8,358 28,897 28.92 2,655

Albania 8,157 16,957 48.10 2,201

Latvia 7,540 33,958 22.20 1,557

Page 49 of 161

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

Georgia 7,078 16,725 42.32 2,940

Malaysia 7,000 27,970 25.03 21,372

Gabon 6,973 16,342 42.67 1,124

Tonga 6,796 15,255 44.55 58

Bosnia and Herzegovina 6,762 14,110 47.92 2,805

South Africa 6,726 22,191 30.31 35,434

Romania 6,658 20,321 32.76 15,582

Samoa 6,516 18,154 35.89 105

Iraq 6,515 14,192 45.91 19,160

Tunisia 6,226 14,932 41.70 8,014

Peru 6,036 22,508 26.82 20,766

Mexico 5,784 20,620 28.05 83,850

Jordan 5,745 13,328 43.10 5,371

North Macedonia 5,640 12,551 44.94 1,612

Dominica 5,548 23,937 23.18 54

Trinidad and Tobago 5,076 15,719 32.29 1,002

Colombia 4,937 18,239 27.07 33,751

Serbia 4,903 10,743 45.64 6,809

Turkmenistan 4,824 10,446 46.18 3,548

Antigua and Barbuda 4,712 19,497 24.17 70

El Salvador 4,616 15,219 30.33 4,024

Mongolia 4,616 10,295 44.84 1,960

Brazil 24,263 31,724 32.58 145,836

Namibia 3,944 11,704 33.70 1,356

Lebanon 3,932 33,726 11.66 4,162

Solomon Islands 3,835 9,035 42.45 312

Grenada 3,704 16,081 23.03 71

Botswana 3,652 10,793 33.84 1,375

Saint Lucia 3,525 11,146 31.63 131

Azerbaijan 3,410 7,530 45.29 6,915

Armenia 3,391 7,583 44.72 2,175

Fiji 3,254 8,031 40.52 574

Page 50 of 161

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

Ecuador 3,211 11,068 29.01 10,507

Argentina 3,176 11,530 27.55 29,953

Algeria 3,175 9,077 34.98 26,565

Angola 3,175 7,921 40.08 12,934

Equatorial Guinea 3,057 9,398 32.53 695

Honduras 2,887 10,675 27.04 5,417

Russia 2,739 19,997 13.70 112,039

Maldives 2,702 6,808 39.69 308

Turkey 2,677 18,555 14.43 54,411

Paraguay 2,589 9,075 28.53 4,181

Saint Vincent and the

Grenadines

2,547 10,882 23.41 75

Jamaica 2,507 8,924 28.09 1,983

Morocco 2,426 9,305 26.07 23,218

Sri Lanka 2,415 5,758 41.94 14,311

Vanuatu 2,346 5,355 43.81 152

Belize 2,298 8,961 25.64 221

Djibouti 2,123 5,389 39.40 569

Papua New Guinea 2,117 6,254 33.85 4,488

Bolivia 2,111 7,306 28.89 6,530

Philippines 1,915 8,349 22.94 62,043

Iran 1,899 4,779 39.74 57,018

Vietnam 1,806 4,560 39.61 67,300

Kyrgyzstan 1,797 4,200 42.79 3,668

Pakistan 1,711 3,816 44.84 110,625

Indonesia 1,597 8,919 17.91 170,221

Laos 1,567 5,215 30.05 3,946

Eritrea 1,499 3,412 43.93 2,462

Guyana 1,454 4,620 31.47 475

Eswatini 1,388 4,219 32.90 719

Cambodia 1,365 3,404 40.10 9,598

Zimbabwe 1,317 3,216 40.95 8,103

São Tomé and Príncipe 1,311 2,987 43.89 96

East Timor 1,303 2,513 51.85 584

Page 51 of 161

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

India 1,289 7,024 18.35 850,210

Senegal 1,270 3,077 41.27 7,525

Benin 1,237 2,972 41.62 5,300

Republic of the Congo 1,219 3,361 36.27 2,546

Suriname 1,147 5,198 22.07 368

Ivory Coast 1,119 2,958 37.83 11,501

Thailand 1,085 9,969 10.88 52,639

Nicaragua 1,054 3,721 28.33 3,858

Bangladesh 1,006 2,332 43.14 102,793

Comoros 971 2,729 35.58 412

Togo 917 2,324 39.46 3,800

Cameroon 897 2,282 39.31 11,413

Kenya 880 2,306 38.16 24,546

Lesotho 857 2,640 32.46 1,208

Nepal 834 2,054 40.60 17,150

Mauritania 764 1,756 43.51 2,239

Belarus 740 1,514 48.88 7,427

Myanmar 739 1,515 48.78 34,334

Haiti 619 2,472 25.04 6,300

Tajikistan 618 1,364 45.31 4,995

Yemen 594 1,967 30.20 14,122

Burkina Faso 569 1,317 43.20 8,571

Syria 500 1,190 42.02 9,477

Mali 468 1,094 42.78 7,834

Liberia 410 1,015 40.39 2,279

Ghana 398 934 42.61 14,972

Zambia 390 1,197 32.58 7,641

Tanzania 383 865 44.28 25,944

Niger 379 863 43.92 8,579

Egypt 346 3,717 9.31 57,160

Central African Republic 332 960 34.58 2,132

Gambia 327 889 36.78 936

Guinea 323 816 39.58 6,077

Guinea-Bissau 296 701 42.23 909

Page 52 of 161

Chad 294 735 40.00 6,319

Afghanistan 290 643 45.10 16,245

Uganda 287 710 40.42 17,941

Rwanda 254 660 38.48 6,123

Sudan 231 530 43.58 19,846

Nigeria 208 1,572 13.23 88,264

Mozambique 201 482 41.70 13,360

Madagascar 179 432 41.44 12,471

Sierra Leone 153 355 43.10 3,596

Kazakhstan 152 5,122 2.97 12,086

Burundi 142 321 44.24 4,972

DR Congo 123 331 37.16 35,869

Ethiopia 78 167 46.71 51,036

Malawi 54 141 38.30 8,493

Ukraine 430 3,964 10.85 35,267

Income Distribution within Individual Countries

Countries' income inequality

according to their most recent

reported Gini index values

(often 10+ years old) as of

2014:

red = high, green = low

inequality

A Gini index value above 50 is

considered high; countries

including Brazil, Colombia, South

Africa, Botswana, and Honduras can be found in this category. A Gini index value of 30

or above is considered medium; countries including Vietnam, Mexico, Poland, the

United States, Argentina, Russia and Uruguay can be found in this category. A Gini

index value lower than 30 is considered low; countries including Austria, Germany,

Denmark, Slovenia, Sweden and Ukraine can be found in this category.

Various Proposed Causes of Economic Inequality

There are various reasons for economic inequality within societies. Recent growth in

overall income inequality, at least within the OECD countries, has been driven mostly by

increasing inequality in wages and salaries.

Page 53 of 161

Economist Thomas Piketty argues that widening economic disparity is an inevitable

phenomenon of free market capitalism when the rate of return of capital (r) is greater

than the rate of growth of the economy (g).

Labor Market

A major cause of economic inequality within modern market economies is the

determination of wages by the market. Where competition is imperfect; information

unevenly distributed; opportunities to acquire education and skills unequal; market

failure results. Since many such imperfect conditions exist in virtually every market,

there is in fact little presumption that markets are in general efficient. This means that

there is an enormous potential role for government to correct such market failures.

Taxes

Malthusian Argument

Another cause is the rate at which income is taxed coupled with the progressivity of the

tax system. A progressive tax is a tax by which the tax rate increases as the taxable

base amount increases. In a progressive tax system, the level of the top tax rate will

often have a direct impact on the level of inequality within a society, either increasing it

or decreasing it, provided that income does not change as a result of the change in tax

regime. Additionally, steeper tax progressivity applied to social spending can result in

a more equal distribution of income across the board. Tax credits such as the Earned

Income Tax Credit in the US can also decrease income inequality. The difference

between the Gini index for an income distribution before taxation and the Gini index

after taxation is an indicator for the effects of such taxation.

Education

Illustration from a 1916 advertisement for a vocational

school in the back of a US magazine. Education has been

seen as a key to higher income, and this advertisement

appealed to Americans' belief in the possibility of selfbetterment,

as well as threatening the consequences of

downward mobility in the great income inequality existing

during the Industrial Revolution.

An important factor in the creation of inequality is

variation in individuals' access to education. Education, especially in an area where

there is a high demand for workers, creates high wages for those with this

education. However, increases in education first increase and then decrease growth as

well as income inequality. As a result, those who are unable to afford an education, or

choose not to pursue optional education, generally receive much lower wages. The

justification for this is that a lack of education leads directly to lower incomes, and thus

Page 54 of 161

lower aggregate saving and investment. Conversely, education raises incomes and

promotes growth because it helps to unleash the productive potential of the poor.

Economic Liberalism, Deregulation and Decline of Unions

John Schmitt and Ben Zipperer (2006) of the CEPR point to economic liberalism and

the reduction of business regulation along with the decline of union membership as one

of the causes of economic inequality. In an analysis of the effects of intensive Anglo-

American liberal policies in comparison to continental European liberalism, where

unions have remained strong, they concluded "The U.S. economic and social model is

associated with substantial levels of social exclusion, including high levels of income

inequality, high relative and absolute poverty rates, poor and unequal educational

outcomes, poor health outcomes, and high rates of crime and incarceration. At the

same time, the available evidence provides little support for the view that U.S.-

style labor market flexibility dramatically improves labor-market outcomes. Despite

popular prejudices to the contrary, the U.S. economy consistently affords a lower level

of economic mobility than all the continental European countries for which data is

available."

More recently, the International Monetary Fund has published studies which found that

the decline of unionization in many advanced economies and the establishment

of neoliberal economics have fueled rising income inequality.

Information Technology

The growth in importance of information technology has been credited with increasing

income inequality. Technology has been called "the main driver of the recent increases

in inequality" by Erik Brynjolfsson, of MIT. In arguing against this explanation, Jonathan

Rothwell notes that if technological advancement is measured by high rates of

invention, there is a negative correlation between it and inequality. Countries with high

invention rates — "as measured by patent applications filed under the Patent

Cooperation Treaty" — exhibit lower inequality than those with less. In one country, the

United States, "salaries of engineers and software developers rarely reach" above

$390,000/year (the lower limit for the top 1% earners).

Globalization

"Elephant curve": Change in real

income between 1988 and 2008 at

various income percentiles of global

income distribution.

Trade liberalization may shift

economic inequality from a global to

a domestic scale. When rich

countries trade with poor countries,

Page 55 of 161

the low-skilled workers in the rich countries may see reduced wages as a result of the

competition, while low-skilled workers in the poor countries may see increased wages.

Trade economist Paul Krugman estimates that trade liberalization has had a

measurable effect on the rising inequality in the United States. He attributes this trend to

increased trade with poor countries and the fragmentation of the means of production,

resulting in low skilled jobs becoming more tradeable.

LSE anthropologist Jason Hickel contends that globalization and "structural adjustment"

set off the "race to the bottom", a significant driver of surging global inequality. Another

driver Hickel mentions is the debt system which advanced the need for structural

adjustment in the first place.

Gender

The gender gap in median earnings

of full-time employees according to

the OECD 2015

In many countries, there is a gender

pay gap in favor of males in the labor

market. Several factors other than

discrimination contribute to this gap.

On average, women are more likely

than men to consider factors other

than pay when looking for work, and

may be less willing to travel or relocate. Thomas Sowell, in his book Knowledge and

Decisions, claims that this difference is due to women not taking jobs due to marriage or

pregnancy. A U.S. Census's report stated that in US once other factors are accounted

for there is still a difference in earnings between women and men. The income gap in

other countries ranges from 53% in Botswana to -40% in Bahrain.

Economic Development

A Kuznets curve

Economist Simon Kuznets argued that

levels of economic inequality are in large

part the result of stages of development.

According to Kuznets, countries with low

levels of development have relatively

equal distributions of wealth. As a country

develops, it acquires more capital, which

leads to the owners of this capital having

more wealth and income and introducing

inequality. Eventually, through various

Page 56 of 161

possible redistribution mechanisms such as social welfare programs, more developed

countries move back to lower levels of inequality.

Wealth Concentration

As of 2019, Jeff Bezos is the richest

person in the world.

Wealth concentration is the process by which, under

certain conditions, newly created wealth concentrates in

the possession of already-wealthy individuals or entities.

Accordingly, those who already hold wealth have the

means to invest in new sources of creating wealth or to

otherwise leverage the accumulation of wealth, and thus

they are the beneficiaries of the new wealth. Over time,

wealth concentration can significantly contribute to the

persistence of inequality within society. Thomas Piketty

in his book Capital in the Twenty-First Century argues

that the fundamental force for divergence is the usually greater return of capital (r) than

economic growth (g), and that larger fortunes generate higher returns.

Rent Seeking

Economist Joseph Stiglitz argues that rather than explaining concentrations of wealth

and income, market forces should serve as a brake on such concentration, which may

better be explained by the non-market force known as "rent-seeking". While the market

will bid up compensation for rare and desired skills to reward wealth creation, greater

productivity, etc., it will also prevent successful entrepreneurs from earning excess

profits by fostering competition to cut prices, profits and large compensation. A better

explainer of growing inequality, according to Stiglitz, is the use of political power

generated by wealth by certain groups to shape government policies financially

beneficial to them. This process, known to economists as rent-seeking, brings income

not from creation of wealth but from "grabbing a larger share of the wealth that would

otherwise have been produced without their effort" [81]

Finance Industry

Jamie Galbraith argues that countries with larger financial sectors have greater

inequality, and the link is not an accident.

Global Warming

A 2019 study published in PNAS found that global warming plays a role in increasing

economic inequality between countries, boosting economic growth in developed

countries while hampering such growth in developing nations of the Global South. The

Page 57 of 161

study says that 25% of gap between the developed world and the developing world can

be attributed to global warming.

Mitigating Factors

Countries with a left-leaning legislature generally have lower levels of inequality. Many

factors constrain economic inequality – they may be divided into two classes:

government sponsored, and market driven. The relative merits and effectiveness of

each approach is a subject of debate.

Typical government initiatives to reduce economic inequality include:

Public education: increasing the supply of skilled labor and reducing income

inequality due to education differentials.

Progressive taxation: the rich are taxed proportionally more than the poor,

reducing the amount of income inequality in society if the change in taxation does

not cause changes in income.

Market forces outside of government intervention that can reduce economic inequality

include:

propensity to spend: with rising wealth & income, a person may spend more. In

an extreme example, if one person owned everything, they would immediately

need to hire people to maintain their properties, thus reducing the wealth

concentration.

Research shows that since 1300, the only periods with significant declines in wealth

inequality in Europe were the Black Death and the two World Wars. Historian Walter

Scheidel posits that, since the stone age, only extreme violence, catastrophes and

upheaval in the form of total war, Communist revolution, pestilence and state collapse

have significantly reduced inequality. He has stated that "only all-out thermonuclear war

might fundamentally reset the existing distribution of resources" and that "peaceful

policy reform may well prove unequal to the growing challenges ahead."

Effects

A lot of research has been done about the effects of economic inequality on different

aspects in society:

Health: British researchers Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett have found

higher rates of health and social problems (obesity, mental

illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use) in

countries and states with higher inequality. Some studies link a surge in "deaths

of despair", suicide, drug overdoses and alcohol related deaths, to widening

income inequality.

Page 58 of 161

Social goods: British researchers Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett have

found lower rates of social goods (life expectancy by country, educational

performance, trust among strangers, women's status, social mobility, even

numbers of patents issued) in countries and states with higher inequality.

Social cohesion: Research has shown an inverse link between income

inequality and social cohesion. In more equal societies, people are much more

likely to trust each other, measures of social capital (the benefits of goodwill,

fellowship, mutual sympathy and social connectedness among groups who make

up a social units) suggest greater community involvement.

Crime: In more equal societies homicide rates are consistently lower. A 2016

study finds that interregional inequality increases terrorism.

Welfare: Studies have found evidence that in societies where inequality is lower,

population-wide satisfaction and happiness tend to be higher.

Debt: Income inequality has been the driving factor in the growing household

debt, as high earners bid up the price of real estate and middle income earners

go deeper into debt trying to maintain what once was a middle class lifestyle.

Economic growth: A 2016 meta-analysis found that "the effect of inequality on

growth is negative and more pronounced in less developed countries than in rich

countries". The study also found that wealth inequality is more pernicious to

growth than income inequality.

Civic participation: Higher income inequality led to less of all forms of social,

cultural, and civic participation among the less wealthy.

Political instability: One study finds that income inequality increases political

instability: "more unequal societies are more politically unstable".

Perspectives

Fairness vs. Equality

According to Christina Starmans et al. (Nature Hum. Beh., 2017), the research literature

contains no evidence on people having an aversion on inequality. In all studies

analyzed, the subjects preferred fair distributions to equal distributions, in both

laboratory and real-world situations. In public, researchers may loosely speak of

equality instead of fairness, when referring to studies where fairness happens to

coincide with equality, but in many studies fairness is carefully separated from equality

and the results are univocal. Already very young children seem to prefer fairness over

equality.

Page 59 of 161

When people were asked, what would be the wealth of each quintile in their ideal

society, they gave a 50-fold sum to the richest quintile than to the poorest quintile. The

preference for inequality increases in adolescence, and so do the capabilities to favor

fortune, effort and ability in the distribution.

Preference for unequal distribution has been developed to the human race possibly

because it allows for better co-operation and allows a person to work with a more

productive person so that both parties benefit from the co-operation. Inequality is also

said to be able to solve the problems of free-riders, cheaters and ill-behaving people,

although this is heavily debated.

In many societies, such as the USSR, the distribution led to protests from wealthier

landowners. In the current U.S., many feel that the distribution is unfair in being too

unequal. In both cases, the cause is unfairness, not inequality, the researchers

conclude.

Socialist Perspectives

Socialists attribute the vast disparities in wealth to the private ownership of the means of

production by a class of owners, creating a situation where a small portion of the

population lives off unearned property income by virtue of ownership titles in capital

equipment, financial assets and corporate stock.

By contrast, the vast majority of the population is dependent on income in the form of a

wage or salary. In order to rectify this situation, socialists argue that the means of

production should be socially owned so that income differentials would be reflective

of individual contributions to the social product.

Marxist socialists ultimately predict the emergence of a communist society based on the

common ownership of the means of production, where each individual citizen would

have free access to the articles of consumption (From each according to his ability, to

each according to his need). According to Marxist philosophy, equality in the sense of

free access is essential for freeing individuals from dependent relationships, thereby

allowing them to transcend alienation.

Meritocracy

Meritocracy favors an eventual society where an individual's success is a direct function

of his merit, or contribution. Economic inequality would be a natural consequence of the

wide range in individual skill, talent and effort in human population. David Landes stated

that the progression of Western economic development that led to the Industrial

Revolution was facilitated by men advancing through their own merit rather than

because of family or political connections.

Page 60 of 161

Liberal Perspectives

Most modern social liberals, including centrist or left-of-center political groups, believe

that the capitalist economic system should be fundamentally preserved, but the status

quo regarding the income gap must be reformed. Social liberals favor a capitalist

system with active Keynesian macroeconomic policies and progressive taxation (to

even out differences in income inequality).

However, contemporary classical liberals and libertarians generally do not take a stance

on wealth inequality, but believe in equality under the law regardless of whether it leads

to unequal wealth distribution. In 1966 Ludwig von Mises, a prominent figure in

the Austrian School of economic thought, explains:

The liberal champions of equality under the law were fully aware of the fact that men are

born unequal and that it is precisely their inequality that generates social cooperation

and civilization. Equality under the law was in their opinion not designed to correct the

inexorable facts of the universe and to make natural inequality disappear. It was, on the

contrary, the device to secure for the whole of mankind the maximum of benefits it can

derive from it. Henceforth no man-made institutions should prevent a man from attaining

that station in which he can best serve his fellow citizens.

Robert Nozick argued that government redistributes wealth by force (usually in the form

of taxation), and that the ideal moral society would be one where all individuals are free

from force. However, Nozick recognized that some modern economic inequalities were

the result of forceful taking of property, and a certain amount of redistribution would be

justified to compensate for this force but not because of the inequalities themselves.

John Rawls argued in A Theory of Justice that inequalities in the distribution of wealth

are only justified when they improve society as a whole, including the poorest members.

Rawls does not discuss the full implications of his theory of justice. Some see Rawls's

argument as a justification for capitalism since even the poorest members of society

theoretically benefit from increased innovations under capitalism; others believe only a

strong welfare state can satisfy Rawls's theory of justice.

Classical liberal Milton Friedman believed that if government action is taken in pursuit of

economic equality then political freedom would suffer. In a famous quote, he said:

A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom

before equality will get a high degree of both.

Economist Tyler Cowen has argued that though income inequality has increased within

nations, globally it has fallen over the 20 years leading up to 2014. He argues that

though income inequality may make individual nations worse off, overall, the world has

improved as global inequality has been reduced.

Page 61 of 161

Social Justice Arguments

Patrick Diamond and Anthony Giddens (professors of Economics and Sociology,

respectively) hold that 'pure meritocracy is incoherent because, without redistribution,

one generation's successful individuals would become the next generation's embedded

caste, hoarding the wealth they had accumulated'.

They also state that social justice requires redistribution of high incomes and large

concentrations of wealth in a way that spreads it more widely, in order to "recognise the

contribution made by all sections of the community to building the nation's wealth."

(Patrick Diamond and Anthony Giddens, June 27, 2005, New Statesman)

Pope Francis stated in his Evangelii gaudium, that "as long as the problems of the poor

are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial

speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found

for the world's problems or, for that matter, to any problems." He later declared that

"inequality is the root of social evil."

When income inequality is low, aggregate demand will be relatively high, because more

people who want ordinary consumer goods and services will be able to afford them,

while the labor force will not be as relatively monopolized by the wealthy.

Effects on Social Welfare

In most western democracies, the desire to eliminate or reduce economic inequality is

generally associated with the political left. One practical argument in favor of reduction

is the idea that economic inequality reduces social cohesion and increases social

unrest, thereby weakening the society. There is evidence that this is true (see inequity

aversion) and it is intuitive, at least for small face-to-face groups of people. Alberto

Alesina, Rafael Di Tella, and Robert MacCulloch find that inequality negatively

affects happiness in Europe but not in the United States.

It has also been argued that economic inequality invariably translates to political

inequality, which further aggravates the problem. Even in cases where an increase in

economic inequality makes nobody economically poorer, an increased inequality of

resources is disadvantageous, as increased economic inequality can lead to a power

shift due to an increased inequality in the ability to participate in democratic processes.

Capabilities Approach

The capabilities approach – sometimes called the human development approach –

looks at income inequality and poverty as form of "capability

deprivation". Unlike neoliberalism, which "defines well-being as utility maximization",

economic growth and income are considered a means to an end rather than the end

itself. Its goal is to "wid[en] people's choices and the level of their achieved well-

Page 62 of 161

being" through increasing functionings (the things a person values doing), capabilities

(the freedom to enjoy functionings) and agency (the ability to pursue valued goals).

When a person's capabilities are lowered, they are in some way deprived of earning as

much income as they would otherwise. An old, ill man cannot earn as much as a

healthy young man; gender roles and customs may prevent a woman from receiving an

education or working outside the home. There may be an epidemic that causes

widespread panic, or there could be rampant violence in the area that prevents people

from going to work for fear of their lives. As a result, income inequality increases, and it

becomes more difficult to reduce the gap without additional aid. To prevent such

inequality, this approach believes it is important to have political freedom, economic

facilities, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, and protective security to

ensure that people aren't denied their functionings, capabilities, and agency and can

thus work towards a better relevant income.

Policy Responses Intended to Mitigate

No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its

workers has any right to continue in this country.

—President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933

A 2011 OECD study makes a number of suggestions to its member countries, including:

Well-targeted income-support policies.

Facilitation and encouragement of access to employment.

Better job-related training and education for the low-skilled (on-the-job training)

would help to boost their productivity potential and future earnings.

Better access to formal education.

Progressive taxation reduces absolute income inequality when the higher rates on

higher-income individuals are paid and not evaded, and transfer payments and social

safety nets result in progressive government spending. Wage ratio legislation has also

been proposed as a means of reducing income inequality. The OECD asserts that

public spending is vital in reducing the ever-expanding wealth gap.

The economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty recommend much higher top

marginal tax rates on the wealthy, up to 50 percent, 70 percent or even 90

percent. Ralph Nader, Jeffrey Sachs, the United Front Against Austerity, among others,

call for a financial transactions tax (also known as the Robin Hood tax) to bolster the

social safety net and the public sector.

The Economist wrote in December 2013: "A minimum wage, providing it is not set too

high, could thus boost pay with no ill effects on jobs....America's federal minimum wage,

at 38% of median income, is one of the rich world's lowest. Some studies find no harm

to employment from federal or state minimum wages, others see a small one, but none

finds any serious damage."

Page 63 of 161

General limitations on and taxation of rent-seeking are popular across the political

spectrum.

Public policy responses addressing causes and effects of income inequality in the US

include: progressive tax incidence adjustments, strengthening social safety

net provisions such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, welfare, the food stamp

program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, organizing community interest

groups, increasing and reforming higher education subsidies,

increasing infrastructure spending, and placing limits on and taxing rent-seeking.

A 2017 study in the Journal of Political Economy by Daron Acemoglu, James

Robinson and Thierry Verdier argues that American "cutthroat" capitalism and inequality

gives rise to technology and innovation that more "cuddly" forms of capitalism

cannot. As a result, "the diversity of institutions we observe among relatively advanced

countries, ranging from greater inequality and risk-taking in the United States to the

more egalitarian societies supported by a strong safety net in Scandinavia, rather than

reflecting differences in fundamentals between the citizens of these societies, may

emerge as a mutually self-reinforcing world equilibrium. If so, in this equilibrium, 'we

cannot all be like the Scandinavians,' because Scandinavian capitalism depends in part

on the knowledge spillovers created by the more cutthroat American capitalism." A 2012

working paper by the same authors, making similar arguments, was challenged by Lane

Kenworthy, who posited that, among other things, the Nordic countries are consistently

ranked as some of the world's most innovative countries by the World Economic

Forum's Global Competitiveness Index, with Sweden ranking as the most innovative

nation, followed by Finland, for 2012–2013; the U.S. ranked sixth.

Page 64 of 161

IV. Educational Injustice

Education for Justice is the process of promoting a culture of lawfulness through

educational activities at all levels. Education for Justice aims at teaching the next

generation about crime prevention, and to better understand and address problems that

can undermine the rule of law. It promotes peace and encourages students to actively

engage in their communities and future professions. Education for Justice is a basic

legal knowledge, in which educational activities at all levels seek to promote

understanding of crime prevention, peace, justice, human rights, and problems that can

undermine the rule of law. Education reportedly plays a key role in transmitting and

sustaining socio-cultural norms and ensuring their continued evolution. As such,

governments may seek to strengthen this promotion of a culture of lawfulness through

education.

Education and Justice

Peace, justice, human rights and fundamental freedoms are considered to be of vital

importance for the stability and well-being of societies across the world. Governments

around the world believe that while regulatory frameworks on corruption, violence, and

crime are part of the responses to be given, the challenges still persist, often beyond

national borders and, increasingly, in globally interconnected ways.

Many governments strengthen efforts to uphold the principle of the rule of law (RoL) in

the daily lives of their citizens and through the public institutions that seek to serve

them. This is to promote and protect the safety, dignity and human rights of all

Page 65 of 161

people. The criminal justice sector has a key role to play and a specific responsibility.

The RoL is considered to be fundamental to all aspects of society, both public and

private, shaping the way individuals interact with each other and with public institutions

in all sectors of society – forging relationships of trust and mutual accountability.

National education systems are responsible for upholding and advancing the principles

of the RoL so that future generations hold state institutions accountable to these

principles and equip learners with the knowledge, values, attitudes and behaviours they

need to take constructive and ethically responsible decisions in their daily lives that

support justice and human rights.

It is on this basis that trusted and trustworthy institutions are constructed.

Rule of Law Related to Education

Rule of law in education aims at teaching learners how they can acquire and develop

the cognitive socio-emotional and behavioral experiences and skills needed to develop

into constructive and responsible contributors to society. Experts believe education

plays a key role in transmitting and sustaining socio-cultural norms and ensuring their

continued evolution.

Formal education contributes to helping children and youth to adopt values, such as

behaviors, attitudes and roles that form their personal and social identity. As they

develop, children and youth also develop the capacity to reflect critically on norms, and

to shape new norms that reflect contemporary conditions.

Education encourages learners to value, and apply, the principles of the RoL in their

daily lives. It also equips learners with the appropriate knowledge, values, attitudes, and

behaviors needed to contribute to its continued improvement and regeneration in

society more broadly.

This can be reflected, for instance, in the way learners demand greater transparency in,

or accountability of, public institutions, as well as through the everyday decisions that

learners take as ethically responsible and engaged citizens, family members, workers,

employers, friends, and consumers etc.

Culture of Lawfulness Related to Education

Culture of lawfulness (CoL) in education is the notion of fostering the RoL to create

cultural and social conditions which respects and promotes the RoL.

A CoL means that the general population in a society follows the law because it

believes that it provides a fair and just response to the needs of individuals and society

as a whole. It also means that individuals’ expectations about the law and the justice

system are reflected in their formal and informal interactions with the law.

Page 66 of 161

Teaching The Basics: Key Knowledge, Values,

Attitudes and Behaviors

Certain key knowledge, values, attitudes and behaviors empowers learners to carry out

the RoL and to participate in the continued development of a CoL within their

community.

Key Knowledge

Learners need to acquire knowledge, understanding and critical thinking about the

meaning of the RoL and a CoL, and how these concepts manifest in different social

settings and through established institutions, laws, mechanisms and procedures. Based

on established norms and factual evidence, learners are required to make

knowledgeable judgements about their environment. If education is to promote the RoL,

then it is key to teach about the ability to carry out critical thinking and analysis.

An integral part of the learning process is to understand and appreciate the linkages

between global and local issues. Violations of the RoL have far-reaching consequences

at the individual, community, national, regional and global levels, which impact different

countries and populations in ways that are often interconnected. It is important not to

underestimate the extent to which a CoL is embedded in national and local realities.

Therefore, teachers and students also need to understand their rights and

responsibilities and identify the behaviors that support democratic processes and the

RoL on a daily basis. These understandings depend on the context.

Page 67 of 161

Key areas of knowledge for learners to understand the meaning of the RoL and CoL,

include:

Good citizenship, representation of individuals’ voices in formal institutions, as

well as rights and duties of citizens;

The justice system;

Human rights;

Conflict prevention and peacebuilding;

Global, national, and local expressions of the RoL and culture of lawfulness;

Democratic values such as transparency, accountability and inclusiveness;

Local, visible expressions of a culture of lawfulness through pluralism and

egalitarianism;

Causes and consequences/impacts of crime on family, community, society, as

well as safety;

Responsible and ethical decision-making.

Key Attitudes and Values

Attitudes and values are developed across a broad range of settings, including in

the home, in schools, and through the experiences that individuals gain in broader

social and cultural contexts (i.e., through socio-emotional learning). Developing positive

attitudes and values is the foundation to the holistic and healthy development of

learners at all ages.

Attitudes and values also help learners make responsible decisions (proactive behavior)

and be resilient when faced with dangerous or threatening situations (responsive

behavior). Most importantly is the sense of ‘self-efficacy’, which means a belief in one’s

own abilities to meet challenges, complete a task successfully, and succeed in reaching

a specific goal. A sense of self-efficacy combined with high levels of motivation provide

the conditions for resilience, which is key to promoting a CoL and the RoL.

School practices that lead learners to address issues that affect their own lives and

those of their peers and family also nurture civic engagement, which is key to

the sustainability of a culture of lawfulness. When learners invest in learning processes

through a personal effort, they take individual and collective responsibilities that nurture

civic maturity. There are other outcomes of socio-emotional learning that are relevant to

the RoL, such as learning to value equality, fairness, mutual respect and integrity and

develop attitudes, values and capacities, including:

A sense of belonging to a community;

Self-identity and positive self-image;

Social awareness (empathy, inclusion);

Relationship skills (communication, cooperation, and conflict resolution);

A sense of personal security;

Resilience (especially for persons vulnerable to becoming a victim or being

recruited into crime);

Mindfulness;

Page 68 of 161

Empathetic concern and compassion;

Self-awareness;

Self-management;

Self-regulation.

Behaviors

The behavioral learning outcomes of Global Citizenship Education (GCE) are relevant

to the promotion of the RoL, specifically, to act effectively and responsibly at local,

national and global levels for a more peaceful and sustainable world, and to develop the

motivation and willingness to take necessary actions.

Learning to develop specific behaviors enhances

the efforts to promote the RoL. Such behaviors

include:

Active participation in democratic structures

and processes (in and out of school);

Participatory and democratic practices in

group decision-making;

Monitoring of RoL institutions and processes

(in and out of schools);

Actions to promote improvements in

RoL/CoL (at different levels of society).

‘Pro-social’ behaviors also function as protective factors, which benefit other people or

society as a whole and support learners’ well-being and sense of belonging to the

community. These pro-social behaviors include:

Actions of support and solidarity with survivors of violence and crime;

Respecting school property;

Participating in school community actions.

Speaking to Real Issues and Dilemmas

Educational strategies and pedagogies that seek to support positive behaviors must

address the real vulnerabilities and dilemmas to which learners are exposed.

Addressing Learners' Individual Vulnerabilities

Addressing learners’ individual vulnerabilities requires identifying two main categories:

Risk factors: those factors that increase the likelihood that a young person will

experience harm, engage in criminal activity, or become violent. Without

necessarily being the direct causes of unlawful behavior, risk factors increase

Page 69 of 161

learners’ vulnerability to engage in such behavior. Risk factors can be mitigated

by protective factors.

Protective factors: factors that encourage the positive development and wellbeing

of children. Protective factors shield young people from the risks of

experiencing harm, engaging in criminal activity, or becoming violent. Though

protective factors are less researched than risk factors, they are equally

important to develop effective educational prevention programs and, more

broadly, support learners’ socio-emotional, physical,

and intellectual development. Protective factors also nurture social

inclusion, civic engagement, agency and interconnectedness.

Risk and protective factors can be found at the individual, family, peer and social levels.

The more a learning context reduces risk factors and increases protective factors, the

more likely it will succeed in enhancing the well-being of the individual and, as a result,

strengthen their resilience to crime and violence.

Adult women and men, whether parents, educators or school personnel, may have a

different perception of learners’ degree of exposure to risk and their abilities to face

them. Therefore, learners need to be perceived and treated as knowledgeable and

engaged actors.

It not only increases the likelihood of gaining an accurate understanding of their learning

needs but also bolsters their sense of empowerment and strengthens their decisionmaking

abilities.

Assessment processes should take a positive approach to learners’ abilities by focusing

on questions such as, ‘what is going well?’ and ‘what are the learners’ strengths and

assets to face this situation?’ rather than exclusively considering “what is going wrong?’.

It is possible to identify relevant educational responses by distinguishing between three

types of prevention efforts, which also helps design relevant and impactful interventions:

Primary prevention 3 efforts target all learners, whether they show any level of

risk or not. At its core, primary prevention is about strengthening communities

and individuals, and ensuring their well-being and connectedness with

their families and communities.

Secondary prevention is provided in addition to primary prevention to individuals

who are at risk of victimization or involvement in violence or crimes. Early

indications might include problems of disrespecting the RoL or committing a

crime. In these contexts, some learners may be given additional academic

support and SEL-related trainings, if they are considered ‘at risk’ of being

victimized or of developing problematic behaviors.

Page 70 of 161

Tertiary prevention interventions are for learners who continue to struggle despite

primary and secondary prevention efforts. Most typically, these constitute a small

number of learners with the most serious patterns of problem behaviour and who

are often subject to victimization. These learners need specific support and

protective measures targeted at preventing the problem from getting worse or

trying to remediate it.

Addressing Real-Life Dilemmas

Schooling can potentially play a partial role in resolving deeper problems such

as corruption, organized crime or drug trafficking, educational programs must be

relevant to the real-life contexts of learners in order to deliver meaningful learning with

long-term impact. This means placing learners in the active role of problem solvers – i.e.

those who can understand and find solutions to realistic dilemmas and conflicts.

Learning about abstract notions of the RoL will not lead to sustainable change,

especially if there are differences between the RoL values taught in the classroom and

those that prevail in the school environment, families or society. In such contexts, it is

important that education

programs inspire and sustain learners’ motivation, confidence and creative abilities to

strive to improve their situation.

Education personnel and teachers need to help learners deal with the frustrations,

anger, and possible disillusionment in order to avoid cultivating cynicism or indifference.

They must develop hope and constructive responses that result from this discrepancy.

Page 71 of 161

Well-guided educational programs can foster personal transformations

that empower learners to play a constructive role in society and re-build the RoL (and its

institutions) where necessary. Such programs must take into account the social

environment of learners, and in particular, the degree of dissonance

between norms and values taught in schools and those that prevail outside.

Reinforcing Positive Behavior

It is necessary when working with children and youth, in particular those perceived as

vulnerable, to take a positive look at their skills, assets and attributes as the foundation

for further learning. This approach is much more effective than viewing young people as

lacking knowledge, skills or values to promote the RoL.

The challenge is to support positive and sustained behavior change when working with

vulnerable learners. This is important in a context where the enforcement of norms is

not sufficient and policymakers, therefore, need to ensure education systems create the

desire and conditions for positive behaviors and genuine sustainable change.

Depending on the age, gender, socio-economic background of learners and the social

context in which they live, this may involve developing educational policies that go

beyond conventional educational approaches to expose learners to new experiences

that bring to life abstract ideals. For example, rather than punishing inappropriate

behaviour, it can be effective to introduce mediation or reconciliation programmes. The

challenge is to ensure learners are able to apply their new skills in a real-world context.

Practicing What We Preach

Schools or any other educational setting who play a meaningful role in strengthening

the RoL, should carry out , and strive to apply, the principles of the RoL. This means

ensuring all aspects of school management and school life, including teacher-teacher

relations, learner-teacher relations, and school-family relations, are guided by

a culture of fairness, rights, accountability and transparency, consistent with

international human rights norms and standards.

Not all education staff are aware of their own behaviors, attitudes and biases (overt and

covert) and this can undermine their ability to speak credibly about the RoL and

contribute actively to its implementation on a daily basis. The principles of the RoL in

schools and classrooms is not easy and should be encouraged and supported by

education leaders.

Making the RoL and a CoL a priority is not just about transmitting knowledge but also

about values and behaviours that are modelled and enforced on a daily basis through

what is called the ‘hidden curriculum. ‘The ‘hidden curriculum’ of

the classroom and school transmits norms, values and beliefs to learners in ways other

Page 72 of 161

than formal teaching and learning processes and ensures learners develop the skills

and know-how they need to engage in society as ethically responsible citizens.

When teachers establish clear and fair classroom rules and enforce them equally,

children can understand what it means to follow the rules and observe first-hand that

they apply to all students equally. They witness that the same consequences apply to all

students who break them. Students will gain experience of transparency, accountability

and certainty, which are all key elements of the RoL. When teachers and students cocreate

classroom rules, it also sends the message that students have an active role to

play in shaping the rules that govern them. This is how a CoL is cultivated.

Classroom and school rules are one example in which the RoL comes alive for students

in everyday life.

Other approaches may include:

Guaranteeing the personal safety and well-being of children in the school

environment, particularly those students belonging to vulnerable groups;

Ensuring the transparency of school policies and practices that are in line

with human rights and supporting the RoL as well as accountability of school

leaders and teachers;

Page 73 of 161

Providing meaningful opportunities for learners to contribute to decisions that

affect them, including rules in the classroom and school and beyond through

student councils and other forms of student representation in various governance

levels (local, regional, national) of educational institutions;

Making it a priority to cultivate a climate of trust and openness where learners are

encouraged to share their opinions and to respectfully consider the views of

others;

Developing neutral and appropriate mechanisms for students and teachers to

use when someone (student, teacher or school leader) is in conflict with the

established rules;

Implementing policies of inclusion that embrace diversity in the curriculum and

facilitate the involvement of all learners in the life of the school.

The Importance of Creating Safe and Inclusive Learning Environments

Inclusive school policies and practices provide learners with the opportunity to

experience the RoL at first hand. Inclusive school policies create enabling environments

that support learners' outcomes and behaviors which are important to the RoL - such as

‘an appreciation and respect for diversity’, ‘a sense of belonging’ and ‘a willingness to

take action’.

Holistic learning environments can be created by working in partnership with learners

and their families and relevant community actors who may not necessarily have a

formal educational mandate, for example the artistic and sports community, cultural and

religious leaders, media, as well as business. Engaging with these actors in ways that

further illustrate how the RoL permeates all aspects of our lives can be an additional

way of bringing the RoL to life.

Curricular Support

Necessary Support Systems

There are numerous curricular strategies for implementing Rule of law (RoL) and

Culture of lawfulness (CoL) activities or programs. These strategies are intended for all

learners across different learning environments.

These curricular options are (not mutually exclusive):

A dedicated subject, such as ‘citizenship education’;

The infusion of themes and approaches predominantly within a few subjects,

such as history, social studies, civics or life skills education;

Page 74 of 161

A cross-curricular or transversal approach that infuses RoL principles – for

example, social and emotional learning (SEL) or human rights education - across

all subjects;

Whole school activities and practices including extracurricular clubs for learners,

experiential learning and community partnerships.

A global citizenship education (GCE) curriculum strategy that is cross-disciplinary and

not restricted to a single subject is encouraged. It should also be holistic and not

restricted just to content knowledge. In keeping with the general principles of GCE,

curriculum that supports the RoL will involve a participatory, learner-centered pedagogy

with values oriented toward personal and social transformation.

Peace education distinguishes between negative peace (a mere absence of violence)

and positive peace (peace that encompasses larger notions of justice). In both

instances, peace education often emphasizes the importance of conflict within a culture,

as it is often productive and indicative of true diversity. Peace education emphasizes the

importance of conflict transformation instead of conflict resolution.

Similarly, human rights education aims at transformation, where the goal is not merely

to teach about human rights, but to teach for human rights, empowering learners and

Page 75 of 161

teachers to act for social change. In certain cases, this might present both opportunities

and challenges for the pursuit of the RoL and a culture of lawfulness, especially where

there are conflicts between governmental educational objectives and broader human

rights considerations.

Teaching and Learning Resources

Curriculum frameworks come alive through educational resources that support teachers’

efforts in the classroom. Teaching resources are aimed at translating learning objectives

into engaging, accurate, and comprehensive materials for learners. This is can be seen

as challenging and requiring creativity. Writers can frame educational materials around

cooperative and group activities, bearing in mind that the materials should elicit

conversation and open discussion to reflect on what is of interests to learners, and to

also reflect on the transmitted messages and knowledge.

Learning Assessment

Assessments provide a measurement of learning and are a key component of the

teaching and learning process. Assessment techniques and tools should be

multifaceted and provide a variety of opportunities for students with different learning

styles to demonstrate their understanding and convey their ideas. Localized,

differentiated, and curriculum specific assessments are usually recommended. Many

different types of assessment tools are available, including stand-alone tests, longer

term courses, certification programs, and archives of assessment resources.

Other forms of assessment include peer assessment, self-assessment, and alternative

assessment. Peer assessment is designed to help students gain insight into the aspects

of learning that the teacher sees as important, and therefore

increases metacognitive thinking skills that are useful when the student is working on

their own projects and learning activities. In a similar vein, a self assessment also

encourages students to take an objective, critical look at their own work and assess

their performance and understanding based on rubrics provided by the teacher. Both

methods, rather than being entirely separate from the learning process, enhance the

student’s learning by becoming part of it.

Education for Justice includes developing social and emotional learning (SEL) and

behavioral learning outcomes that are traditionally more difficult to assess; and ‘grading’

of values is discouraged. Nevertheless, educators might elicit and observe student

values through classroom assignments and discussions. Any troubling exhibitions of

values – such as prejudice against certain groups in the school – can be addressed

through counselling as well as classroom and school processes.

Teachers have found ways to document participation in RoL class activities, such as

through observation of class dynamics and active participation in civic groups. However,

other kinds of behavioral outcomes, such as reduced acts of bullying, may be difficult to

track because of their long-term nature and because such behavior might not be evident

Page 76 of 161

to the teacher. For this reason, impact and program evaluations undertaken for RoL

interventions carried out in other places might be informative, although caution should

be exercised in applying findings across different cultural contexts.

Classroom Pedagogies

Participatory approaches and methods – at the core of GCE pedagogy – aim at

ensuring that learners benefit from an active learning and practical experience grounded

in their everyday lives which develops learning outcomes such as critical

thinking and problem-

solving skills.

In the classroom,

learners can be given

concrete

exercises

that

foster a

CoL.

Activities

include

role playing,

dialogues

and community

governance

activities that allow

them to work on

actively being considerate, tolerant and

‘other-oriented’. By engaging their classmates in ways that anticipate conflicts they are

likely to experience outside of the classroom, learners will be better equipped to

address such challenges and more likely to be respectful of others’ differences.

Page 77 of 161

Examples below provide a variety of transformative pedagogical tools and approaches

that might be used to promote transformations in learners and ultimately in society:

Project-based learning is one of the most widely practiced participatory learning

methods that can be used for any topic or skill that needs to be taught. When

engaged in project-based learning, learners produce a project which engages

their cognitive and creative skills while also increasing their familiarity with the

subject matter through independent research.

Problem-based learning helps learners work towards a solution to a specific

problem. The solution can either be fully realized and implemented or simply

conceptualized and planned out. Either way, learners’ problem-solving skills are

fostered, and/or they develop confidence in their own ability to deal with complex

issues.

Community-based learning utilizes active research and implementation skills to

help address a challenge in the learners’ own communities. Learners identify a

social, economic, or environmental issue and not only practice planning solutions

but also create change in their communities by implementing these solutions. An

example could be holding a community event or a workshop on safe use of the

internet. Peer-to-peer learning is a teaching methodology where certain members

of a group educate other members of the same group, i.e. their peers, to change

individual knowledge and behavior as well as group behaviors and

attitudes. Empowering children through peer-to peer initiatives and providing

opportunities to discuss topics in a safe environment are important aspects of

most participatory methodologies.

Web-based learning. Information and communications technologies (ICT) are an

important pedagogical tool that can be integrated into any of the above

approaches and provide an alternative to traditional classroom-based

environments. They also ensure the development of digital literacy, an essential

twenty-first century skill. There is a wide range of online learning platforms which

offer everything from readings, audio-visual aids, and activity ideas to

opportunities for intercultural internet-based communication.

Many educational environments across the world incorporate ICT learning into their

curriculum in some fashion and it is often an easy entry point from which to engage

with GCE. In the area of RoL, online platforms can be used for games involving role

playing and engagement with dilemmas. Games and apps must balance fun with

learning opportunities through a mixture of online and offline activities. The human

connection remains essential for learning GCE and RoL. While ICTs are considered to

be useful tools for learning, online environments can also be used as a tool for

recruitment, extortion and promotion of crime and extreme violent behavior. Since

mobile phone access to internet is growing worldwide, it is essential to teach about

Page 78 of 161

online risks and the tools to resist recruitment by gangs, criminal and hate groups,

and violent extremists.

Learning through non-formal education and community-based approaches is

instrumental to ensure learning by the most marginalized. Research suggests that

sports have the capacity to connect youth to positive adult role models and provide

positive development opportunities, as well as promote the learning and application of

life skills. In recent years the use of sport to reduce crime, as well as to prevent violent

extremism and radicalization, has become more widespread, especially as a tool to

improve self-esteem, enhance social bonds and provide participants with a feeling of

purpose.

Effective classroom management means safe and nurturing classroom environments,

which have positive effects on student learning and behavior. For example, introducing

structured small group discussions (‘Magic Circle’ classroom meetings) about a variety

of interpersonal and intrapersonal topics can make the classroom environment more

responsive to learners’ affective and cognitive needs and eventually reduce their

acceptance of high risk behaviors.

These pedagogies represent important considerations when looking for opportunities to

integrate GCE, RoL and CoL into existing educational structures. When teaching values

to others, it is essential to pay particular attention to the way in which those values are

Page 79 of 161

embedded within the ‘informal’ or ‘hidden’ curriculum of the teaching methodology and

environment themselves to provide a more cohesive and immersive learning

experience, since these factors also influence student learning immensely. Values and

attitudes are best communicated through participatory pedagogical methods, which are

interactive, inclusive and learner-centered. Paying attention to these details will create a

more holistic, value-laden learning experience which teaches by example.

Teacher Training and Development

Investing in teacher training and development is fundamental for two main reasons. It is

well established that teacher quality has a direct positive impact

on student achievement. As teachers act as planners, initiators, climate builders,

facilitators and guides, mediators, knowledge organizers and evaluators, they are

central to interpreting and implementing any curriculum.

It is possible to identify the skills and characteristics of a good teacher, who is able to

model and promote the principles of the RoL. The development of teacher codes of

conduct, and their inclusion as part of the in service and continuous training of teachers

can be usefully considered in this context.

Teachers may need to learn about aspects of the RoL that are not already covered in

subject matter preparation so that they can instruct students. Educators will need, to:

understand the principle of the RoL, its tenets and implications, expand their knowledge

of human rights, understand the causes, consequences and impacts of crime

on family, community, society, and on the safety and security of society as a whole and

increase their awareness of social influencers that shape student behaviors online and

off.

Teachers will also need to critically assess their own behaviors, attitudes and biases

that possibly undermine the RoL and their ability to speak credibly on challenges to the

RoL, embrace practices that foster inclusion and respect for diversity, with attention

to gender and coming from marginalized communities, adapt to the real learning needs

of young people, lead socio-emotional learning recognize and appropriately respond to

risky or potentially harmful situations, foster and nurture their moral character, create a

sense of community and a climate of trust in the classroom (where learners feel safe

and respected – ‘safe space’), engage in peer counselling and peer mediation,

developing teachers’ ability to acquire this knowledge and develop these skills requires

understandable, accessible and relevant resources and support that address their

genuine needs according with the cultural, school and educational policy environments

in which teachers work.

Any areas not already covered in pre-service training could be introduced to teachers

through in-service training, workshops and resource supports. These supports could be

offered through teacher training institutions and faculty, Ministries of Education and

affiliated training centers, professional associations and civil society organizations.

Page 80 of 161

Teacher learning and development for the RoL involves training as well

as empowering teachers to play their multiple roles. This is possible through the

establishment of professional learning communities (PLCs) that nurture improvements

in teaching practices and continuous teacher learning. Using online networks, teachers

can compare, contrast and shape ideas with each other for implementing the RoL in

their local environment. Websites can be used as clearinghouses of resources or

materials for use in lessons or classrooms. Online forums and hotlines can provide an

avenue for getting guidance in using the materials or information offered on these online

platforms.

Learning Outside of Schools

Issues around RoL are often perceived as an area of work associated with ministries of

justice and the interior, including law enforcement. Therefore, it can be challenging to

develop multi-sector partnerships to promote and integrate crime

prevention and criminal justice issues into all education activities.

Civil society organizations, in particular, play a vital role in supporting educational

efforts, both as a partner in developing educational materials based on the RoL and in

supporting outreach and dissemination activities to reach all stakeholders,

including children, youth, students, parents, teachers, professors and the media.

Schools can work in a participatory manner with stakeholders that operate within and

outside of the education sector, including non-formal educators, out-of-school youth,

parents, civil society organizations, the media, artists, and other actors based in the

Page 81 of 161

community, while respecting the primary mandate of education. Such collaborations can

foster innovation, creativity, and participatory approaches.

Engaging NGOs or other community organizations not only amplifies a

school’s GCE and RoL efforts and ensures that the community benefits from them, but

also provides learners with practical, real-world learning experiences in the social work

space. Behavioral and action-oriented GCE competencies are developed and nurtured

through these connections to community organizations, providing learners with

examples of good citizenship in practice.

The following learning opportunities outside of the school context include:

Youth-led action: Young people have a fundamental role to play in bringing a

CoL and integrity in all areas of society. Policymakers and educators can engage

with youth as partners for development projects, initiatives or responses that

address crime and violence at the school, community, regional and national

levels. Youth-led action includes youth organizations’ initiatives

against corruption, youth integrity networks, peaceful demonstrations, and

expressions through art against crime, drugs and violence. Learners can also

participate in Youth-Led Participatory Action Research where young people

identify a problem of concern, gather data and make recommendations to

policymakers.

Family-focused programs: Education programs geared toward prevention or

intervention for youth populations at high risk from violence or crime often involve

parents. Evidence shows that parent involvement can increase the success of

violence and crime prevention programs in schools because of the added

reinforcement that learners get at home.

School-community partnerships: Another interesting way to integrate GCE values

into learning at the local level is by building communityclassroom

partnerships with local NGOs or existing community efforts. Building

partnerships with community organizations is critical to GCE efforts. Such

partnerships need to be maintained and sustained long term to have a real

impact on the community. Learners will be involved in localized, hands-on

learning while understanding the principles of good community action and that

social work efforts must be scalable as well as sustainable. School administration

and NGO staff can work together to ensure the terms of the partnership are clear

and the goals are attainable.

Inter-school collaborations: In addition to collaborating

with community organizations and NGOs, schools can collaborate and learn from

each other. Just as peer education is meaningful for learners, peer institutions

have a critical role to play in helping schools to implement effective

practices. Schools can replicate programs, collaborate on inter-school events

and initiatives, and create a network to more easily share local RoL and CoL

Page 82 of 161

resources and amplify efforts. This networking can even extend beyond the local

community and stretch nationally and internationally, either online or through

conferences and professional learning communities. Schools and other

educational institutions all over the world can connect and learn from one another

about what works and what does not in terms of pedagogy and practice.

Partnerships with government and private sector actors: Non-traditional

educational actors such as government employees in the criminal

justice sector, law enforcement and local government authorities, as well as

community-based organizations and the private sector are also, when

appropriate, collaborating with schools. These actors may participate directly in

the educational program, provide teacher training on specific sensitive topics and

supplemental off-site learning opportunities to inform on the risks associated

with violence and crime. Their interventions can also help overcome fears and

mistrust between learners and representatives of.

Page 83 of 161

Page 84 of 161

V. Environmental Injustice

Environmental Justice emerged as a concept in the United States in the early 1980s.

The term has two distinct uses with the more common usage describing a social

movement that focuses on the “fair” distribution of environmental benefits and burdens.

The other use is an interdisciplinary body of social science literature that includes

theories of the environment and justice, environmental laws and their implementations,

environmental policy and planning and governance for development and sustainability,

and political ecology.

Definition

United States Environmental Protection Agency defines environmental justice as

follows:

Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people

regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development,

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. EPA

has this goal for all communities and persons across this Nation. It will be achieved

when everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health

hazards and equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy

environment in which to live, learn, and work.

Other definitions include: equitable distribution of environmental risks and benefits; fair

and meaningful participation in environmental decision-making; recognition of

community ways of life, local knowledge, and cultural difference; and the capability of

Page 85 of 161

communities and individuals to function and flourish in society. An alternative meaning,

used in social sciences, of the term "justice" is "the distribution of social goods".

Environmental Discrimination

Environmental discrimination is one issue that environmental justice seeks to address.

Racism and discrimination against minorities center on a socially-dominant group's

belief in its superiority, often resulting in privilege for the dominant group and the

mistreatment of non-dominant minorities. The combined impact of these privileges and

prejudices are just one of the potential reasons that waste management and high

pollution sites tend to be located in minority-dominated areas. A disproportionate

quantity of minority communities (for example in Warren County, North Carolina) play

host to landfills, incinerators, and other potentially toxic facilities. Environmental

discrimination can also be the placement of a harmful factory in a place of minority. This

can be seen as environmental discrimination because it is placing a harmful entity in a

place where the people often don't have the means to fight back against big

corporations.

Environmental discrimination has historically been evident in the process of selecting

and building environmentally hazardous sites, including waste disposal, manufacturing,

and energy production facilities. The location of transportation infrastructures, including

highways, ports, and airports, has also been viewed as a source of environmental

injustice. Among the earliest documentation of environmental racism was a study of the

distribution of toxic waste sites across the United States. Due to the results of that

study, waste dumps and waste incinerators have been the target of environmental

justice lawsuits and protests.

Litigation

Some environmental justice lawsuits are based on violations of civil rights laws.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is often used in lawsuits that claim environmental

inequality. Section 601 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin

by any government agency receiving federal assistance. To win an environmental

justice case that claims an agency violated this statute, the plaintiff must prove the

agency intended to discriminate. Section 602 requires agencies to create rules and

regulations that uphold section 601. This section is useful because the plaintiff must

only prove that the rule or regulation in question had a discriminatory impact. There is

no need to prove discriminatory intent. Seif v. Chester Residents Concerned for Quality

Living set the precedent that citizens can sue under section 601. There has not yet

been a case in which a citizen has sued under section 602, which calls into question

whether this right of action exists.

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was used many

times to defend minority rights during the 1960s, has also been used in numerous

environmental justice cases.

Page 86 of 161

Initial Barriers to Minority Participation

When environmentalism first became popular during the early 20th century, the focus

was wilderness protection and wildlife preservation. These goals reflected the interests

of the movement's initial, primarily white middle and upper class supporters, including

through viewing preservation and protection via a lens that failed to appreciate the

centuries-long work of indigenous communities who had lived without ushering in the

types of environmental devastation these settler colonial "environmentalists" now

sought to mitigate. The actions of many mainstream environmental organizations still

reflect these early principles.

Numerous low-income minorities felt isolated or negatively impacted by the movement,

exemplified by the Southwest Organizing Project's (SWOP) Letter to the Group of 10, a

letter sent to major environmental organizations by several local environmental justice

activists. The letter argued that the environmental movement was so concerned about

cleaning up and preserving nature that it ignored the negative side-effects that doing so

caused communities nearby, namely less job growth. In addition, the NIMBY movement

has transferred locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) from middle-class neighborhoods

to poor communities with large minority populations. Therefore, vulnerable communities

with fewer political opportunities are more often exposed to hazardous waste and

toxins. This has resulted in the PIBBY principle, or at least the PIMBY (Place-inminorities'-backyard),

as supported by the United Church of Christ's study in 1987.

As a result, some minorities have viewed the environmental movement as elitist.

Environmental elitism manifested itself in three different forms:

Page 87 of 161

1. Compositional – Environmentalists are from the middle and upper class.

2. Ideological – The reforms benefit the movement's supporters but impose costs

on nonparticipants.

3. Impact – The reforms have "regressive social impacts". They disproportionately

benefit environmentalists and harm underrepresented populations.

Supporters of economic growth have taken advantage of environmentalists' neglect of

minorities. They have convinced minority leaders looking to improve their communities

that the economic benefits of industrial facility and the increase in the number of jobs

are worth the health risks. In fact, both politicians and businesses have even threatened

imminent job loss if communities do not accept hazardous industries and facilities.

Although in many cases local residents do not actually receive these benefits, the

argument is used to decrease resistance in the communities as well as avoid

expenditures used to clean up pollutants and create safer workplace environments.

Cost Barriers

One of the prominent barriers to minority participation in environmental justice is the

initial costs of trying to change the system and prevent companies from dumping their

toxic waste and other pollutants in areas with high numbers of minorities living in them.

There are massive legal fees involved in fighting for environmental justice and trying to

shed environmental racism.

For example, in the United Kingdom, there is a rule that the claimant may have to cover

the fees of their opponents, which further exacerbates any cost issues, especially with

lower-income minority groups; also, the only way for environmental justice groups to

hold companies accountable for their pollution and breaking any licensing issues over

waste disposal would be to sue the government for not enforcing rules. This would lead

to the forbidding legal fees that most could not afford. This can be seen by the fact that

out of 210 judicial review cases between 2005 and 2009, 56% did not proceed due to

costs.

Overcoming Barriers

Viewing their communities as disproportionately impacted by environmental degradation

and disproportionately denied access to movements claiming to redress this, many

organizations by and for racialized communities and low-wealth groups began to form in

the 1970s and 80s to address environmental injustices. Their work has come to

collectively form the backbone of the contemporary environmental justice movement,

whose guiding principles were especially documented during the First National People

of Color Environmental Leadership Summit in 1991. Participants in this Summit

established 17 particular Principles of Environmental Justice.

Page 88 of 161

Contributions of the Civil Rights Movement

During the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, activists participated in a social

movement that created a unified atmosphere and advocated goals of social justice and

equality. The community organization and the social values of the era have translated to

the Environmental Justice movement.

Similar Goals and Tactics

The Environmental Justice movement and the Civil Rights Movement have many

commonalities. At their core, the movements' goals are the same: "social justice, equal

protection, and an end to institutional discrimination." By stressing the similarities of the

two movements, it emphasizes that environmental equity is a right for all citizens.

Because the two movements have parallel goals, it is useful to employ similar tactics

that often emerge on the grassroots level. Common confrontational strategies include

protests, neighborhood demonstrations, picketing, political pressure, and

demonstration.

Existing Organizations and Leaders

Just as the civil rights movement of the 1960s began in the South, the fight for

environmental equity has been largely based in the South, where environmental

discrimination is most prominent. In these southern communities, black churches and

other voluntary associations are used to organize resistance efforts, including research

and demonstrations, such as the protest in Warren County, North Carolina. As a result

of the existing community structure, many church leaders and civil rights activists, such

as Reverend Benjamin Chavis Muhammad, have spearheaded the Environmental

Justice movement.

Page 89 of 161

The Bronx, in New York City, has become a recent example of Environmental Justice

succeeding. Majora Carter spearheaded the South Bronx Greenway Project, bringing

local economic development, local urban heat island mitigation, positive social

influences, access to public open space, and aesthetically stimulating environments.

The New York City Department of Design and Construction has recently recognized the

value of the South Bronx Greenway design, and consequently utilized it as a widely

distributed smart growth template. This venture is the ideal shovel-ready project with

over $50 million in funding.

Litigation

Several of the most successful Environmental Justice lawsuits are based on violations

of civil rights laws. The first case to use civil rights as a means to legally challenge the

siting of a waste facility was in 1979. With the legal representation of Linda McKeever

Bullard, the wife of Robert D. Bullard, residents of Houston's Northwood Manor opposed

the decision of the city and Browning Ferris Industries to construct a solid waste facility

near their mostly African-American neighborhood.

In 1979, Northeast Community Action Group, or NECAG, was formed by African

American homeowners in a suburban, middle income neighborhood in order to keep a

landfill out of their home town. This group was the first organization that found the

connection between race and pollution. The group, alongside their attorney Linda

McKeever Bullard started the lawsuit Bean v. Southwestern Waste Management, Inc.,

which was the first of its kind to challenge the sitting of a waste facility under civil rights

law. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was used many

times to defend minority rights during the 1960s, has also been used in numerous

Environmental Justice cases.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is often used in lawsuits that claim environmental

inequality. The two most paramount sections in these cases are sections 601 and 602.

Section 601 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin by any

government agency receiving federal assistance. To win an Environmental Justice case

that claims an agency violated this statute, the plaintiff must prove the agency intended

to discriminate. Section 602 requires agencies to create rules and regulations that

uphold section 601; in Alexander v. Sandoval, the Supreme Court held that plaintiffs

must also show intent to discriminate to successfully challenge the government under

602.

Contributions of the Reproductive Justice Movement

Many participants in the Reproductive Justice Movement see their struggle as linked

with those for environmental justice, and vice versa. Loretta Ross describes the

reproductive justice framework as addressing "the ability of any woman to determine her

own reproductive destiny" and argues this is inextricably "linked directly to the

conditions in her community – and these conditions are not just a matter of individual

Page 90 of 161

choice and access." Such conditions include those central to environmental justice—

including the siting of toxic contamination and pollution of food, air, and waterways.

Mohawk midwife Katsi Cook helps illustrate one link between reproductive and

environmental justice when she explains, "at the breasts of women flows the

relationship of those generations both to society and to the natural world. In this way the

earth is our mother, grandma says. In this way, we as women are the earth." Cook

founded the Mother's Milk Project in the 1980s to address the toxic contamination of

maternal bodies through exposure to fish and water contaminated by a General Motors

Superfund site. In underscoring how contamination disproportionately impacted

Akwesasne women and their children through gestation and breastfeeding, this Project

brought to the fore one of the many intersections between reproductive and

environmental justice.

Affected Groups

Among the affected groups of Environmental Justice, those in high-poverty and racial

minority groups have the most propensity to receive the harm of environmental injustice.

Poor people account for more than 20% of the human health impacts from industrial

toxic air releases, compared to 12.9% of the population nationwide. This does not

account for the inequity found among individual minority groups. Some studies that test

Page 91 of 161

statistically for effects of race and ethnicity, while controlling for income and other

factors, suggest racial gaps in exposure that persist across all bands of income.

African-Americans are affected by a variety of Environmental Justice issues. One

notorious example is the "Cancer Alley" region of Louisiana. This 85-mile stretch of the

Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans is home to 125 companies

that produce one quarter of the petrochemical products manufactured in the United

States. The United States Commission on Civil Rights has concluded that the African-

American community has been disproportionately affected by Cancer Alley as a result

of Louisiana's current state and local permit system for hazardous facilities, as well as

their low socio-economic status and limited political influence. Another incidence of

long-term environmental injustice occurred in the "West Grove" community of Miami,

Florida. From 1925 to 1970, the predominately poor, African American residents of the

"West Grove" endured the negative effects of exposure to carcinogenic emissions and

toxic waste discharge from a large trash incinerator called Old Smokey. Despite official

acknowledgement as a public nuisance, the incinerator project was expanded in 1961. It

was not until the surrounding, predominantly white neighborhoods began to experience

the negative impacts from Old Smokey that the legal battle began to close the

incinerator.

Indigenous groups are often the victims of environmental injustices. Native Americans

have suffered abuses related to uranium mining in the American West. Churchrock,

New Mexico, in Navajo territory was home to the longest continuous uranium mining in

any Navajo land. From 1954 until 1968, the tribe leased land to mining companies who

did not obtain consent from Navajo families or report any consequences of their

activities. Not only did the miners significantly deplete the limited water supply, but they

also contaminated what was left of the Navajo water supply with uranium. Kerr-McGee

and United Nuclear Corporation, the two largest mining companies, argued that the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act did not apply to them, and maintained that Native

American land is not subject to environmental protections. The courts did not force them

to comply with US clean water regulations until 1980.

The most common example of environmental injustice among Latinos is the exposure to

pesticides faced by farmworkers. After DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbon

pesticides were banned in the United States in 1972, farmers began using more acutely

toxic organophosphate pesticides such as parathion. A large portion of farmworkers in

the US are working as undocumented immigrants, and as a result of their political

disadvantage, are not able to protest against regular exposure to pesticides or benefit

from the protections of Federal laws. Exposure to chemical pesticides in the cotton

industry also affects farmers in India and Uzbekistan. Banned throughout much of the

rest of the world because of the potential threat to human health and the natural

environment, Endosulfan is a highly toxic chemical, the safe use of which cannot be

guaranteed in the many developing countries it is used in. Endosulfan, like DDT, is an

organochlorine and persists in the environment long after it has killed the target pests,

leaving a deadly legacy for people and wildlife.

Page 92 of 161

Residents of cities along the US-Mexico border are also affected. Maquiladoras are

assembly plants operated by American, Japanese, and other foreign countries, located

along the US-Mexico border. The maquiladoras use cheap Mexican labor to assemble

imported components and raw material, and then transport finished products back to the

United States. Much of the waste ends up being illegally dumped in sewers, ditches, or

in the desert. Along the Lower Rio Grande Valley, maquiladoras dump their toxic wastes

into the river from which 95 percent of residents obtain their drinking water. In the

border cities of Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico, the rate of anencephaly

(babies born without brains) is four times the national average.

States may also see placing toxic

facilities near poor

neighborhoods as preferential

from a Cost Benefit Analysis

(CBA) perspective. A CBA may

favor placing a toxic facility near

a city of 20,000 poor people than

near a city of 5,000 wealthy

people. Terry Bossert of Range

Resources reportedly has said

that it deliberately locates its

operations in poor

neighbourhoods instead of

wealthy areas where residents

have more money to challenge its practices. Northern California's East Bay Refinery

Corridor is an example of the disparities associated with race and income and proximity

to toxic facilities.

It has been argued that environmental justice issues generally tend to affect women in

communities more so than they affect men. This is due to the way that women typically

interact more closely with their environments at home, such as through handling food

preparation and childcare. Women also tend to be the leaders in environmental justice

activist movements. Despite this, it tends not to be considered a mainstream feminist

issue.

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Government Agencies

In its 2012 environmental justice strategy documents, the U.S. Department of

Agriculture (USDA) stated an ongoing desire to integrate environmental justice into its

core mission, internal operations and programming. It identified ambitious timeframes

for action and promised improved efforts to highlight, track and coordinate EJ activities

among its many sub-agencies. Agency-wide the USDA expanded its perspective on EJ,

so that in addition to preventing disproportionate environmental impacts on EJ

communities, USDA voiced a commitment to improve public participation processes and

Page 93 of 161

use its technical and financial assistance programs to improve the quality of life in all

communities. In 2011, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack emphasized the USDA's

focus on EJ in rural communities around the United States. USDA funds or implements

many creative programs with social and environmental equity goals, however it has no

staff dedicated solely to EJ, and faces the challenges of limited budgets and

coordinating the efforts of a highly diverse agency.

Background

The USDA is the executive agency responsible for federal policy on food, agriculture,

natural resources, and quality of life in rural America. The USDA has more than 100,000

employees and delivers over $96.5 billion in public services to programs worldwide. To

fulfill its general mandate, USDA's departments are organized into seven mission

areas:1) Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services; 2) Food, Nutrition and Consumer

Services; 3) Food Safety; 4) Marketing and Regulatory Programs; 5) Natural Resources

and Environment; 6) Research, Education and Economics and; 7) Rural Development.

In 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations."•

Executive Order 12898 requires that achieving EJ must be part of each federal agency's

mission. Agency programs, policies and activities can lead to health and environmental

effects that disproportionately impact minority and low-income populations. Under

Executive Order 12898 agencies must develop strategies that identify and address

these effects by:

1. promoting enforcement of all health and environmental statutes in areas with

minority and low-income populations;

2. ensuring greater public participation;

3. improving research and data collection relating to the health and environment of

minority and low-income populations; and

4. identifying differential patterns of consumption of natural resources among

minority and low-income populations.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that federal funds be used in a fair and

equitable manner. Under Title VI any federal agency that receives federal funding

cannot discriminate. Title VI also forbids federal agencies from providing grants or

funding opportunities to programs that discriminate. An agency that violates Title VI can

lose its federal funding.

Following E.O. 12898 and USDA's initial EJ strategic plan, USDA issued its internal

Environmental Justice Department Regulation (DR 5600-002) in 1997. Although the

definition of EJ was undergoing updates in 2012, DR 5600-002 defines environmental

justice as "to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, all populations are

Page 94 of 161

provided the opportunity to comment before decisions are rendered on, are allowed to

share in the benefits of, are not excluded from, and are not affected in a

disproportionately high and adverse manner by, government programs and activities

affecting human health or the environment." Patrick Holmes, Special Assistant to the

Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment at USDA, notes that this

definition will be broadened in 2012 so that EJ also includes efforts to improve quality of

life in all communities. In other words, USDA will consider EJ to include avoiding

adverse impacts and ensuring access to environmental benefits. Further, DR 5600-002

identified USDA's goals in implementing Executive Order 12898 as:

To incorporate

environmental

justice

considerations

into USDA's

programs and

activities and to

address

environmental

justice across

mission areas;

To identify,

prevent, and/or

mitigate, to the

greatest extent

practicable,

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of

USDA programs and activities on minority and low-income populations; and

To provide, to the greatest extent practicable, the opportunity for minority and

low-income populations to participate in planning, analysis, and decision-making

that affects their health or environment, including identification of program needs

and designs.

DR 5600-002 is "intended only to improve the internal management of USDA,"• and

although it described concrete, mandatory actions by the agency, it did not establish

new rights or benefits enforceable in court. In April 2011, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack

Page 95 of 161

has stated a more concrete priority to fulfill its mission of environmental justice in rural

areas.

2012 Environmental Justice Strategy

In compliance with the August 2011 Memorandum of Understanding on Environmental

Justice and Executive Order 12898 (MOU), USDA released a final Environmental

Justice Strategic Plan: 2012 to 2014 on February 7, 2012 (Strategic Plan), which

identifies new and updated goals and performance measures beyond what USDA

identified in a 1995 EJ strategy it adopted in response to E.O. 12898. In the same week,

it also released its first annual implementation progress report (Progress Report), as the

MOU also required. The Secretary's message accompanying the Strategic Plan

described two immediate tasks: 1) each agency within USDA is required to identify a

point of contact for EJ issues, at the Senior Executive Service (SES) level; and 2) each

agency must develop its own EJ strategy prior to April 15, 2012, and begin

implementing it as soon as possible. As of May 2012, it did not appear that such

strategies had been made public, although sub-agencies provided internal reports to the

USDA's EJ steering committee on April 9, 2012, according to Holmes. The Secretary's

message contained strong language that, "Given that USDA programs touch almost

every American every day, the Department is well positioned to help in [the

environmental justice] effort." USDA has determined that it can achieve the

requirements of the Executive Order by integrating EJ into its programs, rather than

implementing new and costly programs. The agency took this same approach in an EJ

strategy it adopted in 1995. In some areas, such as agricultural chemicals and effects to

migrant workers, USDA reviews its practices to identify potential disproportionate,

adverse impacts on EJ communities, according to Blake Velde, Senior Environmental

Scientist with the USDA Hazardous Materials Management Division.

Generally, USDA believes its existing technical and financial assistance programs

provide solutions to environmental inequity, such as its initiatives on education, food

deserts, and economic development in impacted communities, and ensuring access to

environmental benefits is the focus of USDA's EJ efforts.

Natural Resources and Environment (NRE) Under Secretary Harris Sherman is the

political appointee generally responsible for USDA's EJ strategy, with Patrick Holmes, a

senior staffer to the Under Secretary, playing a coordinating role. Although USDA has

no staff dedicated solely to EJ, its sub-agencies have many offices dedicated to civil

rights compliance, outreach and communication and environmental review whose

responsibilities incorporate EJ issues. The Strategic Plan was developed with the input

of an Environmental Justice Working Group, made up of staff and leadership

representing the USDA's seven mission areas and the SES-level contacts, which were

appointed in early 2012, serve as a steering committee for the agency's efforts. The

Strategic Plan is organized according to six goals, which were purposefully left broad,

and lists specific objectives and agency performance measures under each goal. The

details and specific implementation of many of these programs and the performance

measures are left to the departments and sub-agencies to develop. The six goals are to:

Page 96 of 161

Ensure USDA programs provide opportunities for EJ communities.

Provide targeted training and capacity-building to EJ communities.

Expand public participation in agency activities, to enhance the "credibility and

public trust"• of the USDA.

Ensure USDA's activities do not have disproportionately high and adverse human

health impacts, and resolve environmental justice issues and complaints.

Increase the awareness of EJ issues among USDA employees.

Update and/or Develop Departmental and Agency Regulations on EJ.

The Strategic Plan also lists existing programs that either currently support the goal, or

are expected to in the future.

According to Holmes, some of the challenges of the Strategic Plan process have

stemmed from the diverse programs and missions that the agency serves, limitations on

staff time, and budgets.

Page 97 of 161

Environmental Justice Initiatives

The Strategic Plan requires that EJ must be integrated into the strategies and

evaluations for sub-agencies' technical and financial assistance programs. It also

emphasizes public participation, community capacity-building, EJ awareness and

training within the USDA.

Transparency, Accountability, Accessibility and Community Participation

A stated goal of USDA's Strategic Plan is to expand public participation in agency

activities, to enhance the "credibility and public trust" of the USDA. Specifically, the

agency will update its public participation guidelines to include EJ, beginning this

process by April 15, 2012. The Strategic Plan emphasizes capacity-building in EJ

communities, and includes objectives that emphasize communication between USDA

and environmental justice communities, including Tribal consultation. Sub-agencies

must announce schedules for training programs in EJ communities and to develop new,

preliminary outreach materials on USDA programs by April 15, 2012. An additional

performance standard is to encourage EJ communities to participate in the NEPA

process, an effort the Strategic Plan requires on or before February 29, 2012, although

the Strategic Plan does not articulate a standard by which this could be measured. The

Strategic Plan also reiterates compliance with the Executive Orders on Tribal

consultation and outreach to non-proficient English speakers, and seeks more diverse

representation on regional forest advisory committees. [community participation,

outreach].

Generally, the USDA's process for developing the Strategic Plan demonstrates a

commitment to public involvement. The USDA EJ documents are currently housed

obscurely within the Departmental Management section of the USDA website, under the

Hazardous Materials Management Division, although the agency plans to update its

entire site in 2012 and create a more robust EJ page. The Strategic Plan was released

in draft form in December 2011 for a 30-day public comment period, and responses to

general types of comments received are in the Progress Report, although the

comments themselves are not online. The Secretary's message accompanying the

Strategic Plan requests that organizations and individuals to continue to contact USDA

with comments on the Strategic Plan and to identify USDA programs that have been the

most beneficial to their communities. The agency has a dedicated email address for this

purpose. Agency leadership has asked its sub-agencies to prepare responses to

additional comments that have been received, and the agency will release an interim

progress report, prior to winter 2013. [community participation, outreach, education]

Internal Evaluation and Training

The Strategic Plan also seeks to increase the awareness of environmental justice

issues among USDA employees. The Strategic Plan does not list any existing programs

in this area, but does list a series of performance measures going forward, most of

which must be met by April 15, 2012. The measures include environmental justice

Page 98 of 161

trainings, new web pages, and potential revisions to staff manuals and handbooks. Subagencies

began reviewing their existing training in 2012 and in their April 9, 2012

reports to the USDA EJ steering committee, sub-agencies were asked to describe their

goals for enhanced EJ training. This internal, educational undertaking appears to be

new in the 2012 Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan targets Responsible Officials,

meaning office and program managers, for the trainings, as well as the SES-level points

of contact required by the Secretary's message. [education, study, compliance and

enforcement]

The EJ Strategy tasked each sub-agency with developing its own EJ strategy document

by spring 2012, although as of May 2012 the sub-agencies were still in an evaluation

stage and had not issued final documents. For many sub-agencies, the 2012 process

has been their first focused assessment of their EJ impact and opportunities. Going

forward, sub-agencies will submit twice-yearly reports to NRE about their

implementation of the Strategic Plan's goals; the first of these was due April 9, 2012,

and as of May 2012, the USDA's EJ steering committee was evaluating the first reports.

Establishment of Performance Metrics

As part of its effort to ensure that EJ communities have the opportunity to participate in

USDA programs, the Strategic Plan requires each sub-agency to set measurements

through which it can track increased EJ community participation in USDA technical and

financial assistance programs. This must be done by April 15, 2012. As of late April

2012, the sub-agencies were still in the process of describing a baseline of current

activities and determining the metrics to evaluate improvement, such as staff time, grant

funding or increased programming. The ultimate metrics are likely to be somewhat

subjective, and must be flexible given the broad range of undertakings by the subagencies.

Also related to evaluation, the Strategic Plan requires the sub-agencies to

determine an effective methodology with which they can evaluate whether USDA

Page 99 of 161

programs have disproportionate impacts. [study, redressing environmental racism,

compliance and enforcement]

Tribal Outreach

Other EJ Initiatives

USDA has had a role in implementing Michelle Obama's Let's Move campaign in tribal

areas, by increasing participation by Bureau of Indian Education schools in Federal

nutrition programs, in the development of community gardens on tribal lands, and in the

development of tribal food policy councils. This is combined with measures to provide

Rural Development funding for community infrastructure in Indian Country. [children's

issues, education, diet, grants, Native Americans, public health].

The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) is working to update its policy on protection and

management of Native American Sacred Sites, an effort that has included listening

sessions and government-to-government consultation. The Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service (APHIS) has also consulted with Tribes regarding management of

reintroduced of species, where Tribes may have a history of subsistence-level hunting

of those species. Meanwhile, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is exploring a

program to use meat from bisons raised on Tribal land to supply AMS food distribution

programs to Tribes. [Native Americans, diet, subsistence, community participation]

The Intertribal Technical Assistance Network works to improve access of Tribal

governments, communities and individuals to USDA technical assistance programs.

Technical and Financial Assistance to Farmers

The Progress Report highlights the NRCS Strike Force Initiative, which has identified

impoverished counties in Mississippi, Georgia and Arkansas to receive increased

outreach and training regarding USDA assistance programs. USDA credits this

increased outreach with generating a 196 percent increase in contracts, representing

more than 250,000 acres of farmland, in its Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

[economic benefit, equitable development, grants, outreach, ej as evaluation criteria]

NRCS works with "private landowners protect their natural resources" through

conservation planning and assistance with the goal of maintaining "productive lands and

healthy ecosystems."• NRCS has its own civil rights compliance guidance document,

and in 2001 NRCS funded and published a study, "Environmental Justice: Perceptions

of Issues, Awareness and Assistance," focused on rural, Southern "Black Belt" counties

and analyzing how the NRCS workforce could more effectively integrate environmental

justice into impacted communities. [compliance and enforcement, redressing

environmental racism, grants, study, ej as evaluation criteria]

The Farm Services Agency in 2011 devoted $100,000 of its Socially Disadvantaged

Farmers and Ranchers program budget to improving its outreach to counties with

persistent poverty, including improving its materials and building relationships with local

Page 100 of 161

universities and community groups. [economic benefit, equitable development, grants,

outreach, ej as evaluation criteria]

In addition, USDA's Risk Management Agency has initiated education and outreach to

low-income farmers regarding use of biological controls, rather than pesticides, for pest

control, efforts that the agency believes are valuable in the face of climate change.

[climate change, agricultural chemicals, education]

Green Jobs and Capacity Building

A 2011 MOU between a USDA sub-agency, the Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS)

and the American Indian Science and Engineering Society that aims to increase the

number of Native Americans entering the FSIS career path; [education, community

participation, economic benefit, green jobs, Native Americans, diet, interagency

collaboration]

A partnership between APHIS and the Rural Coalition (Coalicion)--an alliance of

regionally and culturally diverse organizations working to build a more just and

sustainable food system. The partnership focuses on outreach, fair returns to minority

and other small farmers and rural communities, farmworker working conditions,

environmental protection and food safety. [agricultural chemicals, community

participation, diet, economic benefit, outreach, improving health and safety, ej as

evaluation criteria]

USFS is also funding pilot initiatives, such as its Urban Water Ambassadors, summer

internship positions for youth who coordinate and implement urban tree planting

projects. In 2011, USFS provided a grant to the Maryland Department of Natural

Resources that funded 14 summer jobs for youth in Baltimore to work on urban

watershed restoration programs. [community participation, green jobs, mapping, water]

Page 101 of 161

Mapping

USFS has established several Urban Field Stations, to research urban natural

resources' structure, function, stewardship, and benefits. By mapping urban tree

coverage, the agency hopes to identify and prioritize EJ communities for urban forest

projects. [community education, mapping, diet, improving health and safety, ej as

evaluation criteria]

Another initiative highlighted by the agency is the Food and Nutrition Service and

Economic Research Service's Food Desert Locator. The Locator provides a spatial view

of food deserts, defined as a low-income census tract where a substantial number or

share of residents has low access to a supermarket or large grocery store. It also

shows, by census tract, the number and percentage of certain populations, such as

children, seniors, or households without a vehicle, with low access to grocery stores.

The mapped deserts can be used to direct agency resources to increase access to

fresh fruits and vegetables and other food assistance programs, according to Blake

Velde, an agency scientist and spokesperson on EJ issues. [diet, mapping, improving

health and safety, study, ej as evaluation criteria, services and data available to others]

Rural Outreach

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has placed a clear emphasis on supporting EJ in rural

areas. Although "often the highest profile battles on [environmental justice] issue[s] are

waged in at-risk neighborhoods in major cities or at Superfund sites located near

populated urban and suburban areas" Vilsack highlighted the often overlooked rural

areas where environmental justice is largely ignored.

Through its Rural Utilities Service, the USDA supports a number of Water and

Environmental Programs. These programs work to administer water and wastewater

loans or grants to rural areas and cities to support water and wastewater, storm-water

and solid waste disposal systems, including SEARCH Grants that are targeted to

financially distressed, small rural communities and other opportunities specifically for

Alaskan Native villages and designated Colonies.; In his speech, Secretary Vilsack said

that the USDA funded 2,575 clean water projects in rural areas during a two-year period

to address problems ranging from wastewater treatment to sewage treatment. [water,

land use, compliance and enforcement, improving health and safety, pollution cleanup,

ej as evaluation criteria]

The USDA also supports the Rural Energy for America Grant Program. This program

provides grants and loans to farmers, ranchers and rural small businesses to finance

renewable energy systems and energy efficiency improvements. [grants, economic

benefit, ej as evaluation criteria]

Page 102 of 161

Regulations or Formalized EJ Guidelines

In 1997 the USDA promulgated a departmental regulation providing "direction to [sub-

]agencies for integrating environmental justice considerations into USDA programs and

activities" (DR 5600-002). Issuance of this regulation was a primary goal of USDA's

1995 EJ strategy document. DR 5600-002 includes guidelines for consideration of EJ in

the NEPA process, but also stated that "efforts to address environmental justice are not

limited to NEPA compliance." It requires evaluation of activities for potential

disproportionate EJ impacts, outreach, and performance-metric based evaluation and

reporting on sub-agencies' implementation of EJ goals. DR 5600-002 is a forwardlooking,

permanent directive that applies to all USDA programs and activities. It was not

published in the Federal Register as a formal rulemaking and does not create a private

right of action or enforcement tool. A Strategic Plan goal is to update this regulation, as

well as other departmental regulations and policies on EJ. According to USDA, the EJ

definition in DR 5600-002 will be modified in 2012—EJ to include measures to avoid

disproportionate negative impacts as well as quality-of-life improvements that the

agency believes can benefit impacted communities.

The Strategic Plan also has established a performance standard requiring that existing

and new USDA regulations are evaluated for EJ impacts or benefits. Sub-agencies are

required to develop a process for this evaluation by April 15, 2012. This performance

standard reflects a requirement in DR 5600-002 that required the USDA departmental

regulation on rulemaking, DR 1521-1, to be revised to require an EJ evaluation in the

Page 103 of 161

rulemaking process. As of 2012, DR 1521-1 requires that a cost-benefit analysis of

major human health, safety and environmental regulations include analysis of risks to

"persons who are disproportionately exposed or particularly sensitive," although DR

1521-1 does not mention EJ or impacts to minority or low-income communities

explicitly. [Land Use - permitting, community participation, compliance and enforcement,

study]

Enforcement

The Strategic Plan sets an enforcement-specific goal, which includes objectives to

"effectively resolve or adjudicate all environmental justice-related Title VI complaints"

and to include environmental justice as a key component of civil rights compliance

reviews. Agencies are also required to identify an assessment methodology by April 15,

2012, which can be used to determine whether programs have disproportionately high

and adverse environmental and human health impacts. The NRCS has published and

updated a Civil Rights Compliance Review Guide, which guides the NRCS Civil Rights

Division's review of the compliance with Title VI and 12898 in the agency's state offices,

field offices and other facilities. The guide was updated in November 2011 and it does

not mention EJ explicitly. However, the Strategic Plan identifies the NRCS compliance

review and other outreach and research programs as supporting its EJ enforcement

goals [compliance and enforcement].

NEPA

The 1997 Regulation, DR 5600-2 required USDA sub-agencies to develop their own

NEPA environmental justice guidance documents. The sub-agencies have done so,

with some additional details, such as a reminder that the EJ community should be

involved in identifying the alternatives, suggested stakeholders and resources, and

guidance to hold meetings at times when working people can get to them, and to

translate notices. When DR 5600-02 is updated as required by the Strategic Plan,

changes could be made to the NEPA section of the Regulation. The Strategic Plan sets

a performance standard to encourage interested environmental justice communities to

be involved in the public participation process for NEPA documents, although the

Strategic Plan does not require updates to the NEPA portions of DR 5600-02.

Although the USDA has integrated EJ into each step of the NEPA process as required

by Executive Order 12898, many of the NEPA documents completed by the USDA

include only cursory analysis of environmental justice effects. This analysis most often

includes a rote paragraph as to what Executive Order 12898 requires and a quick

conclusion that the agency action does not affect minority and low-income populations.

Some examples where the USDA included more in-depth analysis are:

Descriptions of the minority and low-income populations that live in the study

area;

Page 104 of 161

Impacts relevant to socio-economic environment including changes in

employment and income variations in the distribution of social welfare.

[community participation, education, outreach, ej as evaluation criteria]

Permitting

The USDA does not have any permitting initiatives specific to EJ.

Title VI

The USDA has an Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Civil Rights whose mission it is to

provide leadership and direction "for the fair

and equitable treatment of all USDA

customers."

In 2003 the USDA revised DR 4300-4, internal

regulations requiring a Civil Rights Impact

Analysis of all "policies, actions or decisions"

affecting the USDA's federally conducted and

federally assisted programs or activities. The

analysis is used to determine the "scope,

intensity, direction, duration, and significance of

the effects of an agency's proposed ... policies,

actions or decisions." USDA's departmental

regulation on EJ, DR 5600-002, required DR

4300-4 to be revised to "require that Civil Rights

Impact Analyses include a finding as to whether

proposed or new actions have or do not have a

disproportionately high and adverse effect on the human health or the environment of

minority populations, and whether such effects can be prevented or mitigated". Although

DR 4300-4 was revised in 2003, the revised regulation does not explicitly require a

finding on adverse environmental or health impacts. [study, compliance and

enforcement]

Right-to-Know Movement

Right to know, in the context of United States workplace and community environmental

law, is the legal principle that the individual has the right to know the chemicals to which

they may be exposed in their daily living.

Emergency Planning and Right to Know Act of 1986

After the Bhopal disaster, where a Union Carbide plant released forty tons of methyl

isocyanate into the atmosphere in a village just south of Bhopal, India, the U.S.

government passed the Emergency Planning and Right to Know Act of 1986.

Page 105 of 161

Introduced by Henry Waxman, the act required all corporations to report their toxic

chemical pollution annually, which was then gathered into a report known as the Toxics

Release Inventory (TRI).

Corporate Toxics Information Report

The Corporate Toxics Information Project (CTIP) was founded on the guidelines that

they will "[develop] and [disseminate] information and analysis on corporate releases of

pollutants and the consequences for communities". The overarching goal was to help

take corporations into account for their pollution habits, by collecting information and

putting it in databases so to make it available to the general public. The four goals of the

project were to develop 1) corporate rankings, 2) regional reports, based on state,

region, and metropolitan areas, 3) industry reports, based on industrial sectors, and 4)

to create a web-based resource open to the entire population, that can depict all the

collected data. The data collection would be done by the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and then analyzed and disseminated by the PERI institute.

One of the biggest projects of CTIP was the Toxic 100. The Toxic 100 is an index of the

top 100 air polluters around the United States in terms of the country's largest

corporations. The list is based on the EPA's Risk Screening Environmental Indicators

(RSEI), which "assesses the chronic human health risk from industrial toxic releases",

as well as the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), which is where the corporations must

report their chemical releases to the US government. Since its original publishing date

in 2004, the Toxic 100 has been updated five times, with the latest update in 2016.

Around the world

In recent years environmental justice campaigns have also emerged in other parts of

the world, such as India, South Africa, Israel, Nigeria, Mexico, Hungary, Uganda, and

the United Kingdom. In Europe for example, there is evidence to suggest that the

Romani people and other minority groups of non-European descent are suffering from

environmental inequality and discrimination.

Europe

In Europe, the Romani peoples are ethnic minorities and differ from the rest of the

European people by their culture, language, and history. The environmental

discrimination that they experience ranges from the unequal distribution of

environmental harms as well as the unequal distribution of education, health services

and employment. In many countries Romani peoples are forced to live in the slums

because many of the laws to get residence permits are discriminatory against them.

This forces Romani people to live in urban "ghetto" type housing or in shantytowns. In

the Czech Republic and Romania, the Romani peoples are forced to live in places that

have less access to running water and sewage, and in Ostrava, Czech Republic, the

Romani people live in apartments located above an abandoned mine, which emits

methane. Also in Bulgaria, the public infrastructure extends throughout the town of Sofia

Page 106 of 161

until it reaches the Romani village where there is very little water access or sewage

capacity.

The European Union is trying to strive towards

environmental justice by putting into effect

declarations that state that all people have a right to

a healthy environment. The Stockholm Declaration,

the 1987 Brundtland Commission's Report – "Our

Common Future", the Rio Declaration, and Article

37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the

European Union, all are ways that the Europeans

have put acts in place to work toward environmental

justice. Europe also funds action-oriented projects that work on furthering

Environmental Justice throughout the world. For example, EJOLT (Environmental

Justice Organizations, Liabilities and Trade) is a large multinational project

supported through the FP7 Science in Society budget line from the European

[further explanation needed]

Commission. From March 2011 to March 2015, 23 civil society

organizations and universities from 20 countries in Europe, Africa, Latin-America, and

Asia are, and have promised to work together on advancing the cause of Environmental

Justice. EJOLT is building up case studies, linking organizations worldwide, and making

an interactive global map of Environmental Justice.

Sweden

Sweden became the first country to ban DDT in 1969 due to the efforts of women

protesting its usage in forests. In the 1980s, women activists organized around

preparing jam made from pesticide-tainted berries, which they offered to the members

of parliament. Parliament members refused, and this has often been cited as an

example of direct action within ecofeminism.

United Kingdom

Whilst the predominant agenda of the Environmental Justice movement in the United

States has been tackling issues of race, inequality, and the environment, environmental

justice campaigns around the world have developed and shifted in focus. For example,

the EJ movement in the United Kingdom is quite different. It focuses on issues of

poverty and the environment, but also tackles issues of health inequalities and social

exclusion. A UK-based NGO, named the Environmental Justice Foundation, has sought

to make a direct link between the need for environmental security and the defense of

basic human rights. They have launched several high profile campaigns that link

environmental problems and social injustices. A campaign against illegal, unreported

and unregulated (IUU) fishing highlighted how 'pirate' fisherman are stealing food from

local, artisanal fishing communities. They have also launched a campaign exposing the

environmental and human rights abuses involved in cotton production in Uzbekistan.

Cotton produced in Uzbekistan is often harvested by children for little or no pay. In

addition, the mismanagement of water resources for crop irrigation has led to the near

Page 107 of 161

eradication of the Aral Sea. The Environmental Justice Foundation has successfully

petitioned large retailers such as Walmart and Tesco to stop selling Uzbek cotton.

Building of Alternatives to Climate Change

In France, numerous Alternatiba events, or villages of alternatives, are providing

hundreds of alternatives to climate change and lack of environmental justice, both in

order to raise people's awareness and to stimulate behavior change. They have been or

will be organized in over sixty different French and European cities, such as Bilbao,

Brussels, Geneva, Lyon or Paris.

South Africa

Under colonial and apartheid governments in South Africa, thousands of black South

Africans were removed from their ancestral lands to make way for game parks. Earthlife

Africa was formed in 1988 (www.earthlife.org.za), making it Africa's first environmental

justice organization. In 1992, the Environmental Justice Networking Forum (EJNF), a

nationwide umbrella organization designed to coordinate the activities of environmental

activists and organizations interested in social and environmental justice, was created.

By 1995, the network expanded to include 150 member organizations and by 2000, it

included over 600 member organizations.

With the election of the African National Congress (ANC) in 1994, the environmental

justice movement gained an ally in government. The ANC noted "poverty and

environmental degradation have been closely linked" in South Africa. The ANC made it

clear that environmental inequalities and injustices would be addressed as part of the

party's post-apartheid reconstruction and development mandate. The new South African

Constitution, finalized in 1996, includes a Bill of Rights that grants South Africans the

right to an "environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being" and "to have the

environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations through

reasonable legislative and other measures that

1. prevent pollution and ecological degradation;

2. promote conservation; and

3. secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while

promoting justifiable economic and social development".

South Africa's mining industry is the largest single producer of solid waste, accounting

for about two-thirds of the total waste stream. Tens of thousands of deaths have

occurred among mine workers as a result of accidents over the last century. There have

been several deaths and debilitating diseases from work-related illnesses like

asbestosis. For those who live next to a mine, the quality of air and water is poor. Noise,

dust, and dangerous equipment and vehicles can be threats to the safety of those who

live next to a mine as well. These communities are often poor and black and have little

choice over the placement of a mine near their homes. The National Party introduced a

new Minerals Act that began to address environmental considerations by recognizing

Page 108 of 161

the health and safety concerns of workers and the need for land rehabilitation during

and after mining operations. In 1993, the Act was amended to require each new mine to

have an Environmental Management Program Report (EMPR) prepared before

breaking ground. These EMPRs were intended to force mining companies to outline all

the possible environmental impacts of the particular mining operation and to make

provision for environmental management.

In October 1998, the Department of Minerals and Energy released a White Paper

entitled A Minerals and Mining Policy for South Africa, which included a section on

Environmental Management.

The White Paper states "Government, in recognition of the responsibility of the State as

custodian of the nation's natural resources, will ensure that the essential development of

the country's mineral resources will take place within a framework of sustainable

development and in accordance with national environmental policy, norms, and

standards". It adds that any environmental policy "must ensure a cost-effective and

competitive mining industry."

Page 109 of 161

Australia

In Australia, the "Environmental Justice Movement" is not defined as it is in the United

States. Australia does have some discrimination mainly in the siting of hazardous waste

facilities in areas where the people are not given proper information about the company.

The injustice that takes place in Australia is defined as environmental politics on who

get the unwanted waste site or who has control over where factory opens up. The

movement towards equal environmental politics focuses more on who can fight for

companies to build, and takes place in the parliament; whereas, in the United States

Environmental Justice is trying to make nature safer for all people.

Ecuador

An example of the environmental injustices that indigenous groups face can be seen in

the Chevron-Texaco incident in the Amazon rainforest. Texaco, which is now Chevron,

found oil in Ecuador in 1964 and built sub-standard oil wells to cut costs. The

deliberately used inferior technology to make their operations cheaper, even if

detrimental to the local people and environment. After the company left in 1992, they left

approximately one thousand toxic waste pits open and dumped billions of gallons of

toxic water into the rivers.

South Korea

South Korea has a relatively short history of environmental justice compared to other

countries in the west. As a result of rapid industrialization, people started to have

awareness on pollution, and from the environmental discourses the idea of

environmental justice appeared. The concept of environmental justice appeared in

South Korea in late 1980s.

South Korea experienced rapid economic growth (which is commonly referred to as the

'Miracle on the Han River') in the 20th century as a result of industrialization policies

adapted by Park Chung-hee after 1970s. The policies and social environment had no

room for environmental discussions, which aggravated the pollution in the country.

Environmental movements in South Korea started from air pollution campaigns. As the

notion of environment pollution spread, the focus on environmental activism shifted from

existing pollution to preventing future pollution, and the organizations eventually started

to criticize the government policies that are neglecting the environmental issues. The

concept of environmental justice was introduced in South Korea among the discussions

of environment after 1990s. While the environmental organizations analyzed the

condition of pollution in South Korea, they noticed that the environmental problems were

inequitably focused especially on regions where people with low social and economic

status were concentrated.

The problems of environmental injustice have arisen by environment related

organizations, but approaches to solve the problems were greatly supported by the

Page 110 of 161

government, which developed various policies and launched institution. These actions

helped raise awareness of environmental justice in South Korea. Existing environment

policies were modified to cover environmental justice issues.

Environmental justice began to be widely recognized in the 1990s through policy

making and researches of related institutions. For example, the Ministry of Environment,

which was founded in 1992, launched Citizen's Movement for Environmental Justice

(CMEJ) to raise awareness of the problem and figure out appropriate plans. As a part of

its activities, Citizen's Movement for Environmental Justice (CMEJ) held Environmental

Justice forum in 1999, to gather and analyze the existing studies on the issue which

were done sporadically by various organizations. Citizen's Movement for Environmental

Justice (CMEJ) started as a small organization, but it is keep growing and expanding. In

2002, CMEJ had more than 5 times the numbers of members and 3 times the budget it

had in the beginning year.

Environmental injustice is still an ongoing problem. One example is the construction of

Saemangeum Seawall. The construction of Saemangeum Seawall, which is the world's

longest dyke (33 kilometers) runs between Yellow Sea and Saemangeum estuary, was

part of a government project initiated in 1991. The project raised concerns on the

destruction of ecosystem and taking away the local residential regions. It caught the

attention of environmental justice activists because the main victims were low-income

fishing population and their future generations. This is considered as an example of

environmental injustice which was caused by the execution of exclusive developmentcentered

policy.

The construction of Seoul-Incheon canal also raised environmental justice

controversies. The construction took away the residential regions and farming areas of

the local residents. Also, the environment worsened in the area because of the

appearance of wet fogs which was caused by water deprivation and local climate

changes caused by the construction of canal. The local residents, mostly people with

weak economic basis, were severely affected by the construction and became the main

Page 111 of 161

victims of such environmental damages. While the socially and economically weak

citizens suffered from the environmental changes, most of the benefits went to the

industries and conglomerates with political power.

Construction of industrial complex was also criticized in the context of environmental

justice. The conflict in Wicheon region is one example. The region became the center of

controversy when the government decided to build industrial complex of dye houses,

which were formerly located in Daegu metropolitan region. As a result of the

construction, Nakdong River, which is one of the main rivers in South Korea, was

contaminated and local residents suffered from environmental changes caused by the

construction.

Environmental justice is a growing issue in South Korea. Although the issue is not yet

widely recognized compared to other countries, many organizations beginning to

recognize the issue.

Between Northern and Southern Countries

Environmental discrimination in a global perspective is also an important factor when

examining the Environmental Justice movement. Even though the Environmental

Justice movement began in the United States, the United States also contributes to

expanding the amount of environmental injustice that takes place in less-developed

countries. Some companies in the United States and in other developed nations around

the world contribute to the injustice by shipping the toxic waste and byproducts of

factories to less-developed countries for disposal. This act increases the amount of

waste in the third world countries, most of which do not have proper sanitation for their

own waste much less the waste of another country. Often, the people of the lessdeveloped

countries are exposed to toxins from this waste and do not even realize what

kind of waste they are encountering or the health problems that could come with it.

One prominent example of northern countries shipping their waste to southern countries

took place in Haiti. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania had ash from the incineration of toxic

waste that they did not have room to dump. Philadelphia decided to put the ash into the

hands of a private company, which shipped the ash and dumped it in various other parts

of the world, outside of the United States. The Khian Sea, the ship the ash was put on,

sailed around the world and many countries would not accept the waste because it was

hazardous for the environment and the people. The ship owners finally dumped the

waste, labeled Fertilizer, in Haiti, on the beach, and sailed away in the night. The

government of Haiti was infuriated and called for the waste to be removed, but the

company would not come to take the ash away. The fighting over who was responsible

for the waste and who would remove the waste went on for many years. After debating

for over ten years, the waste was removed and taken back to a site just outside

Philadelphia to be disposed of permanently.

The reason that this transporting of waste from Northern countries to the Southern

countries takes place is because it is cheaper to transport waste to another country and

dump it there, than to pay to dump the waste in the producing country because the third

Page 112 of 161

world countries do not have the same strict industry regulations as the more developed

countries. The countries that the waste is taken to are usually impoverished and the

governments have little or no control over the happenings in the country or do not care

about the people.

Transnational Movement Networks

Many of the Environmental Justice Networks that began in the United States expanded

their horizons to include many other countries and became Transnational Networks for

Environmental Justice. These networks work to bring Environmental Justice to all parts

of the world and protect all citizens of the world to reduce the environmental injustice

happening all over the world. Listed below are some of the major Transnational Social

Movement Organizations.

Basel Action Network – works to end toxic waste dumping in poor undeveloped

countries from the rich developed countries.

GAIA (Global Anti-Incinerator Alliance) – works to find different ways to dispose

of waste other than incineration. This company has people working in over 77

countries throughout the world.

Page 113 of 161

GR (Global Response) – works to educate activists and the upper working class

how to protect human rights and the ecosystem.

Greenpeace International – which was the first organization to become the global

name of Environmental Justice. Greenpeace works to raise the global

consciousness of transnational trade of toxic waste.

Health Care without Harm – works to improve the public health by reducing the

environmental impacts of the health care industry.

International Campaign for Responsible Technology – works to promote

corporate and government accountability with electronics and how the disposal of

technology affect the environment.

International POPs Elimination Network – works to reduce and eventually end

the use of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) which are harmful to the

environment.

PAN (Pesticide Action Network) – works to replace the use of hazardous

pesticides with alternatives that are safe for the environment.

Page 114 of 161

VI. Resource & Distributive

Injustice

Resource Justice (also referred to as "resource equity" or "resource

governance") is a term in environmentalism and in environmental ethics. It combines

elements of distributive justice and environmental justice and is based on the

observation that many countries rich in natural resources such as minerals and

other raw materials nevertheless experience high levels of poverty. This resource

curse is one of the main ethical reasons to demand resource justice, that is, a globally

fair distribution of all natural resources.

Factors Leading to Resource Injustice

Countries' income inequality according to their Gini coefficient – red = high, green = low

inequality (World Bank, 2014)

The term resource justice as a subcategory of distributive justice was first developed

following the repeated observation that natural resources that, supposedly, are a

blessing for local populations, turn out to be a curse. This can manifest itself in a

Page 115 of 161

number of ways – and for a number of reasons, some of which occur in isolation but

more often arise together. Some examples are:

Mining or oil drilling result in severe damage to the environment, for example

through oil spills, environmental degradation, or contamination.

The extraction of resources leads to extreme forms of exploitation of labour and /

or creates very hazardous working conditions.

Resources are being controlled by a small elite that makes or embezzles all the

profits. This often goes along with corruption.

People are forced off their land to make place for resource extraction or for

large monocultural plantations.

Resources in the developing world are being extracted by companies from

industrialized countries, with most of the profits going to the latter.

Companies extract genetic material, which is then commercially farmed or bred –

and often patented.

Approaches Towards Greater Resource Justice

Capacity building and external support in order to empower "communities affected by

oil, gas, and mining operations" so that they themselves are able to determine how local

resources are being used. In addition, mechanisms have to be developed to make sure

that finite resources are distributed in an equitable way so that poor nations' right to

development is not denied. The memorandum Resource Politics for a Fair Future,

published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation lists three criteria for a "fair and sustainable

Resource Politics", namely:

to "secure the rights of people and nature over markets and profits" and

empower them to demand their rights;

to return the "control over natural resources, financial capital and technologies

(...) into the hands of the people;

to "transform production, consumption and livelihoods" in ways that enable

people to live in a world of global equity.

________

Distributive Justice concerns the socially just allocation of goods. Often contrasted

with just process, which is concerned with the administration of law, distributive justice

concentrates on outcomes. This subject has been given considerable attention in

Page 116 of 161

philosophy and the social sciences. Distributive justice is fundamental to the Catholic

Church's social teaching, inspiring such figures as Dorothy Day and Pope John Paul II.

In social psychology, distributive justice is defined as perceived fairness of how rewards

and costs are shared by (distributed across) group members. For example, when some

workers work more hours but receive the same pay, group members may feel that

distributive justice has not occurred.

To determine whether distributive justice has taken place, individuals often turn to

the behavioral expectations of their group. If rewards and costs are allocated according

to the designated distributive norms of the group, distributive justice has occurred.

Types of Distributive Norms

Five types of distributive norm are defined by Donelson R. Forsyth:

1. Equality: Regardless of their inputs, all group members should be given an

equal share of the rewards/costs. Equality supports that someone who

Page 117 of 161

contributes 20% of the group's resources should receive as much as someone

who contributes 60%. .

2. Equity: Members' outcomes should be based upon their inputs. Therefore, an

individual who has invested a large amount of input (e.g. time, money, energy)

should receive more from the group than someone who has contributed very

little. Members of large groups prefer to base allocations of rewards and costs on

equity.

3. Power: Those with more authority, status, or control over the group should

receive less than those in lower level positions.

4. Need: Those in greatest needs should be provided with resources needed to

meet those needs. These individuals should be given more resources than those

who already possess them, regardless of their input.

5. Responsibility: Group members who have the most should share their

resources with those who have less.

Outcomes

Distributive justice affects performance when efficiency and productivity are

involved. Improving perceptions of justice increases performance. Organizational

citizenship behaviors (OCBs) are employee actions in support of the organization that

are outside the scope of their job description. Such behaviors depend on the degree to

which an organization is perceived to be distributively just. As organizational actions

and decisions are perceived as more just, employees are more likely to engage in

OCBs. Perceptions of distributive justice are also strongly related also to the withdrawal

of employees from the organization.

Wealth

Distributive justice considers whether the distribution of goods among the members of

society at a given time is subjectively acceptable.

Not all advocates of consequentialist theories are concerned with an equitable society.

What unites them is the mutual interest in achieving the best possible results or, in

terms of the example above, the best possible distribution of wealth.

Environmental Justice

Distributive justice in an environmental context is the equitable distribution of a society's

technological and environmental risks, impacts, and benefits. These burdens include air

pollution, landfills, industrial factories, and other environmental burdens.

Page 118 of 161

Distributive justice is an essential principle of environmental justice because there is

evidence that shows that these burdens cause health problems, negatively affect quality

of life, and drive down property value.

The potential negative social impacts of environmental degradation and regulatory

policies have been at the center environmental discussions since the rise of

environmental justice. Historically, in the United States, environmental burdens fall on

poor communities that are predominantly African-American, Native-American, Latino,

and Appalachian.

In Policy Positions

Distributive justice theory argues that societies have a duty to individuals in need and

that all individuals have a duty to help others in need. Proponents of distributive justice

link it to human rights.

Many governments are known for dealing with issues of distributive justice, especially

countries with ethnic tensions and geographically distinctive minorities.

Post-apartheid South Africa is an example of a country that deals with issues of reallocating

resources with respect to the distributive justice framework.

________

Redistributive Justice is the equalization of property and wealth ownership by

direct political fiat. It includes taxation designed to move wealth from one group to

another, "land reform" and other means to promote "equality”. It is frequently associated

with Marxism, socialism, or the transition from aristocracy or other form of oligarchy to

more broadly based governments.

Justice is relative in this regard as to the beneficiary of the redistribution versus

the donor/s and may not reflect concepts of social justice. The source of the wealth to

be redistributed is therefore an important component of the actual justice of the

redistribution. Whether the donation is voluntary or being co-opted by force is a key

determination of justice. Redistributive justice is appealed to when wealth redistribution

is justified on utilitarian grounds and when these grounds are used to override individual

rights and property rights.

We [who?] should distinguish between distributive and redistributive systems. Distributive

justice is where the government has an income or an asset that it owns (e.g. oil

reserves) and it distributes the wealth as it sees fit to its concept of

justice. Redistributive justice is exercised by government through taxation or

expropriation of property. Redistributive justice removes wealth from some members of

society under the government's jurisdiction through governmental powers, for the

benefit of others whom the government determines as in need or deserving.

Page 119 of 161

Page 120 of 161

VII. Social Justice Warriors

"Social Justice Warrior" (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who

promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights,

and multiculturalism. The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that

they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and

engaging in disingenuous arguments.

The phrase originated in the late 20th century as a neutral or positive term for people

engaged in social justice activism. In 2011, when the term first appeared on Twitter, it

changed from a primarily positive term to an overwhelmingly negative one. During

the Gamergate controversy, the negative connotation gained increased use, and was

particularly aimed at those espousing views adhering to social liberalism, cultural

inclusivity, or feminism, as well as views deemed to be politically correct.

Page 121 of 161

Origin

Original Meaning

Dating back to 1824, the term social justice refers to justice on a societal level. From the

early 1990s to the early 2000s, social-justice warrior was used as a neutral or

complimentary phrase, as when a 1991 Montreal Gazette article describes union

activist Michel Chartrand as a "Quebec nationalist and social-justice warrior".

Katherine Martin, the head of U.S. dictionaries at Oxford University Press, said in 2015

that "[a]ll of the examples I've seen until quite recently are lionizing the person". As of

2015, the Oxford English Dictionary had not done a full search for the earliest usage.

Pejorative Meaning

"the 'social justice warrior,' i.e., the stereotype of the feminist as unreasonable,

sanctimonious, biased, and self-aggrandizing."

Scott Selisker

According to Martin, the term switched from primarily positive to negative around 2011,

when it was first used as an insult on Twitter. The term's negative use became

mainstream due to the 2014 Gamergate controversy, emerging as the favored term of

Gamergate proponents to describe their ideological opponents. In Internet and video

game culture the phrase is broadly associated with the Gamergate controversy and

wider culture war, including the 2015 Sad Puppies campaign that affected the Hugo

Awards. Usage of the term as a pejorative was popularized on websites such

as Reddit, 4chan, and Twitter.

Description

The negative connotation has primarily been aimed at those espousing views adhering

to social progressivism, cultural inclusivity, or feminism. This usage implies that a

person is engaging in disingenuous social justice arguments or activism to raise his or

her personal reputation. Allegra Ringo writes for Vice that "in other words, SJWs don't

hold strong principles, but they pretend to. The problem is, that's not a real category of

people. It's simply a way to dismiss anyone who brings up social justice."

The term is commonly used by participants in online discussion in criticism of

feminism. Scott Selisker, writes in New Literary History, "[Forum participants] often

make personal criticisms of what they see as a type: the 'social justice warrior,' i.e., the

stereotype of the feminist as unreasonable, sanctimonious, biased, and selfaggrandizing".

In August 2015, social justice warrior was one of several new words and phrases added

to Oxford Dictionaries. Martin states that "the perceived orthodoxy [of progressive

politics] has prompted a backlash among people who feel their speech is being policed".

Page 122 of 161

Use of the term has been described as attempting to degrade the motivations of the

person accused of being an SJW, implying that their motives are "for personal validation

rather than out of any deep-seated conviction".

Page 123 of 161

Page 124 of 161

VIII. References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_justice

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality

5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_for_Justice

6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_justice

7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_justice

8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_justice

9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistributive_justice

10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior

11. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310769309_Social_Justice_Theory

12.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273366488_Defining_Social_Justice_in_a_Soc

ially_Unjust_World

13.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318075767_Social_justice_and_the_formal_pri

nciple_of_freedom/link/5957d353aca272c78abc8653/download

Page 125 of 161

Notes

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Page 126 of 161

Notes

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Page 127 of 161

Page 128 of 161

Attachment A

Social Justice Theory

Page 129 of 161

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310769309


Chapter · January 2011

CITATIONS

0

READS

16,209

3 authors:

Erin Ayala

Saint Mary's University of Minnesota

15 PUBLICATIONS 158 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Sally Hage

Springfield College


SEE PROFILE

Melanie M. Wilcox

Oklahoma State University - Oklahoma City


SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Women in Health Service Psychology View project

qualitative research class View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Erin Ayala on 24 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2794

S Social

Justice Theory

memory also necessarily is involved in social intelligence;

it allows for storing and recalling social information.

This type of memory typically is

(operationalized) as a memory for name and faces

but may cover a broader range of contents (Kosmitzki

and John 1993). Social intelligence also involves social

knowledge, which involves the “procedural” social

memory associated with memory and understanding

(Weis and Süß 2007). Added to these aspects of social

memory would be the ability to deal with people and

use appropriate social techniques in interactions with

others. These more developed definitions continue to

address Thorndike’s (1920) differentiation between

a cognitive component (involving understanding social

relationships) and behavioral component (involving

the management of relationships) of social intelligence.

Despite the significance of social intelligence to

social functioning, research in this area has not developed

considerably. Nor has this area of study focused

much on the period of adolescence or considered fully

the developmental components of what would constitute

social intelligence. Rather than focus on social

intelligence itself, the study of adolescence has focused

more on related areas such as social skills, selfregulation,

and interactions with peers and family

members. These areas of research are all related closely

to social intelligence, but they do not address it directly

to develop, for example, measures that would assess

social intelligence in a way that intelligence is assessed,

which is what the field of social intelligence has

attempted to do but mainly with adults. This area of

research remains a potentially fruitful one if it would

specifically focus on adolescents and youth to understand

better the developmental roots, changes, and

nature of social intelligence.

Cross-References

▶ Emotional Intelligence

References

Kloep, M. (1999). Love is all you need? Focusing on adolescents’ life

concerns from an ecological point of view. Journal of Adolescence,

22, 49–63.

Kosmitzki, C., & John, O. (1993). The implicit use of explicit

conceptions of social intelligence. Personality and Individual

Differences, 15, 11–23.

Spear, L. P. (2000). The adolescent brain and age-related behavioral

manifestations. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 24,

417–463.

Thorndike, E. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s Magazine,

140, 227–235.

Weis, S., & Süß, H. (2007). Reviving the search for social intelligence-

A multitrait-multimethod study of its structure and construct

validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 3–14.

William, D., Killgore, S., & Yurgelun-Todd, D. A. (2007). Neural

correlates of emotional intelligence in adolescent children.

Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 140–151.


SALLY M. HAGE, ERIN E. RING, MELANIE M. LANTZ

Division of Counseling Psychology, University at

Albany, Albany, NY, USA

Overview

The intent of this essay is to provide a concise overview

of the relevance and implications of social justice theory

to adolescence. To begin, a description of what is

meant by the term “social justice” is presented. Next,

the relevance of social justice theory to adolescence is

described, and relevant research addressing critical

social justice issues in adolescent populations is explicated.

Finally, future research directions and the implications

of a social justice approach to work with

adolescents are discussed.

Introduction

For several reasons, social justice theory is important to

consider in the context of adolescence. Research has

shown that the effects of social injustice are deleterious

in the adolescent population. Poverty and family dysfunction

serve as risk factors for a number of setbacks

in adolescence, including mental, emotional, and

behavioral disorders, delayed cognitive development,

and poor physical well-being (O’Connell et al. 2009).

Furthermore, these negative effects disproportionately

affect the lives of children and adolescents. The rate of

children and youth living in poverty in America has

been consistently higher than that of adults for decades,

more than 1½ times higher, and this rate continues to

increase. For example, the percentage of adolescent

children (ages 12–17) living in low-income families

increased from 33% in 2000 to 36% in 2008 (Wight

and Chau 2009).


S 2795

Furthermore, it is children and adolescents within

communities of color, who are often among those most

negatively impacted by situations of inequality and

injustice. For example, ethnic minority children and

those in low-income households are more likely to

experience heightened rates of violence and less likely

to live in neighborhoods that offer resources such as

parks, museums, and libraries (O’Connell et al. 2009).

Neighborhoods without such features are less able to

promote the positive development and well-being of

young people (O’Connell et al. 2009). Before delving

into this research, it is important to provide a clear

definition of the term “social justice.”

Defining Social Justice

Social justice is generally defined as the fair and equitable

distribution of power, resources, and obligations

in society to all people, regardless of race or ethnicity,

age, gender, ability status, sexual orientation, and religious

or spiritual background (Van den Bos 2003).

Fundamental principles underlying this definition

include values of inclusion, collaboration, cooperation,

equal access, and equal opportunity. Such values are

also the foundation of a democratic and egalitarian

society (Sue 2001). In addition, a crucial link exists

between social justice and overall health and wellbeing.

For individuals, the absence of justice often

represents increased physical and emotional suffering

as well as greater vulnerability to illness. Furthermore,

social justice issues and access to resources are also

inexorably tied to collective well-being (e.g., relationships

and political welfare) of families, communities,

and society (Hage 2005; Kenny and Hage 2009;

Prilleltensky and Nelson 2002).

Effects of Inequality on Adolescents

Much research documents the adverse effects of poverty

and inequality on the physical, psychological, and

social development of adolescents (e.g., Evans and Kim

2007; Hay et al. 2007; Wadsworth et al. 2008; Young

et al. 2001). For example, Abernathy et al. (2002) noted

that adverse health outcomes start in infancy, as poverty

is associated with higher rates of infant mortality.

In their study, they assessed how the home environment

and family income level affect adolescents’ physical

well-being. Results showed that negative healthrelated

behaviors were associated with lower levels of

income. Specifically, adolescents living in lowerincome

families were more likely to live in a smoking

household, more likely to smoke cigarettes themselves,

and were less physically active. Adolescents in lowerincome

families were also less likely to have a regular

physician (Abernathy et al. 2002).

Elgar et al. (2005) also found evidence of

a relationship between negative health behaviors and

socioeconomic status. These authors investigate the

effects of national-level income inequality – that is,

income disparities between the rich and poor – on

negative health behaviors, such as drinking and

smoking. Elgar et al. (2005) assessed the relationship

between living in a country with higher levels of

income inequality and alcohol consumption among

11, 13, and 15-year-olds. They found that the 11- and

13-year-olds living in countries with more income

inequality were significantly more likely to drink alcohol.

They were also more likely to drink more often,

and the 11-year-olds were more likely to drink until

a state of drunkenness was achieved (Elgar et al. 2005).

Much literature confirms the link between poverty

in adolescence and adverse health risks and conditions

(e.g., Evans and Kim 2007). These negative health factors

may contribute to a shortened lifespan for adolescents

living in poverty, and likely contribute to higher

rates of chronic health problems among adults living in

poverty. For example, Miech et al. (2006) found that

rates of obesity were higher among poor adolescents,

with adolescents in their sample also less likely to be

physically active. Vieweg et al. (2007) found a similar

link between poverty and obesity. They found that

receiving public health insurance (and lack of private

health insurance) was positively correlated with

unhealthy weight levels in adolescents. In addition,

the incidence of unhealthy weight was highest in Hispanic

adolescents, followed by Black adolescents

(Vieweg et al. 2007).

The psychological effects of living in poverty have

been shown to be equally problematic during adolescence.

Adolescents living in poverty often cope with

stressful life situations, such as domestic disputes and

neighborhood violence, at a higher rate than youth

from families with adequate income (Center for Disease

Control 2007). In addition, adolescents of color

are more likely than White adolescents to live in the

poorest, crime-ridden neighborhoods, which place

racial minority adolescents at greater risk of exposure

S

2796

S Social

Justice Theory

to violence and the effects of negative environments

(Douglas-Hall et al. 2006; Schiavone 2009).

Schiavone (2009) interviewed adolescents living in

impoverished communities about their encounters

with violence. All 14 racial minority youths interviewed

indicated that they frequently witnessed violence in

their communities. Participants described these experiences

as emotionally distressing, leading to feelings of

helplessness and fear, which caused them to be distrustful

(Schiavone 2009). Furthermore, living under

conditions of poverty also tends to demand adult

role-taking earlier among adolescence (Dashiff et al.

2009). Dashiff et al. (2009) found that adolescents’

awareness of the financial difficulties their parents

face appeared to cause negative mood effects, a sense

of helplessness, and shame. Adolescents living in poverty

are also more at risk for depression, substance

abuse, and early sexual activity. Despite these increased

mental health risks, the authors found that

impoverished communities often lacked adequate

mental healthcare (Dashiff et al. 2009).

Simultaneously, school environments often serve to

perpetuate and institutionalize systems of injustice for

adolescents (Kozol 1991, 2005). Public school districts

in the most impoverished communities have fewer

resources and opportunities for their youth. For example,

in 2003, New York City spent $11,627 on the

education of each child, while in Nassau County on

Long Island, New York, the town of Manhasset spent

$22,311 (Kozol 2005). Too often, classrooms in poorer

communities are overcrowded, understaffed, and

lacking basic equipment and textbooks needed for

teaching (Kozol 1991). In addition, such schools are

comprised of mostly Black and Hispanic students,

often accounting for a majority of the student body.

Following his tour of 60 American public schools,

Kozol (1991) found that conditions had actually

grown worse for urban children in the 50 years since

the Supreme Court landmark ruling of Brown versus

the Board of Education, in which the policy of segregated

schools was dismantled. As described by Kozol

(2005), “What is happening right now in the poorest

communities of America – which are largely black

communities... is the worst situation black America

has faced since slavery” (p. 313).

Schools and family environments also may be

unsafe environments for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and

transgender youth. Perceived sexuality has been noted

to be a primary reason for harassment in schools

(Matthews et al. 2009). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual

youth who have experienced rejection during adolescence

were also recently found to be 8.4 times more

likely to report having attempted suicide, 5.9 times

more likely to report high levels of depression, 3.4

times more likely to use illegal drugs, and 3.4 times

more likely to report having engaged in unprotected

sexual intercourse compared with peers from families

that reported no or low levels of rejection (Ryan et al.

2009). These results mirrored other studies, which

found that harassment or rejection in the school environment

due to individual differences was harmful to

adolescent development, putting such youth at greater

risk for substance use, poorer grades, lower self-esteem,

and poorer mental health (Descamps et al. 2000; Gay,

Lesbian and Straight Education Network 2005; Hodges

and Perry 1999).

One of the primary avenues for promoting social

justice and reducing inequality for adolescents is

through the implementation of preventive interventions.

The following section will describe examples of

preventive interventions with youth, and guidelines

and principles for their implementation.

Preventive Interventions and Social

Justice

Preventive interventions may function best by targeting

risk factors and strengthening protective factors in

young people (Kenny et al. 2009; Wolf 2005). Protective

and risk factors occur both on an individual and societal

level, thus affecting adolescents within multiple

communities and systems. Protective factors include

the abilities that at-risk individuals have to develop

strengths in spite of negative environmental circumstances

(e.g., poverty, prejudice, and discrimination)

(Walsh et al. 2009). Such factors can include resilience,

self-efficacy, community involvement, and academic

achievement. Although these components do not prevent

at-risk adolescents from facing social injustice,

they increase the likelihood of positive outcomes for

youth who face barriers related to their community,

school, or home environment.

Preventive interventions that promote social justice

are best designed as systemic interventions that reduce

inequality in a variety of settings such as schools and

communities (Kenny et al. 2009; Wolf 2005). These

prevention programs work to simultaneously increase


S 2797

competencies and decrease problems in young people

in order to empower them (Wolf 2005). They strive to

give youth the knowledge and skills needed to more

effectively deal with situations of unequal social power,

as well as work to change social policies that may serve

as barriers in the promotion of social justice (Wolf

2005). Successful interventions provide adolescents,

families, and communities with the tools and motivation

needed to create change on both an individual and

systemic level and to promote social justice (Conyne

2004).

Contextual Factors for Adolescents

Well-designed preventive interventions take account of

social and contextual factors (e.g., poverty and discrimination),

and promote community-wide involvement

(Hage and Kenny 2009; Kenny et al. 2009). Ecological

theory is one useful model that is frequently utilized in

developing effective preventive interventions, as it

requires an awareness of many interacting contexts

that create adolescents’ life circumstances

(Bronfenbrenner 1979). These systems include the

social, familial, school, and community context of adolescents’

lives, all of which need to be considered in

creating, designing, and implementing effective preventive

interventions.

Guidelines for Effective Preventive

Interventions

Prevention scholars have begun to identify a set of

guidelines for effective social justice–oriented preventive

interventions that are relevant to work with

adolescents (Hage et al. 2007; Walsh et al. 2009). First,

it is imperative that prevention programs be designed

with an understanding of the social context specific to

adolescents (Walsh et al. 2009). More specifically,

programs should address both risk and protective

factors within each setting relevant to the lives of

adolescents, including the social, familial, school,

governmental, and community levels. Secondly,

programs should be created with the ultimate goal of

social justice and structural change, recognizing that

genuine change must go beyond an individual level

(Hage and Kenny 2009; Kenny et al. 2009). Thirdly,

effective preventive interventions are also geared

toward the appropriate developmental level of the target

population. For example, adolescence is characterized

by a transition from elementary school to high

school and into adulthood. With this transition come

decisions pertaining to work, school, family, and

increasing levels of responsibility both for oneself and

for one’s community. By recognizing adolescents’

unique developmental needs, preventive interventions

will more effectively support the transition from adolescence

into adulthood (Walsh et al. 2009).

In addition to attention to the unique developmental

needs of adolescents, preventive interventions

should take the cultural context of adolescents into

account in designing, implementing, and evaluating

prevention programs (Walsh et al. 2009). Multiple factors

shape the beliefs and behaviors of an individual

adolescent, including racial–cultural identity, ethnic

background, family traditions, peer behaviors, and

acculturation levels. These cultural influences create

an identity that is consistently changing and evolving.

Preventive programs that consider the cultural context

of adolescence attend to the norms, attitudes, beliefs,

and experiences of the target group of adolescents, in

their program development, implementation, and

evaluation efforts. Not attending to the context may

result in programs that inappropriately impose their

own values on the target population (Hage et al. 2007).

It is also important to note that collaboration across

a variety of disciplines, such as counseling, social work,

community psychology, and other related fields,

strengthens such programs so that individuals are able

to work toward structural change on multiple levels

(Hage et al. 2007; Walsh et al. 2009). This collaboration

is crucial because it reduces the potential for miscommunication

and allows for greater consideration of the

specific context of the target community, thereby

enhancing program relevance and likelihood of

a successful outcome. In addition, it is also imperative

that leaders evaluate the extent to which the program

meets their specific social justice goals (Walsh et al.

2009), such as a decrease in social inequities. Finally,

professionals need to carry out these programs over

time in order to reach as many individuals as possible

and sustain smaller, short-term changes that have been

made (Walsh et al. 2009).

In sum, these principles can be used to implement

prevention programs and can help program leaders

reach social justice goals by working to eliminate social

inequalities. A number of programs that work with

adolescents have used these factors to promote social

justice, and have shown promising results, as well as the

S

2798

S Social

Justice Theory

potential to create and maintain structural change.

Some examples of these programs are discussed in the

next section.

Examples of Preventive Interventions

That Promote Social Justice

The number of preventive interventions for adolescents

that target social justice has grown tremendously in the

past few years (Wolf 2005). One such program, known

as The Boston Connects Program, takes a multilevel

approach to promoting social justice by targeting students,

peers, families, schools, and communities

(Walsh et al. 2008). Students and families in the program

are provided with resources to improve academic

performance, social competencies, school and community

involvement, and support on the individual, peer,

and familial levels. The program involves a large-scale

intervention targeting both neighborhoods and schools

to address risk (e.g., violence, aggression) and protective

factors (e.g., mentorship and service opportunities).

Evaluations of this program revealed increased

support services for students, more community

involvement in schools, and improved academic success.

More specifically, data suggested that at-risk students

in the program progressed academically at the

same rate as (if not faster than) students who were not

in the program because they were not at risk (Kenny

et al. 2009).

An additional example is the Communities That

Care program based in Pennsylvania, which uses prevention

strategies to address problem behaviors of atrisk

adolescents in over 100 communities (Feinberg

et al. 2005). One of the most important features of

this program is a prevention board made up of community

members that create an individualized risk

assessment for each community. Preventive interventions

are then implemented for each community,

targeting problem behaviors such as teen pregnancy,

substance use, school dropout, and acts of violence.

Leaders from each community serve as the bridge for

program and community involvement, ultimately creating

a collaborative partnership in which all parties

work to establish social justice at the community level.

Program evaluations have shown multiple benefits,

including increased community involvement and collaboration

in programs, as well as improvements in

school performance, school safety, parenting, practices

and family and community relations (Hawkins et al.

2002; Jenson et al. 1997; Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP] 1996). Evaluations

have also shown decreased problems in school (e.g.,

detention, failure, truancy, suspension, fighting) and

decreases in weapons charges, burglaries, and drug

offenses (Jenson et al. 1997; OJJDP 1996).

A third preventive program that works with adolescents

who face multiple societal barriers, such as poverty

and racism, is Tools For Tomorrow, which works

with urban youth in public high schools in Boston,

Massachusetts (Kenny et al. 2007). The focus of Tools

For Tomorrow is on a pivotal point in adolescence,

high school graduation. This program educates students

about further educational and career opportunities

available post-graduation, while also informing

them of structural barriers that they will inevitably

face due to the social stratification of society (e.g.,

racism, classism). The program’s ultimate goal is to

promote social justice for urban youth by addressing

barriers and giving students access to the tools needed

to prevent negative consequences of school dropout

(e.g., lifelong poverty). Initial findings demonstrate

that teachers who worked with students in the program

observed improvements in decision-making skills

(Solberg et al. 2002). Early evaluations also suggest

positive results pertaining to binge drinking, delinquent

behavior, and other targeted risk factors

(O’Connell et al. 2009). Finally, the program has also

formed a strong collaborative relationship between an

area university (i.e., Boston College) and the public

school system (i.e., Boston high schools), allowing the

intervention to initiate change from more than one

level.

The above preventive interventions provide examples

of effective programs that have worked to increase

awareness of social barriers and decrease social inequities

on multiple levels. By following the principles

and guidelines outlined above that speak to effective

preventive interventions (Walsh et al. 2009), professionals

in the helping profession can effectively design,

implement, and evaluate programs that promote social

justice and target risk and protective factors for

adolescents.

Conclusion

This essay provides an overview of critical issues related

to a social justice theory of adolescence. Researchers

interested in promoting social justice with adolescent


S 2799

populations can contribute to existing work by identifying

the causes and effects of oppression in the larger

society, and by exploring how oppression and its consequences

can be prevented. Examples include studies

on preventing dating violence (Cornelius and

Resseguie 2007), preventing bias against gay and lesbian

youth (Fisher et al. 2008; Morsillo and

Prilleltensky 2007) and promoting career development

for adolescent girls (O’Brien et al. 2000). In sum, in

order to impact issues relevant to social justice in

adolescents, researchers need to work toward developing

effective preventive interventions that address societal

issues of discrimination, and exploitation, such as

bias against people based on their race, ethnicity, sexual

orientation, age, religion, and gender (APA 2003; Perry

and Albee 1994).

The examples of social justice prevention practice

contained in this essay are meant to provide direction

to practitioners, researchers, and theorists in mitigating

the harmful effects of poverty and other inequities on

youth, and in empowering youth to use their skills and

knowledge to engage in creating social change.

A primary avenue for cultivating adolescents’ skills

and awareness is through education about the social

and historical context of social injustice and about

factors that contribute to the well-being of all adolescents.

Roaten and Schmidt (2009) propose beginning

such education as early as elementary school by

integrating experiential activities and self-awareness

exercises into classroom meetings and curricula. Such

activities aim at expanding children’s knowledge of

social inequality and sense of cultural empathy.

They note that such activities not only increase

self-awareness but also lead students to confront

their biases and ethnocentricity (Roaten and Schmidt

2009).

Furthermore, in addition to education about

oppression and to designing preventative interventions

aimed at reducing or eliminating the negative effects of

social injustice on adolescents, scholars and youth

leaders need to engage in substantial policy change to

adequately address pressing social concerns facing adolescents.

For example, professionals can engage in training

of school personnel (e.g., teachers, psychologists) to

assist them with developing skills and knowledge about

implementing prevention projects that target adolescents

(Romano 1997). Youth leaders might also become

actively involved in political initiatives that lend their

expertise as it relates to health promotion and the prevention

of psychological and physical distress among

adolescents. Examples include public advocacy initiatives

and legislation to reduce community and school

violence, to reduce adolescent drug use, and support for

cigarette smoking bans in schools and other places

frequented by youth. Professionals can further advocate

for the support of federal funding priorities that address

adolescent health promotion through agencies such as

the National Institute of Mental Health, Substance

Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration,

and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency.

These efforts will work toward ensuring that all youth

are provided with resources and opportunities to

become successful leaders for the next generation.

References

Abernathy, T. J., Webster, G., & Vermeulen, M. (2002). Relationship

between poverty and health among adolescents. Adolescence,

37, 55–67.

APA. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training,

research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists.

American Psychologist, 58, 377–402.

Brofrenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments

by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Center for Disease Control. (2007). Youth risk behavior survey,

2001–2007. Retrieved February 15, 2010, from http://www.cdc.

gov/yrbss

Conyne, R. K. (2004). Preventive counseling: Helping people to become

empowered in systems and settings (2nd ed.). New York: Brunner-

Routledge.

Cornelius, T. L., & Resseguie, N. (2007). Primary and secondary

prevention programs for dating violence: A review of the literature.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 364–375.

Dashiff, C., DiMicco, W., Myers, B., & Sheppard, K. (2009). Poverty

and adolescent mental health. Journal of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatric Nursing, 22, 23–32.

Descamps, M. J., Rothblum, E., Bradford, J., & Ryan, C. (2000).

Mental health impact of child sexual abuse, rape, intimate partner

violence, and hate crimes in the National Lesbian Health

Care survey. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 11, 27–55.

Douglas-Hall, A., Chau, M., Koball, H. (2006). Basic Facts About

Low-Income Children: Birth to Age 18. National Center for Children

in Poverty, Columbia University Mailman School of Public

Health.

Elgar, F. J., Roberts, C., Parry-Langdon, N., & Boyce, W. (2005).

Income inequality and alcohol use: A multilevel analysis of

drinking and drunkenness in adolescents in 34 countries. European

Journal of Public Health, 15, 245–250.

Evans, G. W., & Kim, P. (2007). Childhood poverty and health:

Cumulative risk exposure and stress dysregulation. Psychological

Science, 18, 953–957.

S

2800

S Social

Justice Theory

Feinberg, M. E., Riggs, N. R., & Greenberg, M. T. (2005). Social

networks and community prevention coalitions. The Journal of

Primary Prevention, 26, 279–298.

Fisher, E., Komosa-Hawkins, K., Saldana, E., Thomas, G., Hsiao, C.,

Rauld, M., et al. (2008). Promoting school success for lesbian,

gay, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning students: Primary,

secondary, and tertiary prevention and intervention strategies.

California School Psychologist, 13, 79–91.

Gay, L., & Network, S. E. (2005). From teasing to torment: School

climate in America. A survey of students and teachers. New York:

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

Hage, S. M. (2005). Future considerations for fostering multicultural

competence in mentalhealth and educational settings: Social

justice implications. In M. G. Constantine & D. W. Sue (Eds.),

Strategies for building multicultural competence in mental health

and educational settings. Hoboken: Wiley.

Hage, S. M., & Kenny, M. (2009). Promoting a social justice approach

to prevention: Future directions for training, practice, and

research. Journal of Primary Prevention, 30, 75–87.

Hage, S. M., Romano, J. L., Conyne, R. K., Kenny, M., Matthews, C.,

Schwartz, J. P., et al. (2007). Best practice guidelines on prevention

practice, research, training, and social advocacy for psychologists.

The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 493–566.

Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Arthur, M. W. (2002). Promoting

science-based prevention in communities. Addictive Behaviors,

27, 951–976.

Hay, C., Forston, E. N., Hollist, D. R., Altheimer, I., & Schaible,

Lonnie M. (2007). Compounded risk: The implications for

delinquency of coming from a poor family that lives in a poor

community. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 593–605.

Hodges, E. V. E., & Perry, D. G. (1999). Psychological sequelae of

hate-crime victimization among lesbian, gay, and bisexual

adults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 945–951.

Jensen, J. M., Hartman, J. C., Smith, J. R., Draayer, D., & Schurtz, R.

(1997, January). An evaluation of Iowa’s Juvenile Crime Prevention

Community Grant Fund Program (Report submitted to the

State of Iowa Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning).

Iowa: University of Iowa, School of Social Work.

Kenny, M., & Hage, S. M. (2009). The next frontier: Prevention as an

instrument of social justice. Journal of Primary Prevention,

30, 1–10.

Kenny, M. E., Horne, A. M., Orpinas, P., & Reese, L. E. (2009).

Realizing social justice: The challenge of preventive interventions.

Washington: American Psychological Association.

Kenny, M. E., Sparks, E., & Jackson, J. (2007). Striving for social

justice through interprofessional university school collaboration.

In E. Aldarondo (Ed.), Advancing social justice through clinical

practice (pp. 313–335). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools.

New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid

schooling in America. New York: Crown Publishers.

Miech, R. A., Kumanyika, S. K., Stettler, N., Link, B. G., Phelan, J. C.,

& Chang, V. W. (2006). Trends in the association of poverty with

overweight among U.S. adolescents, 1971–2004. Journal of the

American Medical Association, 295, 2385–2393.

Matthews, C. R., Pepper, S., & Lorah, P. (2009). Fostering a healthy

climate for diversity. In M. E. Kenny, A. M. Horne, P. Orpinas &

L. E. Reese (Eds.), Realizing social justice: The challenge of

preventive interventions (pp. 165–184). Washington: American

Psychological Association.

Morsillo, J., & Prilleltensky, I. (2007). Social action with youth:

Interventions, evaluation, and psychopolitical validity. Journal

of Community Psychology, 35, 725–740.

O’Brien, K. M., Bikos, L. H., Epstein, K. L., Flores, L. Y., Dukstein,

R. D., & Kamatuka, N. A. (2000). Enhancing the career decisionmaking

self-efficacy of Upward Bound students. Journal of

Career Development, 26, 277–293.

O’Connell, M. E., Boat, T., & Warner, K. E. (Eds.). (2009). Preventing

mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people:

Progress and possibilities. Washington: National Academies Press.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP).

(1996). 1996 report to Congress: Title V incentive grants for local

delinquency prevention programs (Department of Justice Publication

No. NCJ 165694). Washington: Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP).

Perry, M., & Albee, G. W. (1994). On “The science of prevention”.

American Psychologist, 49, 1087–1088.

Prilleltensky, I., & Nelson, G. (2002). Doing psychology critically:

Making a difference in diverse settings. New York: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Roaten, G., & Schmidt, E. (2009). Using experiential activities with

adolescents to promote respect for diversity. Professional School

Counseling, 12, 309–314.

Romano, J. L. (1997). School personnel training for the prevention of

tobacco, alcohol, and other drug use: Issues and outcomes.

Journal of Drug Education, 27, 245–258.

Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R. M., & Sanchez, J. (2009). Family

rejection as a predictor of negative health outcomes in White and

Latino lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults. Pediatrics, 123,

346–352.

Schiavone, D. B. (2009). The effects of exposure to community

violence on aspects of adolescent identity development. Journal

of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 22, 99–105.

Solberg, S. S., Howard, K. A., Blustein, D. L., & Close, W. (2002).

Career development in the schools: Connecting school-to-workto-life.


Sue, D. W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence.


Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The

role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482–498.

Vieweg, V. R., Johnston, C. H., Lanier, J. O., Fernandez, A., &

Pandurangi, A. K. (2007). Correlation between high risk obesity

groups and low socioeconomic status in school children. Southern

Medical Journal, 100, 8–13.

Wadsworth, M. E., Raviv, T., Reinhard, C., Wolff, B., Santiago, C. D., &

Einhorn, L. (2008). An indirect effects model of the association

between poverty and child functioning: The role of children’s

poverty-related stress. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 13, 156–185.

Walsh, M. E., DePaul, J., & Park-Taylor, J. (2009). Prevention as

a mechanism for promoting positive development in the context

Social Networking in Online and Offline Contexts

S 2801

of risk: Principles of best practice. In M. E. Kenny, A. M. Horne,

P. Orpinas, & L. E. Reese (Eds.), Realizing Social Justice: The

challenge of preventive interventions (pp. 57–78). Washington:

American Psychological Association.

Walsh, M. E., Kenny, M. E., Wieneke, K. M., & Harrington, K. R.

(2008). The Boston connects program: Promoting learning

and healthy development. Professional School Counseling, 12,

166–169.

Wight, V. R., & Chau, M. (2009). Basic facts about low-income

children, 2008. New York: National Center for Children in

Poverty, Columbia University.

Wolf, J. L. (2005). A meta-analysis of primary preventive interventions

targeting the mental health of children and adolescents: a review

spanning 1992–2003. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Loyola

University Chicago, Chicago.

Young, T. M., Martin, S. S., Young, M. E., & Ting, L. (2001). Internal

poverty and teen pregnancy. Adolescence, 36, 289–304.

Social Learning Theory

ROGER J. R. LEVESQUE

Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

Social learning theory emphasizes the importance of

observing and modeling the behaviors, attitudes, and

emotional reactions of others and focuses on the reciprocal

action between individuals and their environment

to determine some aspects of behavior. It is one

of the most popular theories in psychological science

and criminology. In psychological science, Bandura

(1969, 1973) proposed a social learning model that

spans both cognitive and behavioral frameworks by

encompassing attention, retention, reproduction, and

motivation. His model has been applied extensively to

the understanding of aggression and psychological disorders,

especially in the context of behavior modification.

In criminology, Akers (1973, 1990, 1998)

proposed a social learning theory composed of four

major concepts – differential association, reinforcement,

imitation/modeling, and definitions. Akers’ theory

proposes that individuals learn criminal behaviors

as they do noncriminal ones and seeks to specify how

they learn these criminal and noncriminal behaviors

and behavioral cues through reinforcement. Akers’ theory

suggests that individuals learn to anticipate rewards

and punishments for criminal behaviors within intimate

associations to the extent that these behaviors

were previously reinforced, either directly or vicariously.

Once behavioral consequences are anticipated,

the theory assumes that reinforcement will increase the

chances of the behavior since individuals are deemed to

maximize rewards and minimize punishments. Social

learning theory, regardless of whether it seeks to

explain aggression (Bandura 1977) or delinquent

behavior (Akers), importantly incorporates protective

and preventive factors in addition to factors that facilitate

the problem behavior under investigation. The

focus is on the balance of influences that make for the

probability of problem or conforming behavior, and

those influences are not only from one’s learning

history but also from those operating within given

situations and those that are predictive of future

behavior.

References

Akers, R. L. (1973). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach.

Belmont: Wadsworth.

Akers, R. L. (1990). Rational choice, deterrence, and social learning

theory in criminology: The path not taken. Journal of Criminal

Law and Criminology, 81, 653–76.

Akers, R. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general

theory of crime and deviance. Boston: Northeastern University

Press.

Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York:

Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning

Press.

Social Networking in Online

and Offline Contexts

AMORI YEE MIKAMI 1 ,DAVID E. SZWEDO 2

1 University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

2 Department of Psychology, University of Virginia,

Charlottesville, VA, USA

Overview

Adolescence is a developmental period in which social

networks (cohesive groupings of peers to which the

youth belongs) become important for identity, adjustment,

and future relationships. This essay provides an

S

Page 130 of 161

Attachment B


In A Socially Unjust World

Page 131 of 161

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273366488

Defining Social Justice in a Socially Unjust World

Article in Families in society: the journal of contemporary human services · December 2002

DOI: 10.1606/1044-3894.17

CITATIONS

92

READS

12,479

1 author:

Michael Reisch

University of Maryland, Baltimore

148 PUBLICATIONS 1,161 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

(1) The history of social work's response to unaccompanied immigrant and refugee children; (2) the use of the concept of social justice in social work practice theories; (3)

the implications of the Trump Presidency for social welfare in the U.S. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael Reisch on 08 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SOCIAL JUSTICE


in a Socially Unjust World

by Michael Reisch

The Evolution of

the Concept of Social Justice

ONE OF THE IRONIES OF THE EARLY twenty-first

century is that ideological struggles between and within

nations have intensified a decade after the end of the Cold

War. Today, proponents of diametrically opposed visions

of society, secular and religious, march under the banner

of social justice. As desirable social and political goals are

depicted in starkly different forms, labels like “good” and

“evil” become interchangeable and the meaning of social

justice becomes obscured. As it has been for millennia, the

concept of social justice is now used as a rationale for

maintaining the status quo, promoting far-reaching social

reforms, and justifying revolutionary action. If liberals and

conservatives, religious fundamentalists, and radical secularists

all regard their causes as socially just, how can we

develop a common meaning of the term?

Although fascinating and vitally important, a full exploration

of this question is better suited for another essay.

This article will focus instead, somewhat more narrowly,

on how the concept of social justice in Western societies

has influenced contemporary social welfare. The evolution

of this concept reflects, in part, the shift towards a secular

and materialist culture, and the changes this transformation

produced in people’s fundamental assumptions about

human nature, society, and the state. As the meaning of

social justice changed, it became increasingly complex and

conflict-ridden, both as an idea and in its applications.

Today, for example, our understanding of social justice is

inextricably connected to our definition of terms like

equality and freedom, and to sweeping policy questions

about the relative responsibilities and obligations of individuals

and society.

Originally, the idea of social justice was groupspecific—that

is, it was applied solely to a particular people

or nation with the intention of redressing the effects of hierarchical

inequalities, particularly inherited inequalities.

The Bible, for example, introduces the idea of a “jubilee

year,” when slaves would be freed, debts and obligations

liquidated, and land returned to its original owners. In this

usage, however, social justice was not regarded as universal

in its application. Also, it focused primarily on issues of

economic redistribution largely among individuals.

In The Republic, Plato (1974, trans.) expanded the

meaning of justice by equating it with human well-being.

He linked the concept of individual and social justice by

asserting that justice was derived from the harmony between

reason, spirit, and appetite present in all persons.

Within this formulation, if a society lacked such harmony,

justice could not be achieved. Yet, Plato’s view of justice

did not include a belief in equality. In fact, since he regarded

class distinctions as essential for the effective functioning

of society, he argued that justice would be

achieved when each person received those goods they deserved

based on their prescribed position in the social

order. In other words, that unequals would be treated unequally.

Social justice, therefore, would not involve efforts

to transform or transcend existing societal structures, but

rather would guarantee that existing institutions would

continue to function as intended.

Aristotle further developed this concept of justice in

The Nicomachian Ethics (1980, trans.), where he introduced

a view of justice that anticipates modern debates

about issues of resource allocation. Aristotle regarded justice,

as fulfilled through law, as the principle that ensures

social order through the regulation of the allocation and

distribution of benefits. In Book V, Aristotle states, “equality

for the people involved will be the same as for the

things involved, since [in a just society] the relation between

the people will be the same as the relation between

the things involved. For if the people involved are not

Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services

Copyright 2002 Families International, Inc.

343

FAMILIES IN SOCIETY • Volume 83, Number 4

equal, they will not [justly] receive equal shares; indeed,

whenever equals receive unequal shares, or unequals equal

shares, … that is the source of quarrels and accusations”

(p. 123). Yet, like Plato and many other philosophers and

political leaders over the past 2,000 years, Aristotle did not

regard people as fundamentally equal. His view of equality

and justice applied only to those individuals who occupied

the same stratum of a hierarchical social order—for

Aristotle, this meant Athenian men of property. This interpretation

of justice rationalized the coexistence of slavery

or oppression for the many with a democratic polis for

the few (Campbell, 1989).

Universal concepts of justice first appeared between

1,500 and 2,500 years ago in the teachings of most of the

world’s great religions,

such as Judaism, Christianity,

Islam, and Buddhism,

and in Western literature of

this period, such as the

Greek tragedies of Sophocles

and Aeschylus. The

idea of one universal or allpowerful

deity became

linked with the pursuit of a

divine vision for humankind,

one in which

universal justice was attained,

either in this life or

the afterlife. Ironically, as these religions evolved, religious

institutions and religiously sanctioned hierarchies emerged

that undermined this initial conception of justice. In addition,

the exclusivity and competition among proponents

of different religions—increasingly linked to states or empires—further

undermined the ideal of justice for all. In

this context, it is not surprising that the reemergence of

the concept of justice in Western societies occurred concurrently

with the growth of secular humanism and the

spirit of rationalism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries

(Gay, 1966; Israel, 2001). In the early modern period,

this conception of justice was initially used to rationalize

the consolidation of state power under the authority

of absolute monarchs.

Like Aristotle, the foremost proponent of this perspective,

the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1996), regarded

the construction of an external authority—the

state or leviathan—as an essential ingredient in the maintenance

of a just society. This was not because he considered

government the embodiment of the collective will of

people who were naturally just, but because he viewed humans

as antisocial and driven by their baser instincts—an

Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth

centuries, however, the gap between the

ideal of social justice and the reality of

persistent inequality and injustice became

more apparent …

idea that still resonates in the early twenty-first century. In

Hobbes’s conception of justice, the state would create and

enforce laws and social norms to preserve peace and restrain

individuals from harming each other in the pursuit

of their self-interests. This view of justice complemented

perfectly the emergence of commercial and industrial capitalism

(van Mill, 2001; Isbister, 2001). Through the Elizabethan

Poor Laws it shaped Western models of social

welfare to the present, particularly in Great Britain and

North America.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the

idea of justice was strongly connected in the West to the

scientific revolution (which sought to discover universal

nonreligious truths) and the Enlightenment (which

sought to apply these scientific

discoveries to society

and its institutions). As part

of their structural analyses

of society, political philosophers

during the “age of

revolution,” such as

Rousseau (1754/1994),

and their nineteenth century

successors constructed

a series of metanarratives

that explained the persistence

of injustice. To a considerable

extent, the frameworks

they constructed over two centuries ago shaped the

formation of most modern institutions in the West,

including the relationship between the state and social

welfare (Roemer, 1996).

The great political and social revolutions of the late

eighteenth century also contained a revolutionary idea of

justice. Both explicitly and implicitly, the pursuit and realization

of social justice were now inextricably linked to the

preservation of individual liberty or freedom, the achievement

of equality (of rights, opportunities, and outcomes),

and the establishment of common bonds of all humanity

(fraternity or mutuality). Both the American and French

revolutions linked their social justice goals with the “pursuit”

or “the perfection of happiness” (Saint-Just, de,

1968, ed.). In theory, this required the creation of societies

that would maximize both individual and collective

well-being. Through such documents as the American

Declaration of Independence and the French Universal

Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, social justice

became the unwritten linchpin of so-called “natural

rights” that, in rhetoric if not reality, would now be applied

to all people.

344

Reisch • Defining Social Justice in a Socially Unjust World

Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,

however, the gap between the ideal of social justice and

the reality of persistent inequality and injustice became

more apparent, as did the difficulty of reconciling the goal

of social equality with the preservation of individual liberties

(Berlin, 1958). The elites that dominated emerging

nation-states rationalized their power by distinguishing in

both rhetoric and practice between political and economic

justice, and separating the abstraction of justice from the

legal concept of individual or social rights (Mill, 1971;

Sandel, 1982). This enabled them to withhold political

rights from the majority of the population, virtually ignore

the issue of social and economic rights (the so-called “Social

Question,” and even deny the humanity of large numbers

of people, particularly women and persons of color

(Miller, 1999; Nussbaum, 1999). The growing recognition

of the gap between social justice as an abstraction and

injustice as a fact of life produced a torrent of critical ideas

that inspired most of the reform movements and revolutions

of the period between 1815 and the outbreak of

World War I.

Foremost among the critics of these contradictions was

Karl Marx, who applied a rigorous, “scientific” politicaleconomic

analysis to the philosophic arguments of those

he pejoratively labeled “utopian socialists.” In contrast

with many contemporary economists (and twentieth century

Marxists), Marx expressed a holistic view of the

human condition and the social reality from which it

emerged. He argued that human beings did not have a

fixed, innate nature, but were defined by their social relationships

that, in turn, were dependent on the economic

structure of society and the classes it produced. Unlike

Hobbes, Marx rejected the idea that injustice was the byproduct

of natural human competition, selfishness, and

aggression. He asserted that the roots of injustice lie, instead,

in the political-economic structure that was based

on subjugation, discrimination, exploitation, and privilege

(Berlin, 1996). Justice would prevail, therefore, when individuals

received what they needed on the basis of their

humanity and not merely what they deserved on the basis

of their social class origin or productivity (Marx, 1964).

Thus, in the West, the idea of social justice gradually became

closely associated with the concept of a social contract

involving mutual rights and obligations. Nineteenth century

Liberals and Marxists differed sharply, however, in their

interpretation of the terms of this contract. The former emphasized

the preservation of individual liberty, including

property rights, and the latter stressed the attainment of social

equality (Tomasi, 2001; Ackerman, 1980; Barry, 1989;

Berlin, 1978; Bird, 1967; Campbell, 1989; Nozick, 1974).

In one sense, the debate revolved around distinctions between

contributive and distributive views of justice and the

implications of these concepts for the allocation of social

rights, goods, and responsibilities (White, 2000; Roemer,

1996; George & Wilding, 1994; Held, 1984).

During much of the twentieth century, although differences

emerged over the relative balance of these rights

and responsibilities, there was broad agreement in the

West that a social justice paradigm must incorporate various

means of achieving a fair distribution of societal

goods—tangible and intangible. In addition, there was

agreement that the ways in which society should pursue

such goals must be based on some accounting for either

the contribution of the individual to society or the individual’s

past, present, and potential role and status.

Summarizing this perspective, Miller (1976, 1999, 2001)

asserts that social justice reflects

the distribution of benefits and burdens throughout

a society, as it results from the major social institutions

such as property systems and public organizations.

It deals with such matters as the regulations of

wages and … profits, the protections of persons’

rights through the legal system, the allocation of housing,

medicine, welfare benefits, etc. (1976, p. 222)

Miller’s view of social justice is one of “just distribution”

that is not dependent on the nature of the goods allocated

or the policy domain, but on “modes of human relationship”

(Miller, 1999; Grogan, 2000). Recently,

feminist philosophers like Nussbaum and Held have added

a gender dimension to this conception of social justice

(Nussbaum, 1999; Held, 1995).

Yet, there has been little consensus about the balance

within a social justice framework between individual and

group entitlements and social obligations. In brief, there

have been six different ways in which distributive justice

has been described:

• Equal rights (to intangibles such as freedom) and equal

opportunity to obtain social goods, such as property

• Equal distribution to those of equal merit

• Equal distribution to those of equal productivity

• Unequal distribution based upon an individual’s needs

or requirements

• Unequal distribution based upon an individual’s status

or position

• Unequal distribution based upon different “contractual”

agreements

345


During the twentieth century, the most popular approach

to the problem of distribution was based on utilitarian

arguments, whose calculus presupposes the rational

ordering of social goods to achieve what John Stuart Mill

(1971) termed the “greatest net balance of satisfaction” for

society. In the late twentieth century, this view was often

linked with the assumption that the prioritization of social

goals occurs through a process equally accessible to all

members of society in a manner that promotes generalized

benevolence. Yet, in his contemporary classic, A Theory of

Justice (1971, 1999), Rawls argues that as a philosophical

guide utilitarianism creates no imperative of social justice,

since it can be used to rationalize a concentration of goods

benefiting the privileged classes of society. Instead, the justice

of a system must be measured, he argued, based “on

how fundamental rights and duties are assigned and on the

economic opportunities and social conditions in the various

sectors of society” (p. 7; see also Rawls, 2001).

Rawls based his conception of distributive justice on the

premise that “all social values … are to be distributed equally

unless an unequal distribution of any, or all, of these values

is to everyone’s advantage” (p. 62). He derived what he

called his maximin theory from two fundamental principles:

• Each person has an equal right to the most extensive system

of personal liberty compatible with a system of total liberty

for all

• Social and economic inequality are to be arranged so that

they are both (a) to the greatest benefit to the least advantaged

in society and (b) attached to positions open to all

under conditions of fair equality of opportunity

From these principles of justice, Rawls articulated a

“principle of redress,” which established the philosophical

basis for social policies directed toward a more just distribution

of social goods. Other scholars have applied this

principle to support policies like affirmative action and

reparations for African Americans (Maguire, 1980; Robinson,

2000). As stated by Rawls, the principle seems particularly

well-suited to the social work profession’s goal of

eliminating racial, gender, and economic inequalities.

Undeserved inequalities call for redress; and since

inequalities of birth and natural endowment are

undeserved, these inequalities are to be somehow

compensated for. Thus, the principle holds that in

order to treat all persons equally, to provide genuine

equality of opportunity, society must give more attention

to those with fewer native assets and to those

born into the less favorable social positions. The idea

is to redress the bias of contingencies in the direction

of equality. (1971, p. 100)

This view of distributive justice found adherents in religious

circles as well. In their famous pastoral letter

(1986), the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops went

even further than Rawls. The bishops asserted that “distributive

justice requires that the allocation of income,

wealth, and power in society be evaluated in light of its effect

on persons whose basic needs are unmet” (paragraph

70). The document also stated that “social justice implies

that persons have an obligation to be active and productive

participants in the life of society and that society has a

duty to enable them to participate in this way.” Thus, the

concept of social justice “also includes a duty to organize

economic and social institutions so that people can contribute

to society in ways that respect their freedom and the dignity

of their labor” (paragraphs 71 & 72, emphases added).

Part of the appeal of Rawls’ theory and the Bishops’ letter

is in the synthesis they forged between two competing

meta-analyses—liberalism and socialism—whose conflicting

influences have been regarded as central to the development

of modern Western social welfare (George &

Wilding, 1994). Rawls’ “difference principle” and the duties

articulated by the pastoral letter seek to equalize life

chances for people across racial, gender, and class lines, but

never at the expense of the basic liberal freedoms protected

by the “equal liberty principle” (Tomasi, 2001; Gutman,

1989; Moon, 1988; Sandel, 1982; Ackerman, 1980).

This synthesis is particularly compelling for the social work

profession because of its historic emphasis on both the

preservation of individual human rights and dignity—best

expressed through the concept of self-determination—and

the redistribution of resources to promote the well-being

of disadvantaged populations (National Association of Social

Workers, 1996). It also offers social reformers a conceptual

escape from the trap laid by conservative opponents

of social welfare that have often obfuscated appeals for justice-centered

social policies by labeling them with antidemocratic

rhetoric, such as quotas (Hayek, 1976; Mead,

1986; Nozick, 1974; Sunstein, 1997).

Two fundamental problems are often overlooked, however,

in discussions of applying justice principles to contemporary

social policy debates. The first is the paradox of

attempting to develop principles of justice within a political,

economic, and social context based largely, if tacitly, on

the preservation of injustice. As Smith (1988) argues, “the

longstanding history of invidious discrimination in the

United States demonstrates that attention must always be

paid to the threats [it] poses to liberal values” (p. 247).

346


A social justice framework …

can enable the social work

profession to develop and refine

new practice principles for the

difficult years ahead.

The second problem relates to the application of justice

concepts based largely on the expansion of individual

rights and individual shares of societal resources to the development

of policies, programs, and modes of intervention

that address group needs and concerns (Ryan, 1981).

As Caputo (2000) points out, the resolution of this problem

is critical to social work’s efforts to contribute to the

development of a truly multiracial, multicultural society.

Throughout the world, but especially in the United States,

race and racism are social constructs, deeply rooted in the

political-economic system and culture. Debates over social

justice and multiculturalism, therefore, are inextricably

linked. They reflect a broader dialogue over the nature of

social relations, the concept of community, the structure

of the economy, and definitions of what constitutes the

public good (Katz, 2001; Prigoff, 2000; Caputo, 2000;

Fraser, 1995; Gilbert, 1995).

The creation of greater social solidarity (fraternity or

humanity) implied in the goals of multiculturalism and social

justice, requires the reassertion of the ideas of collective

responsibility, a community

of need, and public virtue. It

implies the formulation of citizenship

requirements that are

“more responsive to our communitarian

and collective security

needs, without sacrificing

our commitment to liberty and

justice for all” (Smith, 1988). It

also implies the establishment

of a societal imperative that promotes

full participation of each

member of the community in

the community’s activities

(Warren, 1983). In the social welfare field, this participation

would include the determination of what constitutes

individual and social need, the development of alternative

conceptions of helping, and the creation of new criteria for

evaluating the effectiveness of various modes of intervention

(Green, 1999). A social justice framework, therefore,

can enable the social work profession to develop and refine

new practice principles for the difficult years ahead.

In recent decades, postmodern theorists have complicated

this picture further through the presentation of

powerful challenges to prevailing metanarratives at all ends

of the ideological spectrum because of what and whom

they exclude (Leonard, 1995). A positive contribution of

the postmodernist critique is the expansion of the concept

of justice to include other groups long denied the benefits

of justice and of other goals of justice, beyond the achievement

of economic and social equality. In addition, strongly

influenced by feminist theory, postmodernism has defined

justice as a process as well as an outcome (Mullaly,

1997; Leonard, 1995; Dean & Rhodes, 1998). It remains

to be seen, however, whether the postmodern emphasis

on identity can provide the conceptual basis for the formation

of powerful social justice-oriented coalitions.

Social Justice and the

Emergence of U.S. Social Work

Since the early twentieth century, the pursuit of social

justice has been a core value of the social work profession

in the United States, providing an alternative to the concept

of social welfare as charity (Hunter, 1904; Woods,

1905). For a century, the conflict between justice and

charitable perspectives was not merely the focus of academic

debate. It shaped the evolution of U.S. social policy

by forging an awkward synthesis of individualistic and

collectivist orientations to society and its problems

(George & Wilding, 1994).

In the Progressive Era, the

concept of social justice among

social workers emerged through

a synthesis of religious ideals

(such as the Social Gospel,

Quakerism, or Christian socialism),

the work of secular

philosophers such as Marx,

Dewey, and William James, and

the political activities of leaders

such as Jane Addams, Florence

Kelley, Ellen Gates Starr, and

Lillian Wald on behalf of workers’

rights, women’s suffrage, racial justice, and peace

(Reisch & Andrews, 2001; Elshtain, 2002; Carson, 1990).

Settlement workers, in particular, regarded the pursuit of

social justice as a necessary response to growing economic

inequality and the breakdown of community (Tucker,

1903; Sklar, 1995, 1998; Daniels, 1989). Their pursuit of

social justice led them to forge alliances with feminist organizations,

trade unions, neighborhood-based community

associations, civil rights groups, and radicals outside of the

social work field, and to advocate for social reforms in areas

as diverse as child welfare, housing, and public health

(Holder, 1922; Reisch & Andrews, 2001; Fisher, 1994;

Davis, 1967).

A generation later, at the height of the Great Depression

of the 1930s, the Rank and File Movement in social

work articulated “five simple principles” as the basis for

347


developing a justice-centered social work practice. Bertha

Reynolds (1963), a leader among the Rank and Filers,

summarized these principles in her autobiography:

• The purpose of social work is to serve people in need. If social

workers serve other classes who have other purposes,

they become too dishonest to be capable of either theoretical

or practical development.

• Social work exists to help people help themselves and, therefore,

social workers should not be alarmed when people do

so by organized means.

• Social work practice operates by communication, listening,

and sharing experiences.

• Social workers have to find their place among other movements

for human betterment by forming and joining coalitions

with clients, community groups, and like-minded colleagues

from all disciplines.

• Social workers cannot consider themselves superior to their

clients, as if they do not have the same problems (Quoted in

Withorn, 1986, pp. 1–2).

Beginning in the 1930s, proponents of social justice

regarded the establishment and expansion of the welfare

state as a primary means of ameliorating the impact of

longstanding structural inequalities in society and the market.

For nearly half a century after their modest successes

during the New Deal, they focused debates over social

policy largely on the extent to which they established social

rights and provided forms of institutionalized compensation

or redress (Towle, 1945; Titmuss, 1968; Gal,

2001). Since the early 1980s, however, attacks on the concept

of entitlement—both legal and social—have undermined

the idea of using social welfare as an instrument for

achieving social justice, culminating in the United States

in the passage of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA).

Contemporary Views of Social Justice

Today’s complex environment obscures both the

meaning of social justice and the goals of social justice.

New and persistent questions frame both philosophical

and political debates. These include: Are the goals of social

justice and multiculturalism compatible? Through

what means is justice to be achieved? How can we reconcile

traditional ideas of social justice with the emerging interest

in human rights? Are such rights individual or social?

Can they all be legislated? Should they be?

During the past two decades of welfare cutbacks and

retrenchment, social work authors have stated these questions

both implicitly and explicitly. Looking for a cause

around which to focus the profession’s abstract commitment

to social justice principles, social workers have linked

the pursuit of social justice with a variety of diverse issues.

These include the promotion of peace and nuclear disarmament;

opposition to U.S. intervention in the political

affairs of other nations; support for the rights of women,

gays, and lesbians; defense of affirmative action; and the

promotion of multiculturalism (Brawley & Martinez-

Brawley, 1999; Van Soest, 1994; Gibelman, 2000; Witkin,

1999; Verschelden, 1993). Although the relationships between

social workers and other movements for social justice

are not as strong as in the past, many observers believe

that “far more social workers today think that problems

such as poverty are rooted in structural sources than

thought so in the 1960s” (Cloward, 1990, p. xvi). This

demonstrates that even in conservative times the social justice

legacy of the profession remains strong (Reisch & Andrews,

2001).

Influenced by postmodern ideas, social work literature

now often links the attainment of social justice with the

goals of social diversity or multiculturalism, and with challenges

to the normative power structure and the oppression

it produces (Hyde, 1998). Some authors, however, have defined

social justice in terms of empowerment practice without

specifying the meaning of either term (Cox, 2001). This

ambiguity of meaning is also found in articles about social

policy, which recognize that social justice has to be promoted

at all levels of government, from local to national but do

not explicitly define the concept (Hagen, 2000).

Building on the ideas of Reynolds and Freire (1971),

other social work scholars have focused on human transformation

as part of their critiques of the positivist-empiricist

and rationality-centered emphases of social work research

and epistemology (Weick, 1999; Saleebey, 1990;

Gottschalk & Witkin, 1991; Rose, 2000). Clinical social

workers have struggled with ways of integrating contemporary

emphases on the role of narratives within a social

justice framework (Dean & Rhodes, 1998; Morell, 1996).

Some have connected the struggles for social justice and

gender or racial equality in a way that “requires an integration

of personal, professional, and spiritual-political values

and beliefs into a framework that respects the dialectical

tensions while striving for wholeness” (Sternbach,

2000, p. 413; Wakefield, 1988a, 1988b).

Swenson (1998) provides a clinical perspective on why

social justice is considered the organizing value of social

work. She identifies several strategies for basing clinical

work on a social justice foundation that is derived from the

writings of Rawls and Van Soest (1994). These include

348


recognizing clients’ strengths, an awareness of the role of

power in professional relationships, and a focus on positionality.

Like Wakefield (1988a, 1988b), Mullaly (1997),

and others, Swenson argues that clinical social workers can

also engage in social justice work through the elimination

of oppressive practices in their agencies, the development

of new client-centered programs, and the education of

colleagues and members of related disciplines about social

justice principles.

In the macro arena, authors have applied broadly defined

concepts of social justice to the formation of alliances

in support of civil rights, affirmative action, a clarification of

laws regarding sexual harassment, and “a society that truly

values human worth and dignity” (Schreiber, 1995; Beck &

Eichler, 2000; Brawley & Martinez-Brawley, 1999; Gibelman,

2000; Gould, 2000). Other writers have linked social

justice to the principle of social responsibility, opposition to

oppression and domination, the eradication of racism and

poverty, and the emancipation of “people from the restrictive

social arrangements that make both instrumental and

substantively rational action difficult” (Gottschalk &

Witkin, 1991; Haynes & White, 1999; Gould, 2000; Rose,

2000; Witkin, 2000). Some authors have adopted a global

perspective and connected social justice with antiwar sentiments,

opposition to economic globalization and its consequences,

or the need to reorder national priorities (Verschelden,

1993; Prigoff, 2000; Van Soest, 1994).

These scholars, however, express significant differences

in their definition of social justice. Some equate

the profession’s commitment to human rights and social

justice and question “whether social justice goals can be

met without redistribution” (Beck & Eichler, 2000).

Others appear to define social justice as the pursuit of social

change or service to disadvantaged and vulnerable

groups, particularly people living in poverty (Witkin,

1998; 1999; 2000). Van Soest (1994) argues that the

three different justice theories—libertarianism, utilitarianism,

and egalitarianism—could all be used as the basis

for reordering national priorities and support people’s

“valid claim for a share of the resources needed to ensure

the provision of adequate food, clothing, and shelter.”

Gibelman (2000) sees the roots of injustice in discrimination

and maintains that “social justice refers to conditions

in which all members of society have the same basic

rights, protections, opportunities, obligations, and social

benefits.” Using Rawls’ conception of justice, Figueira-

McDonough (1993) emphasizes the importance of equality

in the distribution of social goods. Reflecting the 200-

year-old tension between individual liberty and social

equality, she questions, however, whether social work has

been able to attain its dual goals of self-determination and

social justice.

Gal (2001) elaborates on this issue through an exploration

of the different notions of social justice implied in

the concept of compensatory social welfare policies. Gal

maintains that social justice is defined in two fundamental

ways. One definition reflects efforts to reward individuals

for past services or contributions, or as a redress for “injuries

or losses inflicted unjustly on individuals or groups.”

This definition is often in conflict with the view of social

justice that emphasizes equality. Gal suggests that a way of

reconciling this conflict is to use the social welfare system

to ensure horizontal equality in meeting needs, while allowing

the market to reward people for their efforts by

“providing them with their just deserts.”

Influenced by Etzioni (1993), McNutt (1997) takes a

communitarian perspective that seeks to balance individual

rights and responsibilities in articulating a definition of

social justice. He asserts that social workers today primarily

rely upon the definitions of social justice formulated by

Rawls (1971, 2001), Beverly and McSweeny (1987), or

Goulet (1971) that are based more on individual rights.

As alternatives, McNutt suggests four possible positions

on social justice along a continuum from individual to

community hegemony:

• The Community Reigns Supreme. Social justice involves

individual sacrifice to the common good.

• The Community and the Community Good Position. This

view (embraced by communitarians) attempts to link

individual rights with community rights.

• The Individual Need Community Position. This is the

traditional liberal position in which social justice is assured

by state action and the common good is “defined in terms

of what will benefit all individuals and that the market

cannot deliver.”

• The Individual Reigns Supreme Position. The conception

of social justice “equates individual self-interest with the

common good.”

The absence of conceptual or historical clarity or

agreement among scholars, however, has not deterred

some authors from urging the profession to embrace its

social justice responsibilities more fully, as required by the

revised Code of Ethics (Brill, 2001; NASW, ), or to pursue

professional unity as a means of reviving the field’s interest

in social justice goals (Haynes & White, 1999). This

author would argue, however, that without this conceptual

clarity it is difficult to understand how the Council on

Social Work Education can require all social work

349


programs to educate students to pursue economic and social

justice or how NASW can enforce its ethical imperative

that “social workers promote social justice” and “challenge

social injustice” (NASW, 1996, pp. 1, 5; see also

Cox, 2001; Council on Social Work Education, 2001; Van

Soest, 1994; Reeser & Leighninger, 1990).

Summary: Different

Aspects of Social Justice

During the past century social work scholars have focused

on different aspects of social justice. Most have

viewed social justice as an alternative to charity in that its

emphasis is on egalitarianism and mutuality, instead of dominance

and hierarchy (Reynolds, 1951; Kropotkin, 1902).

At one end of the ideological spectrum, a Marxist view of

social justice recognizes that neither the human condition

nor social reality is fixed, but are the consequences of socioeconomic

relationships and cultural patterns, including

the ideological frameworks that rationalize them (George &

Wilding, 1994; Mullaly, 1997; Fraser, 1995; Gil, 1998). A

liberal view focuses on the distribution of benefits and burdens

and the protection of persons’ rights particularly at the

level of individuals (Katz, 2001; Isbister, 2001; Miller,

2001; Schmidtz & Goodwin, 1998). According to Rawls

(2001) and others, it also involves the assignment of fundamental

rights and duties, economic opportunities and social

conditions, and incorporates a principle of compensation or

redress (Tomasi, 2001; Sen, 1992).

Conservatives, such as Robert Nozick (1974) and

Lawrence Mead (1986, 1997), differ from liberals in four

important ways. First, they would assign these rights solely

to individuals and not to groups or classes of persons. Second,

they would limit these rights to the political sphere and

exclude the redistribution of resources and status. Third,

they would regard the protection of property rights as of

equal or greater importance (Sunstein, 1997; Hayek,

1976). Finally, they would assert that social justice requires

a balancing of rights with responsibilities or obligations

(Berlin, 1958; Gilbert, 1995; Schmidtz & Goodin 1998).

By contrast, Held (1984) maintains that the pursuit of

social justice complements rather than competes with the

pursuit of human rights. Both, she argues, are products of

social cooperation, trust, and mutuality. Gil (1998) shares

this vision of society and makes a similar argument from a

social work perspective. Finally, postmodern scholars propose

an expansion of modern visions of social justice to include

groups traditionally omitted from justice-oriented

debates, an examination of justice/injustice in the sociocultural

as well as the political-economic spheres of society,

and a focus on societal processes as well as societal goals

and outcomes (Leonard, 1995).

Conclusion: Social Justice,

Social Policy, and Social Work Practice

A social justice approach to social policy would acknowledge

the connection in the design and delivery of

social services between peoples’ needs for economic assistance

and the supports agencies provide. This would reflect

the goals of empowerment as originally articulated by

Solomon (1976) and developed by social work scholars

over the past quarter century (Reisch, Wenocur, & Sherman,

1981; Simon, 1994; Gutierrez & Lewis, 1999;

Gutierrez, Parsons, & Cox, 1998). Some principles for

policy development derived from a justice-centered approach

could include:

• Policies and services should hold the most vulnerable populations

harmless in the distribution of societal resources.

Based upon Rawls’ notion of redress (2001), unequal distribution

of resources would be justified only if such inequalities

served to advance the least advantaged groups in the

community (Isbister, 2001; Franklin, 1998).

• Reflecting the mutuality of worker/client interests best articulated

by Bertha Reynolds, the construction of social services

would embody the idea that such services are the expression

of collective responsibility for people’s needs (Gil, 1998).

• To achieve the long-range goals of social justice, when scarce

resources make such choices necessary, social policies and

services should emphasize prevention rather than correction,

amelioration, or remediation (Katz, 2001; White, 2000).

• To incorporate ideas developed both by multiculturalists and

postmodernists, social services should stress multiple forms

of helping and multiple means of providing access to services

and benefits in order to recognize that needs and helping

are defined differently by different groups in a multicultural

society (Caputo, 2000; Green, 1999; Rivera & Erlich, 1998;

Iglehart & Becerra, 1995; Leonard, 1995).

• Finally, in order to reflect the social work profession’s longstanding

emphasis on the primacy of the client’s interest, social

policies and services should be developed so as to enable

clients and constituents to define their own situations and

contribute to the development and evaluation of solutions as

much as possible (Saleebey, 2002; Simon, 1994).

Bertha Reynolds (1951) proposed four criteria for

achieving social justice in social work practice. One was

the criterion of belonging—that people should be treated

as human beings, not as problems to be solved. To some

350


extent, the “strengths perspective” reformulates this idea

in contemporary terms, as do some aspects of empowerment

literature (Saleebey, 2002; Lee, 1994; Gutierrez,

Parsons, & Cox, 1998).

A second criterion is that people should be able to retain

their humanity while receiving help. They should be

treated with compassion and not condescension and must

never be reduced to a means to a professional or societal

end (Lewis, 1987). The empowerment tradition in social

work embodies key elements of this principle and incorporates

specific attention to the unique needs of historically

disenfranchised populations (Simon, 1994).

A third criterion is mutuality. Each person must be recognized

as having the capacity to repay society for its assistance

at some time, in some

way. This principle provides a

social justice-oriented adaptation

of the conservative

focus on balancing rights

and responsibilities. It contains

certain elements of the

contemporary communitarian

perspective although it

does not necessarily emerge

from the same ideological

foundation (Etzioni, 1993;

McNutt, 1997).

A final criterion is that

no strings should be attached

to the provision of

help. This principle would

reverse recent trends in social

welfare—best embodied in so-called “welfare reform”—and

would involve a redefinition of the prevailing

view of the relationship between individuals and society

that emphasizes human responsibility, but not agency,

over societal obligation (Mead, 1997).

In conclusion, the pursuit of social justice in the twenty-first

century requires social workers to acknowledge the

political dimensions of all practice and to engage in multifaceted

struggles to regain influence within the public

arena (Fisher & Karger, 1997; Haynes & Mickelson,

2002). By working cooperatively with clients and constituents

we can gain clarity about the mutual goals of our

efforts. As postmodernists argue, a social justice perspective

also contains the imperative of challenging prevailing

assumptions about power, privilege, and various forms of

oppression in the theories that underlie current policies,

programs, and practice methods. Finally, as modernists

have long asserted, it would include the development of

A social justice approach to social policy

would acknowledge the connection in

the design and delivery of social services

between peoples’ needs for economic

assistance and the supports agencies

provide. This would reflect the goals of

empowerment …

an alternative vision of society and its institutions and the

integration of that vision into all social work interventions.

Yet, social policies and social work practice in the United

States will not fully reflect social justice principles until

moral frameworks that stress the protection of human

rather than property rights acquire equal public credibility

and influence. This is the implicit imperative within the

profession’s Code of Ethics. As Reynolds prophetically remarked

a half century ago “The philosophy of social work

can not be separated from the prevailing philosophy of a

nation, as to how it values people and what importance it

sets upon their welfare” (1951, p. 174).

At its best, social work stands for the creation of a society

in which people, individually and in community, can

live decent lives and realize

their full human potential.

This requires us to advocate

for the elimination of

those policies that diminish

people’s sense of control

over their lives and drain finite

resources from basic

human needs. Simultaneously,

we need to work for

the expansion of those programs

that enable people to

exercise personal freedom

by removing the fear of

economic and physical

calamity from their lives

and making them feel like

integral and valued parts of

society. These goals reflect a potential synthesis of the historic

divisions between individual and collective wellbeing

at the heart of debates over social justice and may

provide the basis for its attainment in an increasingly diverse

and conflict-ridden society.

Comments on Other Articles

in the Special Focus

Editor’s note: Richard Caputo, the guest editor of this special focus on social

justice, asked Michael Reisch to comment on the other articles in the

focus. Reisch’s commentary follows:

The essays in this special issue explore different dimensions

of contemporary debates about social justice.

Richard Caputo, in Social Justice, Ethics of Care, and Market

Economies, confronts the growing dilemma of how social

justice can be achieved in a political-economic environment

in which market forces are ascendant. He does

351


this through a creative analysis in which gender issues

(long associated with the caring function of social

work/social welfare) are linked to the pursuit of democratic

social and political goals. Caputo argues that this

would require a return to universal approaches to social

welfare, within which the specific needs of persons could

then be accommodated.

In her essay, The Capabilities Perspective: A Framework

for Social Justice, Patricia McGrath Morris postulates a

new synthesis of justice perspectives that would combine

the social work profession’s recurring concerns about

human dignity and self-determination with a Rawlsian distributive

justice approach. Using Nussbaum’s (1999) “capabilities

perspective,” Morris expands the idea of social

justice beyond its traditional aspirations of achieving minimalist

levels of human need to one that would produce

outcomes that would enable each individual to realize his

orher full human potential. Without acknowledging it,

Morris essentially restates in postmodern language the vision

of humanitarian socialism articulated by the early

Marx (1964, ed.) and, more recently, by Gil (1998).

The article Two Tails of Justice by Pranab Chatterjee

and Amy D’Aprix points out the basic conflicts among the

five prevailing definitions of justice. Rather than attempt

to reconcile these conflicts, however, Chatterjee and

D’Aprix argue that each definition of justice contains elements

of two important social functions—distribution and

stability. They argue that, as a form of group behavior,

concepts of justice reflect a society’s history and the influences

of internal and external forces in its environment.

How these concepts will evolve in an increasingly diverse

society in which multiple histories and multiple forms of

adaptation exist is, perhaps, the critical question for social

workers and our society in the decades ahead.

References

Ackerman, B. (1980). Social justice and the liberal state. New Haven,

CT: Yale University Press.

Aristotle. (1980). The nicomachean ethics, translated by D. Ross, revised

by J. L. Ackrill and J. O. Urmson. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Barry, B. M. (1989). A treatise on social justice. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Beck, E. L., & Eichler, M. (2000). Consensus organizing: A practice

model for community building. Journal of Community Practice

8(1), 87–103.

Berlin, I. (1978). Concepts and categories. London: Hogarth Press.

Berlin, I. (1996). Karl Marx: His life and environment (4th ed.). New

York: Oxford University Press.

Berlin, I. (1958). Two concepts of liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Beverly, D., & McSweeny, E. (1987). Social welfare and social justice.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bird, O. A. (1967). The idea of justice. New York: Praeger.

Brawley, E. A., & Martinez-Brawley, E. E. (1999, June). Promoting

social justice in partnership with the mass media, Journal of

Sociology and Social Welfare, 26(2), 63–86.

Brill, C. K. (2001, March). Looking at the social work profession

through the eyes of the NASW Code of Ethics. Research on

Social Work Practice, 11(2), 223–234.

Campbell, T. (1989). Seven Theories of Human Society. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.

Caputo, R. (2000). Multiculturalism and social justice in the United

States: An attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable within a

pragmatic liberal framework. Race, Gender, and Class, 7(4),

161–182.

Carson, M. J. (1990). Settlement folk: Social thought and the American

settlement movement, 1885–1930. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

Cloward, R. (1990). Foreword. In I. Epstein & L. Cherrey-Reeser,

Professionalization and activism in social work: The sixties, the

eighties, and the future. New York: Columbia University Press.

Council on Social Work Education. (2001). Curriculum policy

statement–revised. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Cox, A. L. (2001). BSW students favor strengths/empowerment-based

generalist practice. Families in Society, 82(3), 305–313.

Daniels, D. (1989). Always a sister: The feminism of Lillian D. Wald.

New York: Feminist Press at the City University of New York.

Davis, A. F. (1967). Spearheads for reform: The social settlements and the

progressive movement, 1890–1917. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Dean, R. G., & Rhodes, M. L. (1998). Social constructionism and

ethics: What makes a “better” story. Families in Society, 79(3),

254–262.

Elshtain, J. B. (2002). Jane Addams and the dream of American

democracy: A life. New York: Basic Books.

Etzioni, A. (1993). The spirit of community. New York: Crown Books.

Figueira-McDonough, J. (1993). Policy practice: The neglected side of

social work intervention. Social Work, 38(2), 179–188.

Fisher, R. (1994). Let the people decide: Neighborhood organizing in

America (revised ed.). New York: Twayne.

Fisher, R., & Karger, H. J. (1997). Social work and community in a

private world: Getting out in public. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Franklin, J. (Ed.). (1998). Social policy and social justice: The IPPR

reader, Malden, MA: Polity Press.

Fraser, N. (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of

justice in a “post-socialist” age. New Left Review, 212, 68–93.

Freire, P. (1971). Pedogogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.

Gal, J. (2001, June). The perils of compensation in social welfare

policy. Social Service Review, 75(2), 225–244.

Gay, P. (1966). The enlightenment, 2 vols., New York: Alfred Knopf.

George, V., & Wilding, P. (1994). Welfare and ideology, London:

Routledge.

Gibelman, M. (2000). Affirmative action at the crossroads: A social

justice perspective. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 27(1),

153–174.

Gil, D. (1998). Confronting injustice and oppression: Concepts and

strategies for social workers, New York: Columbia University

Press.

Gil, D., & Gil, E. A. (1985). Toward social and economic justice.

Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.

Gilbert, N. (1989). The enabling state: Modern welfare capitalism in

America. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gilbert, N. (1995). Welfare justice: Restoring social equity. New Haven,

CT: Yale University Press.

352


Gottschalk, S. S., & Witkin, S. L. (1991). Rationality in social work: A

critical examination. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare,

18(4), 121–135.

Gould, K. H. (2000). Beyond Jones v. Clinton: Sexual harassment law

and social work. Social Work, 45(3), 237–248.

Goulet, D. (1971). The cruel choice. New York: Pantheon.

Green, J. (1999). Cultural awareness in the human services (3rd ed.).

Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Grogan, C. (2000, December). Principles of social justice, Social Service

Review. 74(4), 668–671.

Gutierrez, L., Parson, R. J., & Cox, E. O. (Eds.) (1998).

Empowerment and social work practice: A sourcebook. Belmont,

CA: Brooks/Cole.

Gutierrez, L., & Lewis, E. A. (Eds.). (1999). Empowerment and women

of color. New York: Columbia University Press.

Hagen, J. L. (2000). Critical perspectives on social welfare: Challenges

and controversies. Families in Society, 81(6), 555–556.

Hayek, F. A. (1976). The mirage of social justice. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Haynes, D. T., & White, B.W. (1999). Commentary: Will the “real”

social work please stand up? A call to stand for professional unity.

Social Work, 44(4), 385–391.

Held, V. (1995). Justice and care: Essential readings in feminist ethics.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Held, V. (1984). Rights and goods: Justifying social action. New York:

The Free Press.

Hobbes, T. (Ed.) (1996), Leviathan, New York: Oxford University Press.

Holder, A. C. (1922). The settlement idea: A vision of social justice. New

York: MacMillan.

Hyde, C. (1998). A model for diversity training in human service

agencies. Administration in Social Work, 22(4), 19–33.

Iglehart, A., & Becerra, R. (1995). Social services and the ethnic

community. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Isbister, J. (2001). Capitalism and justice: Envisioning social and

economic fairness. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

Israel, J. I. (2001). Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and the making of

modernity, 1650–1750. New York: Oxford University Press.

Katz, M. B. (2001). The price of citizenship: Redefining the American

welfare state. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Kropotkin, P. (1902). Mutual aid. Boston: Porter Sargent.

Lee, J. A. B. (1994). The empowerment approach to social work practice.

New York: Columbia University Press.

Leonard, P. (1995). Postmodernism, socialism and social welfare.

Journal of Progressive Human Services, 6(2), 3–19.

Lewis, H. (1987). A family ethic for our time. Social Casework, 68(2),

311–314.

Macleod, A. M. (1985). Economic inequality: Justice and incentives. In

K. Kipnis & D. T. Meyers (Eds.), Economic Justice (pp.

176–189). Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allenheld.

Maguire, D. (1980). A new American justice: Ending the white male

monopolies. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Marx, K. (1964). In D. J. Struik (Ed.) (M. Milligan, Trans.), Economic

and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. New York: International

Publishers.

McNutt, J. (1997, December). New communitarian thought and the

future of social policy. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare,

24(4), 45–56.

Mead, L. (1986). Beyond entitlement: The social obligations of

citizenship. New York: The Free Press.

Mead, L. (1997). The new paternalism: Supervisory approaches to

poverty. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Mill. J. S. (1971). Utilitarianism. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

Miller, D. (2001). Boundaries and justice: Diverse ethical perspectives.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Miller, D. (1976). Social justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Moon, J. D. (Ed.). (1988). Responsibility, rights, and welfare: The

theory of the welfare state. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Morell, C. (1996). Radicalizing recovery: Addiction, spirituality, and

politics. Social Work, 41(3), 306–312.

Moroney, R. (1986). Shared responsibility: Families and social policy.

New York: Aldine.

Mullaly, R. (1997). Structural social work: Ideology, theory, and practice

(2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

National Association of Social Workers. (1996). Code of ethics (Rev.

ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.

Nussbaum, M. C. (1999). Sex and social justice. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Plato. (1974). The republic (G. M. A. Grube, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN:

Hackett.

Prigoff, A. (2000). Economics for social workers: Social outcomes of

economic globalization, with strategies for community action.

Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole/ Thomson.

Rawls, J. (1971, 1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA:

The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Reamer, F. G. (1998). The evolution of social work ethics, Social Work,

43(6), 488–499.

Reisch, M., & Andrews, J. L. (2001). The road not taken: A history of

radical social work in the United States. New York: Brunner-

Routledge.

Reynolds, B. C. (1963). An uncharted journey: Fifty years growth in

social work. New York: Citadel Press.

Reynolds, B. C. (1951). Social work and social living, New York:

Citadel Press.

Rivera, F., & Ehrlich, J. (1998). Community organizing in a diverse

society (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Robinson, R. (2000). The debt: What America owes to Blacks, New

York: Dutton.

Roemer, J. E. (1996). Theories of distributive justice, Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Rose, S. M. (2000). Reflections on empowerment-based practice.Social

Work,45(5), 403–412.

Rousseau, J.-J. (1994). Discourse on the origins of inequality (P.

Coleman, Ed.; F. Philip, Trans.). New York: Oxford University

Press. (Original work published 1754.)

Ryan, W. (1981). Equality. New York: Vintage Books.

Saint-Just, A. L. L., de. (1968). Oeuvres choisies, discours, rapports,

institutions republicaines, proclamations, lettres, Paris: Gallimard.

(Original work published earlier.)

Saleebey, D. (1990). Philosophical disputes in social work: Social justice

denied. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 17(1), 29–40.

Saleebey, D. (2002). The strengths perspective in social work practice (3rd

ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Sandel, M. (1982). Liberalism and the limits of justice, New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Schmidtz, D., & Goodin, R. E. (1998). Social welfare and individual

responsibility, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schreiber, M. S. (1995). Labeling a social worker a national security

risk: A memoir. Social Work, 40(5), 656–660.

Sen, A. (1990, June 14). Individual freedom as a social commitment.

New York Review of Books, 49–54.

353


Sen, A. (1992). Inequality re-examined. New York: Russell Sage

Foundation.

Simon, B. L. (1994). The empowerment tradition in social work practice.

New York: Columbia University Press.

Sklar, K. K. (1995). Florence Kelley and the nation’s work: The rise of

women’s political culture 1830–1900. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Sklar, K. K. (1998). Social justice feminists in the U.S. and Germany: A

dialogue in documents 1885–1933. Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press.

Solomon, B. B. (1976). Black empowerment: Social work in oppressed

communities. New York: Columbia University Press.

Sternbach, J. (2000). Lessons learned about working with men: A

prison memoir. Social Work, 45(5), 413–423.

Sunstein, C. R. (1997). Free markets and social justice. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Swenson, C. R. (1998). Clinical social work’s contribution to a social

justice perspective. Social Work, 43(6), 527–537.

Titmuss, R. (1968). Commitment to welfare. London: George Allen &

Unwin.

Tomasi, J. (2001). Liberalism beyond justice: Citizens, society, and the

boundaries of political theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.

Towle, C. (1945). Common human needs. Washington, DC: Social

Security Administration.

Tucker, W. J. (1903). The progress of the social conscience (Reprint from

The Atlantic Monthly, 116 (3), 289–303). Boston: South End

House Association.

U.S. Catholic Bishops. (1986). Economic justice for all: Pastoral letter

on Catholic social teaching and the U.S. economy. Washington,

DC: National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

van Mill, D. (2001). Liberty, rationality and agency in Hobbes’s

Leviathan. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Van Soest, D. (1994). Strange bedfellows: A call for reordering national

priorities from three social justice perspectives. Social Work,

39(6), 710–717.

Verschelden, C. (1993). Social work values and pacifism: Opposition to

war as a professional responsibility. Social Work, 38(6), 765–769.

Wakefield, J. C. (1988). Psychotherapy, distributive justice, and social

work—Part 1: Distributive justice as a conceptual framework for

social work. Social Service Review, 62(2), 187–210.

Wakefield, J.C. (1988). Psychotherapy, distributive justice, and social

work—Part 2: Psychotherapy and the pursuit of justice, Social

Service Review 62(3), 353–382.

Warren, R. (1983). New perspectives on the American community (4th

ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Weick, A. (1999). Guilty knowledge, Families in Society, 80(4),

327–332.

White, J. E. (2000). Democracy, justice, and the welfare state:

Reconstructing public care, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania

State University Press.

Wise, S. S. (1909). The conference sermon: Charity vs. justice.

Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and

Corrections (USA), 36, 20–29.

Withorn, A. (1986). What is progressive social work? The Bertha Capen

Reynolds Society Newsletter, 1(2), 1–2.

Witkin, S. (1999). Identities and contexts. Social Work, 44(4),

293–297.

Witkin, S. (1998). Is social work an adjective? Social Work, 43(6),

483–486.

Witkin, S. (2000). Writing social work. Social Work, 45(5), 389–394.

Woods, R. (1905). Social work: A new profession. International

Journal of Social Ethics, 16.

Michael Reisch is professor, University of Michigan School of Social

Work, 1080 South University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106; e-

mail: mreisch@umich.edu. Professor Reisch is the coauthor of two recent

books:

Reisch, M., & Andrews, J. (2001). The road not taken: A history

of radical social work in the United States. New York: Brunner-

Routledge.

Reisch, M., & Gambrill, E. (Eds.) (1997). Social work in the

21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Manuscript received: May 3, 2002

Accepted: May 5, 2002

354

View publication stats

Page 132 of 161

Attachment C

Social Justice

and The Formal Principle of Freedom

Page 133 of 161

UDK: 316.34

FILOZOFIJA I DRUŠTVO XXVIII (2), 2017.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1702270N

Original scientific article

Received: 15.5.2017 — Accepted: 31.5.2017

Olga Nikolić

Igor Cvejić

Social Justice and the Formal Principle of Freedom

270

Abstract The aim of this paper is to show, contra the right-libertarian critique

of social justice, that there are good reasons for defending policies of social

justice within a free society. In the first part of the paper, we will present two

influential right-libertarian critiques of social justice, found in Friedrich Hayek’s

Law, Legislation and Liberty and Robert Nozick’s Anarchy, State and Utopia. Based

on their approach, policies of social justice are seen as an unjustified infringement

on freedoms of individual members of a society. In response to this critique, we

will introduce the distincion between formal and factual freedom and argue that

the formal principle of freedom defended by Hayek and Nozick does not suffice

for the protection of factual freedom of members of a society, because it does

not recognize (1) the moral obligation to help those who, without their fault, lack

factual freedom to a significant degree, and (2) the legal obligation of the state

to protect civic dignity of all members of a society. In the second part of the

paper, we offer an interpretation of Kant’s argument on taxation, according to

which civic dignity presupposes factual freedom, in order to argue that Kant’s

justification of taxation offers good reasons for claiming that the state has the

legal obligation to protect factual freedom via the policies of social justice.

Keywords: social justice, social policy, taxation, freedom, dignity, Hayek, Nozick,

Kant

Should a society enforce policies of social justice and on what grounds? We

will deal with this problem by presenting two influential right-libertarian

arguments against the policies of social justice and against the very meaningfulness

of social justice – arguments offered by Friedrich Hayek and Robert

Nozick. We will argue that their critique is based on what they claim to

be the grounding principle of a legitimate social order – which we will call

the formal principle of freedom. In response to their critique we will suggest

that, in order to justify policies of social justice, such as taxation, social

minimum, social housing, universal health care, public education, unemployment

benefits, gender justice and similar policies aimed at greater equality

among members of a society, we need a more robust concept of freedom.

This will lead us to propose a difference between formal freedom on the one

hand and factual freedom on the other hand, in order to show why we believe

that social justice indeed has a meaning and what we see as the main

elements constituting its meaningfulness. As we intend to show, justifying

social justice requires attributing value to another principle: the principle

Olga Nikolić: Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; olga@

instifdt.bg.ac.rs.

Igor Cvejić: Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; cvejic@

instifdt.bg.ac.rs.

SOCIAL JUSTICE: NEW PERSPECTIVES, NEW HORIZONS

of factual freedom, i.e. the principle of respect for human life and dignity.

Moreover, the principle of factual freedom can be understood not only in

the ethical sense of governing individual behaviour, but has an important

legal dimension as well. In the second part of the paper we will discuss the

latter via Kant’s argument on taxation which, as we will argue, rests upon

an implicit defence of factual freedom, and thus can help us respond to the

right-libertarian critique of social justice.

The issues revolving around the concept of social justice that we will discuss

emerge in the context of the aftermath of the Second World War, The Cold

War, and the problems of planned economies. Hayek’s and Nozick’s critiques

presented here are mainly directed at the socialist planned economies and

Keynesian economics, which was the dominant economic model from the

later part of the Great Depression until the 1970s. Both sources of which we

make use, Nozick’s Anarchy, State and Utopia, as well as Hayek’s Law Legislation

and Liberty were published in the 1970s, the years which saw first the

economic recession and then the general acceptance of neoliberal policies

and neoliberal economic theories (with Hayek as one of their main proponents),

as well as libertarian political ideals Nozick influentially advanced.

Arguments against social justice discussed here should therefore be seen as

contributing to the arguments against state planning of the economy and as

an attempt to limit government intervention in the society. We begin with a

presentation of Hayek’s and Nozick’s critique of social justice.

271

Critiques of Social Justice

Hayek’s Four Arguments

When discussing Hayek’s critique of social justice we can distinguish four

interrelated key arguments: the ontological, the epistemological, the economic

and the political argument.

The ontological argument is in fact the argument for social justice as a meaningless

concept. The argument is called ontological because it reflects the

ontological view of society as comprised of individuals and rejects the idea

that there is a social entity with its own collective will. Only individuals with

their individual wills exist. Our societies, says Hayek, are ordered, we have

laws, institutions, customs, and we respect certain rules. We tend to understand

this order as produced by somebody’s deliberate design (whether it is

a particular person, or a group of persons, an institution, or a class). However,

this is not always the case. In fact, social order can, and in very complex

societies most of the time does arise spontaneously, out of many descrete

actions of many individuals which are mutually ignorant of any overarching

goal or the entirety of the process. (Hayek 2013: 34–50) Out of this Hayek

Olga Nikolić, Igor Cvejić


derives his critique of social justice. For Hayek, only distributions that have

been deliberately brought about can be called just or unjust. The term ‘justice’

has meaning only within the domain of deliberate actions. Unequal distribution

of wealth produced by the “impersonal process of the market” cannot

be called unjust, because it was not intentionally produced. When we attribute

justice or injustice to the market, we mistakely transfer our experinece

of personal face-to-face relationships to a realm where this is inapplicable.

(Hayek 2013: 231–234, Tebble 2009: 583–585)

272

The second, epistemological argument states that if we attempt to create and

preserve a just distibution in our society, we are faced with an insurmountable

difficulty. Namely, we cannot predict the outcome of our actions, because

there is too many factors in play. Market does not operate according

to a deliberate plan and its outcomes are unpredictable. Deciding how to

distribute resources based on some non-market criterion, such as people’s

needs or equality, will necessarily be flawed, because people’s needs and intentions

are many and changing, they are individual and impossible to calculate.

They are in fact best reflected by the price of goods in the free market

and the best way to manage them is to let people decide by themselves about

their needs. (Hayek 2013: 250–253, Tebble 2009: 586–588)

Furthermore, according to Hayek, economically speaking it is more prosperous

not to intervene in the market. Interventions are dangerous for the

economy because they disturb the natural system of prices, which are only

capable of giving us accurate information about supply and demand, enabling

us to make good economic decisions. Moreover, economic inequality is socially

necessary. The market only functions properly “at the price of a constant

dissapointment of some expectations”. (Hayek 2013: 267) This is the

value of free competition for Hayek. It makes all the economic agents, both

the successful and the unsuccessful ones, learn from the process, develop

their skills, adjust and innovate. It is through such dispersion of knowledge

that society can prosper.

Last but not least, social justice endangers individual freedom by putting

too much power in the hands of the government. Prices “lose the guiding

function they have in the market order and would have to be replaced by

the commands of the directing authority.” (Hayek 2013: 245) “No less than

in the market order, would the individuals in the common interest have to

submit to great inequality – only these inequalities would be determined not

by the interaction of individual skills in an impersonal process, but by the

uncontradictable decision of authority”. (Hayek 2013: 245) The pursuit of

social justice “must progressively approach nearer and nearer to a totalitarian

system”. (Hayek 2013: 232) Instead of this futile attempt at creating a society

of social justice, Hayek argues, the state should provide the framework


for the free market, i.e. it should provide the set of formal conditions for the

free competition in the market to take place.

However, it is worth mentioning that Hayek ultimately defends the state

provision of the economic minimum. In the end, he conceded that there is

no reason to reject the minimal income safety net in a free society, as long

as we find some outside-of-market mechanisms for this. (Hayek 2013: 249).

What does this mean though is not completely clear, because redistribution

always involves at least via taxation, some sort of intervention in the market.

This concession actually made his theory vulnerable to attacks, because it

contradicts his earlier arguments against social justice (Tebble 2009). It shows

perhaps that contrary to everything previously said, Hayek was aware that

in a free society some role should still be left for social justice.

Nozick’s Entitlement Theory

Nozick gives us some similar arguments as Hayek. He too accepts spontaneous

order explanation and uses it to argue that the main aim of the state

should be the protection of individuals against infringements on their freedom.

The infringements involve use of violence, coercion, murder, theft,

fraud, etc. Any more extensive state is unjustified because it violates individual

rights of its citizens. Whereas Hayek’s arguments are more epistemologically

based (Hayek argues that we don’t know what others need, we

don’t know what possible ill effects our actions could have on the market,

so it’s best to leave the market to function on its own), Nozick’s arguments

are based on the theory of natural rights. This allows him to make an even

stronger case for inappropriateness of state intervention and redistribution,

because in order to rectify inequalities, the state would infringe upon private

property rights of individuals.

Social justice is about redistribution. It is about taking away from the wealthier

and giving to those who are less fortunate. Nozick argues that this is not

morally justified because every person should be guaranteed the right to decide

on his or her property.

To support this claim he develops the entitlement theory of justice. We will

quote Nozick’s summary of his theory: “the holdings of a person are just if

he is entitled to them by the principles of justice in acquisition and transfer

or by the principle of recification of injustice.” (Nozick 1974: 153) These two

principles, of acquisition and transfer basically state that if a person aquires

property in a morally permissible, lawful, just way (whatever this is, is rather

complex and depends on the context), he or she is entitled to that property.

The same goes if that property is transferred in a morally permissible, lawful

and just way to another person. “Entire distribution is just if everybody

273



is entitled to the holdings they posses under the distribution.” (Nozick 1974:

151) And: “Whatever arises from a just situation by just steps is itself just.”

(Nozick 1974: 151)

Nozick argues that it is important to take into account how a particular distribution

came about, that is, whether a person acquired a holding in a just

way and is therefore entitled to it, rather than simply looking at the distribution

at a given time and judging that it is just or unjust based on the distribution

itself. For example, if somebody judges that it is not just that so

many people are starving, while a minority is extremely wealthy in a given

society, that would be an ahistorical approach to justice and for Nozick the

judgement would be flawed as long as it does not take into account the history

of the acquisition. (Nozick 1974: 153–155)

274

Moreover, Nozick labels his entitlement theory as non-patterned, which

means that the just distribution is not generated by some sort of decision on

who and based on which characteristics should get what, but by a set of formal

principles, formal rules in the game of just acquisition and just transfer.

Nozick gives a vivid and concrete example of his views in describing a hypothetical

case involving a very successful basketball player at the time, Wilt

Chamberlain. (Nozick 1974: 161–163) Nozick says let us start with any distribution

that you consider just, let it be for example, that everyone has an

equal share of wealth. Now, Wilt Chamberlain attracts audience, everybody

loves to see him play, because he is so good, and various basketball teams

compete to have him on their team, and so on. He decides to sign a contract

with his basketball team, whereby he will get 25 cents out of every sold ticket.

Everybody is ready to pay the price but in the end Wilt Chamberlain will

have 25 000 dollars more. The distribution of wealth will become unequal.

Where did everything go wrong? Nozick says, nowhere, Wilt is entitled to

his money because no injustice has been done to anyone during the transfer,

everybody willingly agreed to give him one small portion of what they

have in exchange for the pleasure of seeing him play.

What this argument is meant to show is that any distribution of wealth in a

free society will be unequal. If we allow people to freely exchange their holdings,

we will inevitably end up with an unequal distribution. If we want to

keep the distribution equal we would have to constantly interfere with people’s

lives. (Nozick 1974: 163)

Finally, why we shouldn’t stop this from happening, why not simply stop the

free exchange, is because it would be immoral. It would interfere with individual

property rights, the rights to choose what we want to do with what

we have. The basic fact of morality is that everybody should be allowed to

live his or her life the way he or she wants, as long as they don’t hurt anybody


else. Nozick is radical in endorsing this principle, so much so that for him

taxation is the same as forced labour, because it forces us to do unrewarded

work for others. (Nozick 1974: 172)

Should we say that for Nozick social justice is meaningless? The weight of

Nozick’s argument does not rely primarily on social justice being meaningless

concept. However, it deprives social justice of its moral meaning. This

effectively makes demands for social justice meaningless, because they rely

on the premise that social justice is a morally desirable goal.

* * *

From these arguments we can derive the main principle both Nozick and

Hayek see as the principle that every legitimate social order must respect.

They did not invent this principle. It is the very same principle we find in

Adam Smith, John Locke, John Stuart Mill and other classical liberals. It represents

the social ideal of individual independence and liberty. It respects

as the basic moral fact that everybody has their own life and should have

freedom to decide on what makes their life valuable. In the words of John

Stuart Mill: “The only purpose for which power can rightfully be exercised

over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent

harm to others.” (Mill 2003: 80) The free society is the society which fulfills

this condition.

275

The freedom established by this principle is identical with what Isaiah Berlin

calls negative freedom, freedom from infringement. “I am normally said

to be free to the degree to which no man or body of men interferes with my

activity. If I am prevented by others from doing what I could otherwise do,

I am to that degree unfree.” (Berlin 2002: 169) We named this principle the

formal principle of freedom, because it fixes only the necessary formal condition

of freedom, but not the sufficient conditions of factual freedom. The

latter include all the possibilities open to me and all those closed to me based

on the concrete, material circumstances of my life and the society I live in.

It is the factual, not the formal freedom that we experience in our everyday

lives. We experience freedom and unfreedom in relation to certain concrete

possibilities that we have or don’t have. Most of the time, such experience is

linked to the resources that we have or don’t have, and to the concrete power

relations in our society. Resources have an important influence on the

factual freedom, because they greatly determine how much power we will

have to change circumstances that are unfavourable to us. 1

1 The term ‘factual freedom’ is also used in order to defend social constitutional rights

by Robert Alexy. See Alexy 2002: 337–348.



The formal principle of freedom does not suffice for the protection of factual

freedom of members of a society, because it does not recognize (1) the moral

obligation to help those who, without their fault, lack factual freedom to

a significant degree, and (2) the legal obligation of the state to protect civic

dignity of all members of a society.

276

The formal principle of freedom does not recognize (1) because it only protects

individual freedom from infringement. Therefore, if I choose not to

help somebody in danger crying out for help, even if helping would not represent

any significant risk for me, I am not morally responsible, according

solely to the formal principle of freedom. In a similar way, although taxes

could be used to help the less fortunate members of a society and guarantee

to them a degree of factual freedom necessary for living a dignified life (and

not just mere subsistence), Nozick could still say that they are infringement

on rights of those who have to pay taxes. In the case of conflict which one

should we choose? If we wish to keep the moral obligation to help intact, we

need another principle, the one that would protect factual freedom as well.

However, we cannot prove that this is a desirable moral goal for everyone.

Nozick could still argue that private property rights are more basic moral

rights. We need another argument in order to show that, irrespectively of

what we individually believe to be morally valuable, the state is somehow

legally obliged to ensure some amount of social justice.

In response, we wish to stress the importance of another principle governing

social life: respect for human life and dignity. We intend to show that

this principle requires not only respect for the formal principle of freedom,

but also an increase in the factual freedom of all members of a society, given

that the factual, not the formal freedom is the sufficient condition for living

a dignified life, because it presupposes having a concrete infrastructure to

realize our freely chosen goals. This principle also includes the above mentioned

moral obligation to help those less fortunate. In addition to being

morally relevant in this way, we will show that it has legal relevance as well.

This would justify redistribution via taxation, and other policies of social

justice, to the extent to which they are means for improving chances of each

member of a society to in fact live a dignified and free life. We will also show

that the demand to protect factual freedom of members of a society includes

the protection of civic dignity, i.e. equal rights of citizens to take part in the

political life of their society.

In the next section, we intend to show how Kant’s theory of justice can help

us accomplish this goal, by recognizing how the question of factual freedom

and civic dignities is related to the problem of taxation and social justice We

will conclude with a brief critique of Nozick’s and Hayek’s arguments informed

by Kant’s theory.


Kant’s Argument on Taxation

In many points Nozick’s argument about formal principle of freedom is similar

to the Kantian view of formal justice. Nozick even used Kant’s claim to

treat others as ends in themselves to defend his own thesis (Nozick 1974:

32). Taking this into consideration, it could look like the formal principle

of freedom suffices to protect dignity in a Kantian sense (the possibility to

choose one’s own ends). Moreover, like Nozick, Kant actually rejects the

idea that justice can re quire the redistribution of resources in response to

needs (V-MS/Vigil, AA 27: 517,526), explicitly rejects juridical relevance of

material inequality (TP, AA 08: 289–290) and “mere” needs and wishes (MS,

AA 06: 213,230).

However, in Metaphysics of morals Kant is also explicit about the right of the

state to introduce taxation of the rich:

To the supreme commander (Oberbefehlshaber) there belongs indirectly,

that is, insofar as he has taken over the duty of the people, the right to impose

taxes on the people for its own preservation, such as taxes to support

organizations providing for the poor, foundling homes, and church organizations,

usually called charitable or pious institutions. (MS, AA 06:326)

In his Lectures on Ethics (Moralphilosophie Collins) Kant holds even more egalitarian

view:

One can participate in the general injustice even if one does no injustice

according to the civil laws and institutions. Now if one shows beneficence

to a wretch, then one has not given him anything gratuitously, but

has given him only what one had earlier helped to take from him through

the general injustice. For if no one took more of the goods of life than another,

then there would be no rich and no poor. Accordingly, even acts of

generosity are acts of duty and indebtedness, which arise from the rights

of others. (V-MO/Collins, AA 27: 416)

For right-libertarians, such as Nozick, these claims contradict justice based

on the principle of formal freedom. One of the solutions is to understand taxation

as founded on the ethical duty toward the other, i.e. as the right of the

state to enforce duty of benevolence – as claimed by Onora O’Neill (O’Neill

1989: ch10–12.). However, Kant explicitly rejects both that state could rely

on voluntary contributions and, more importantly, that enforcement of current

contributions would be a legal way to satisfy the needs of the poor 2 , and

rather argues for legal public taxation (MS, AA 06: 326). As we will argue,

Kant’s argument is specifically juridical and not (merely) ethical.

277

2 See Varden 2016.



Kant’s main argument goes:

The general will of the people has united itself into a society that is to

maintain itself perpetually; and for this end it has submitted itself to the

internal authority of the state in order to maintain those members of the

society who are unable to maintain themselves. For reasons of state the

government is therefore authorized to constrain the wealthy to provide

the means of sustenance to those who are unable to provide for even their

most necessary natural needs. The wealthy have acquired an obligation to

the commonwealth, since they owe their existence to an act of submitting

to its protection and care, which they need in order to live; on this obligation

the state now bases its right to contribute what is theirs to maintaining

their fellow citizens (MS, AA 06: 326).

278

As we see, Kant refers to the state right based on a ‘duty of the people’ (Pflicht

des Volks). The preservation of the people, here in question, is not material

existence of the state (“for it is rich”), but existence of its members as citizens.

Selbständigkeit, factual freedom and civic diginity

Kant characterizes citizens of the state with three main attributes:

The members of such a society who are united for giving law (societas civilis),

that is, the members of a state, are called citizens of a state (cives). In

terms of rights, the attributes of a citizen, inseparable from his essence (as

a citizen), are: lawful freedom, the attribute of obeying no other law than

that to which he has given his consent; civil equality, that of not recognizing

among the people any superior with the moral capacity to bind him as

a matter of Right in a way that he could not in turn bind the other; and

third, the attribute of civil self-subsistence, of owing his existence and preservation

to his own rights and powers as a member of the commonwealth,

not to the choice of another among the people. From his self-subsistence

follows his civil personality, his attribute of not needing to be represented

by another where rights are concerned (MS, AA 06: 314).

The most controversial of them is the attribute of self-subsistence (Selbständigkeit),

not owning one’s existence to the choice of other people. Unlike the

first two attributes, self-subsistence is connected with factual (material) situation.

Kant gives us varieties of examples, including servants, a minor (naturaliter

vel civiliter), controversially all women, but also some explicit examples

of economic organizations of society: “the blacksmith in India, who goes

into people’s houses to work on iron with his hammer, anvil, and bellows,

as compared with the European carpenter or blacksmith who can put the

products of his work up as goods for sale to the public; the private tutor, as

compared with the schoolteacher; the tenant farmer as compared with the

leasehold farmer, and so forth“ (MS, AA 06: 314–315). In a word “anyone

whose preservation in existence (his being fed and protected) depends not on


his management of his own business but on arrangements made by another

(except the state)“ (ibid). Though many of Kant’s claims here could be taken as

dubious and politically incorrect 3 , it is important that he acknowledges the

fact that status of the (active) citizen of the state could be violated by some

material aspects of that person’s life, e.g. by an infringement on her factual

freedom – as it is the case with economic dependence on another person.

Implications of these claims are also controversial. Kant uses them to introduce

a distinction well known from the French post-revolutionary Constitution,

between active and passive citizens. On the one hand, Kant, as the

old French Constitution, claims that those who lack (above all) economic

self-subsistence are passive citizens, enjoying the protection of the state, but

lacking rights to vote and participate in other public political decision-making.

From this point of view, it could seem that Kant is only an old-fashioned

theorist who promotes the unacceptable idea that some citizens should be

deprived of their basic political right to vote. On the other hand, although

Kant accepts that one could naturally or voluntary lose the status of an active

citizen, he insists that there must be rightful conditions for everyone to

become an active citizen:

279

It follows only that, whatever sort of positive laws the citizens might vote

for, these laws must still not be contrary to the natural laws of freedom

and of the equality of everyone in the people corresponding to this freedom,

namely that anyone can work his way up from this passive condition

to an active one. (MS, AA 06: 315)

Kant’s weak claim „that anyone can work his way up from this passive condition

to an active one” could certainly not be used to defend egalitarian view

of a society, nor the premise “to everyone according to their needs”. However,

it could be used as a strong argument in favour of some social policies,

which are today in danger; for example, public health and social insurance,

free public education, etc (Shell 2016).

To sum up this part of the text, Kant had recognized the dependence of person’s

possibility to be an active participant of political life from economical

and factual situation. What is here at stake are not only basic needs, nor

3 Alessandro Pinzani and Nuria Sánchez Madrid listed three key limitations of Kant’s

account of passive citizenship. 1) They found Kant’s argu ment that the poor should not

vote, because they would sell their votes, double-edged – for the same argument could

be used against the rich (buyers), and it was used for ostracism in Ancient Athens. 2) Kant

addresses formal obstacles to attaining full active citizenship, while (intentionally or not)

economic privileges and inequalities are left out of consideration. 3) Kant is very insensitive

to the gender issue, for he finds that a woman renounces her civil independence by

entering into marriage. (Pinzani, Madrid 2016)



universal human rights, but rather civic dignities. 4 Civic dignity implies equal

rights to possibilities to take part in political decision-making, i.e. to become

an active citizen of the state. Kant acknowledges that those rights could be

affected through the material limits, limits of one’s factual freedom, caused by

dependence of their material existence from someone else. Although Kant’s

ethics certainly implies duties toward the other, to help others who are in

trouble, the obligation implied by argument about self-subsistence of citizens

is not reducible to (mere) ethical duties and, as we will see in the next

part of the text, is connected with juridical questions and rights of the state.

280

General will, civil union and society

Kant makes a distinction between society and civil union:

The civil union (unio civilis) cannot well be called a society [Gesellschaft];

because between the commander (imperans) and the subject (subditus) there

is no partnership (Mitgenossenschaft). They are not social fellows [Gesellen];

rather, one is subordinated to, not coordinated with, the other, and being

co-ordinated with one another must regard themselves as equals inasmuch

as they stand under the same common laws. It is thus less the case

that this union [Verein] is a society than that makes one. (AA 06: 306 –307)

It is important to notice that civil society, thus, is not simple uniting of people

who live in a same place, but, as previous quotation suggests, a society which

has been made by a civil union, a society of active citizens living at equal as

lawgivers, whose dignity is founded on public laws of the state. Kant refers

to civil society both in the argument about taxation (“The general will of the

people has united itself into a society”) and in the argument about self-subsistence

of citizens (“The members of such a society who are united for giving

law (societas civilis)”).

It is now clear that “preservation”, previously mentioned in an argument

about taxation, is not material preservation of the state, nor of existence of

its members, but preservation of the civil society, which would be corrupted

if the members of the state lose their active role in a society. Moreover, this

right, according to Kant, belongs to the dignities of the state:

Every state contains three authorities within it, that is, the general united

will consists of three persons (trias politica): the sovereign authority

[Herrschergewalt] (sovereignty) in the person of the legislator; the executive

authority in the person of the ruler (in conformity to law); and the judicial

authority (to award to each what is his in accordance with the law) in the

person of the judge (potestas legislatoria, rectoria et iudiciaria). (AA 06: 313)

4 This term was introduced by Josiah Ober. He distinguishes civic dignity, as defined

above, from universal human dignity and aristocratic or elitist dignity related to the

social statuses and ranks (Ober 2012)


All of those authorities in the state are dignities (Würden), since they arise

necessarily from the Idea of a state as such, as essential for the establishment

(constitution) of it, they are dignities of the state (Staatswürden) (AA06: 315)

The legislative authority can belong only to the united will of the people.

(AA06: 313)

With this, Kant’s juridical argument about taxation and social policies is completed:

the infringement on the factual (material) freedom of the people, if it

happens that they become poor, implies that they will lose their active status

in society and if people lose possibilities to become active members of

society, civil society would become corrupted, thus the state has the right to

impose taxes to enable those in a passive status to became active members of

the society for the preservation of the civil society. But, there is also an additional

argument, mentioned above, that probably could imply even more

egalitarian consequences. Those who are rich are dependent on civil society

in at least two ways: they owe their protection to the civil society, to the public

laws, that regulate this society; and they owe to the society, because they

became rich only in and with the help of the society (which protects trade

rules, property, encourages others to cooperate inside its institutions, etc.)

281

The main difference between Nozick and Kant is, therefore, that for Kant

things in some way change with the transition from private rights (in a state

of nature) to the public rights (“the sum of the laws which need to be promulgated

generally in order to bring about a rightful condition“, AA 06: 311).

Although, both private and public rights for Kant have the same content, and

only the form changes, this change presupposes united lawgiving will. But

here, the reasoning is not merely private, laws must actually be based on the

public reasoning, and must protect public reasoning, which includes protection

of rightful conditions for everyone to take part in the civil society.

And this presupposes much more than just the formal principle of freedom,

including the protection of factual freedom; as Shell wrote:

As member of the general will, in other words, each wills his own existence

as citizen only insofar as he also, and equally, wills the civic existence of

every other member of the peo ple (Shell 2016: 8)

We do not want here to discuss which view of society is ultimately better,

but argument showed above indicates that Nozick does not actually defend

(factual) freedom of all in the society, but the capitalist view of the society.

Geral Cohen came to the same conclusion:

Therefore Nozick cannot claim to be inspired throughout by a desire to

protect freedom, unless he means by ‘freedom’ what he really does mean

by it: the freedom of private property owners to do as they wish with their

property. (Cohen 1995: 90)



From the Kantian perspective, protection of person’s freedom under the public

laws would imply much more than just the formal principle of freedom.

It would demand the protection of factual freedom, e.g. through the relief

of poverty. Thus it looks like freedom as understood by Nozick would for

Kant still count as lawless freedom:

And one cannot say: a state, a man in state has sacrificed a part of his own

innate outer freedom for the sake of an end, but rather, he has relinquished

entirely his wild, lawless freedom in order to find his freedom as such undiminished,

in a dependence upon laws, that is, in a rightful condition,

since this dependence arises from his own lawgiving will. (AA 06: 316)

Based on everything said above, let us dispose with Hayek’s arguments as

well.

282

First of all, Hayek’s ontological argument, seems to us unconvincing because

we can in fact attribute some responsibility for a particular distribution of

wealth in the society to the institutions deciding on policies which are to

be adopted. Therefore, we have responsibility as a political community for

the particular distribution of wealth being just or unjust, because we adopted

certain policies leading to such distribution.In the light of developments

within social thoery in the last tree decades, Hayek’s ontological position

seems rather naïve. There has been a significant effort lately to explain and

understand various collective social institutuions and their intentionality. 5

As for Hayek’s epistemological argument, he himself conceded that we can

in fact have some knowledge at least regarding the minimal needs, for example

shelter, clothing and food. There is no reason why we couldn’t extend

this even further, to encompass needs that are easily recognized as universally

desirable: education, health care, sanitation, access to information, etc.

Moreover, some of them directly follow from the political and economical

organization of a society and enable the possibilities of factual freedom (for

example, the need to use transport to go to or to find a job, or the need to use

internet to access information). 6 The problem remains of course, where to

draw the line. But the issue does not really confronts us with an impossible

epistemological task described by Hayek (unless we set the task too stringently,

demanding e.g. establishment of some perfectly egalitarian society).

Social needs are many and changing, but that does not mean that they cannot

be an object of knowledge for the social sciences.

As for Hayek’s economic argument, we will not dwell upon it, but we do

think that he overestimates the dangers for the economy that policies of

5 See Tuomela 2007; Searle 1995, 2010; Gilbert 1989.

6 See Geuss 1981: 22.


social justice can bring. There are theories that show the benefits of alternative

economic models, as well as the perils of the neoliberal one. The success

of neoliberal policies in the second half of XX century was followed by the

serious economic crises in the beginning of the XXI century, indicating that

neoliberal economy might not be a solution to all our problems. 7

Finally, Hayek’s political argument is at least double-edged, for, as we saw

above in Kant’s defence of social policies, and as we can see in the world today,

if the factual freedom of people is in danger, members of the society

could easily lose their possibilities to actively take part in a political decision-making,

leaving the doors wide open for oligarchy.

Concluding Remarks

We tried to show that we need something more that the formal principle of

freedom to make our society free. If the basic fact of human life and human

freedom is something that we should build our society on, then we think

that in formulating the principles of a free society, we need to be careful not

to underestimate the lived experience of freedom and the facticity of life.

The principle of respect for human life and dignity (civic dignities included),

which is not blind to the problem of factual freedom, gives us very strong reason

to defend social policies. This principle enables freedom itself to be more

generally dispersed than if we stick only to the formal principle of freedom.

283

Following this line of argument, the social policies can be defended, via the

principle of human dignity and respect, as moral obligations, as a duty of

beneficence which could be institutionalized by the state. In addition, and

this is often omitted from the story, they can also be defended juridically

via civic dignity.

The importance of questions presented here is even greater because today

we witness the worldwide degradation of social policies which enable protection

of the minimum of factual freedom, such as universal healthcare,

free public education, social insurance, the right to fair working conditions,

poverty relief, and many more.

References:

Alexy, Robert (2002), A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Berlin, Isaiah (2002), “Two Concepts of Liberty” in H. Hardy (ed.), Liberty, Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 166–217.

Cohen, Gerald A. (1995), Self-ownership Freedom and Equality, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Gilbert, Margaret (1989), On Social Facts, London and New York: Routledge.

7 see McNally 1993



284

Hayek, Friedrich (2013), Law, Legislation and Liberty, London and New York: Routledge.

Nozick, Robert (1974), Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Oxford: Blackwell.

Mill, John Stuart (2003), On Liberty, New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Ober, Josiah (2012), “Democracy’s Dignity”, American Political Science Review 106 (4):

827–846.

O’Neill, Onora (1989), Constructions of Reason. Explorations on Kant’s Practical Philosophy,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Pinzani, Alessandro; Madrid, Nuria Sánchez, “The State Looks Down: Some

Reassessments of Kant’s Appraisal of Citizenship“, in: A. Faggion, A. Pinzani, N.S.

Madrid (ed.), Kant and Social Policies, Cham: Palgrave McMillan: 25–48.

Searle, John (1995), The Construction of Social Reality, London: Penguin

Searle, John (2010), Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization, Oxford:

Oxford University Press

Shell, Susan Meld, “Kant on Citizenship, Society and Redistributive Justice”, in: A.

Faggion, A. Pinzani, N.S. Madrid (ed.), Kant and Social Policies, Cham: Palgrave

McMillan: 1–24.

Tebble, Adam James (2009), “Hayek and Social Justice: A Critique”, Critical Review of

International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (4): 581–604.

Toumela, Raimo (2007), The Philosophy of Sociality: The Shared Point of View, Oxford:

Oxford University Press

Varden, Helga (2016), “Rawls vs Nozick vs Kant on Domestic Economic Justice”, in: A.

Faggion, A. Pinzani, N.S. Madrid (ed.), Kant and Social Policies, Cham: Palgrave

McMillan: 93–124.


Socijalna pravda i formalni princip slobode

Apstrakt

Cilj ovog teksta je da pokaže, nasuprot desno-libertarijanskoj kritici socijalne

pravde, da postoje dobri razlozi za odbranu politika socijalne pravde unutar slobodnog

društva. U prvom delu rada, predstavićemo dve uticajne desno-libertarijanske

kritike socijalne pravde, izložene u knjigama Pravo, zakonodavstvo i sloboda

Fridriha Hajeka i Anarhija, država i utopija Roberta Nozika. Na osnovu njihovog

pristupa, politike socijalne pravde vide se kao neopravdana povreda slobode

pojedinačnih članova društva. U odgovoru na ovu kritiku, uvešćemo distinkciju

između formalne i faktičke slobode i tvrdićemo da formalni princip slobode koji

brane Hajek i Nozik nije dovoljan za zaštitu faktičke slobode članova društva, jer

ne prepoznaje (1) moralnu obligaciju da se pomogne onima kojima, bez njihove

krivice, u velikoj meri nedostaje faktička sloboda, i (2) pravnu obligaciju države

da zaštiti građansko dostojanstvo svih članova društva. U drugom delu teksta,

nudimo interpretaciju Kantovog argumenta o porezima, prema kom građansko

dostojanstvo pretpostavlja faktičku slobodu, da bismo tvrdili da Kantovo opravdanje

poreza daje dobre razloge da se tvrdi da država ima pravnu obligaciju da

zaštiti faktičku slobodu politikama socijalne pravde.

Ključne reči: socijalna pravda, socijalna politika, porez, sloboda, dostojanstvo,

Hajek, Nozik, Kant.

Page 134 of 161


Page 135 of 161


The e-Advocate Quarterly

Page 136 of 161

Issue Title Quarterly

Vol. I 2015 The Fundamentals

I

The ComeUnity ReEngineering

Project Initiative

Q-1 2015

II The Adolescent Law Group Q-2 2015

III

Landmark Cases in US

Juvenile Justice (PA)

Q-3 2015

IV The First Amendment Project Q-4 2015

Vol. II 2016 Strategic Development

V The Fourth Amendment Project Q-1 2016

VI


Juvenile Justice (NJ)

Q-2 2016

VII Youth Court Q-3 2016

VIII

The Economic Consequences of Legal

Decision-Making

Q-4 2016

Vol. III 2017 Sustainability

IX The Sixth Amendment Project Q-1 2017

X

The Theological Foundations of

US Law & Government

Q-2 2017

XI The Eighth Amendment Project Q-3 2017

XII

The EB-5 Investor

Immigration Project*

Q-4 2017

Vol. IV 2018 Collaboration

XIII Strategic Planning Q-1 2018

XIV

The Juvenile Justice

Legislative Reform Initiative

Q-2 2018

XV The Advocacy Foundation Coalition Q-3 2018

Page 137 of 161

XVI

for Drug-Free Communities


Juvenile Justice (GA)

Q-4 2018

Page 138 of 161


Vol. V 2019 Organizational Development

XVII The Board of Directors Q-1 2019

XVIII The Inner Circle Q-2 2019

XIX Staff & Management Q-3 2019

XX Succession Planning Q-4 2019

XXI The Budget* Bonus #1

XXII Data-Driven Resource Allocation* Bonus #2

Vol. VI 2020 Missions

XXIII Critical Thinking Q-1 2020

XXIV

The Advocacy Foundation

Endowments Initiative Project

Q-2 2020

XXV International Labor Relations Q-3 2020

XXVI Immigration Q-4 2020

Vol. VII 2021 Community Engagement

XXVII

The 21 st Century Charter Schools

Initiative

Q-1 2021

XXVIII The All-Sports Ministry @ ... Q-2 2021

XXIX Lobbying for Nonprofits Q-3 2021

XXX

XXXI

Advocacy Foundation Missions -

Domestic

Advocacy Foundation Missions -

International

Q-4 2021

Bonus

Page 139 of 161

Vol. VIII

2022 ComeUnity ReEngineering

XXXII

The Creative & Fine Arts Ministry

@ The Foundation

Q-1 2022

XXXIII The Advisory Council & Committees Q-2 2022

XXXIV

The Theological Origins

of Contemporary Judicial Process

Q-3 2022

XXXV The Second Chance Ministry @ ... Q-4 2022

Vol. IX 2023 Legal Reformation

XXXVI The Fifth Amendment Project Q-1 2023

XXXVII The Judicial Re-Engineering Initiative Q-2 2023

XXXVIII

The Inner-Cities Strategic

Revitalization Initiative

Q-3 2023

XXXVIX Habeas Corpus Q-4 2023

Vol. X 2024 ComeUnity Development

XXXVX

The Inner-City Strategic

Revitalization Plan

Q-1 2024

XXXVXI The Mentoring Initiative Q-2 2024

XXXVXII The Violence Prevention Framework Q-3 2024

XXXVXIII The Fatherhood Initiative Q-4 2024

Vol. XI 2025 Public Interest

XXXVXIV Public Interest Law Q-1 2025

L (50) Spiritual Resource Development Q-2 2025

Page 140 of 161

LI

Nonprofit Confidentiality

In The Age of Big Data

Q-3 2025

LII Interpreting The Facts Q-4 2025

Vol. XII 2026 Poverty In America

LIII

American Poverty

In The New Millennium

Q-1 2026

LIV Outcome-Based Thinking Q-2 2026

LV Transformational Social Leadership Q-3 2026

LVI The Cycle of Poverty Q-4 2026

Vol. XIII 2027 Raising Awareness

LVII ReEngineering Juvenile Justice Q-1 2027

LVIII Corporations Q-2 2027

LVIX The Prison Industrial Complex Q-3 2027

LX Restoration of Rights Q-4 2027

Vol. XIV 2028 Culturally Relevant Programming

LXI Community Culture Q-1 2028

LXII Corporate Culture Q-2 2028

LXIII Strategic Cultural Planning Q-3 2028

LXIV

The Cross-Sector/ Coordinated

Service Approach to Delinquency

Prevention

Q-4 2028

Page 141 of 161

Vol. XV 2029 Inner-Cities Revitalization

LXIV

LXV

LXVI

Part I – Strategic Housing

Revitalization

(The Twenty Percent Profit Margin)

Part II – Jobs Training, Educational

Redevelopment

and Economic Empowerment

Part III - Financial Literacy

and Sustainability

Q-1 2029

Q-2 2029

Q-3 2029

LXVII Part IV – Solutions for Homelessness Q-4 2029

LXVIII

The Strategic Home Mortgage

Initiative

Bonus

Vol. XVI 2030 Sustainability

LXVIII Social Program Sustainability Q-1 2030

LXIX

The Advocacy Foundation

Endowments Initiative

Q-2 2030

LXX Capital Gains Q-3 2030

LXXI Sustainability Investments Q-4 2030

Vol. XVII 2031 The Justice Series

LXXII Distributive Justice Q-1 2031

LXXIII Retributive Justice Q-2 2031

LXXIV Procedural Justice Q-3 2031

LXXV (75) Restorative Justice Q-4 2031

LXXVI Unjust Legal Reasoning Bonus

Page 142 of 161

Vol. XVIII 2032 Public Policy

LXXVII Public Interest Law Q-1 2032

LXXVIII Reforming Public Policy Q-2 2032

LXXVIX ... Q-3 2032

LXXVX ... Q-4 2032

Page 143 of 161

The e-Advocate Monthly Review

2018

Transformational Problem Solving January 2018

The Advocacy Foundation February 2018

Opioid Initiative

Native-American Youth March 2018

In the Juvenile Justice System

Barriers to Reducing Confinement April 2018

Latino and Hispanic Youth May 2018


Social Entrepreneurship June 2018

The Economic Consequences of

Homelessness in America S.Ed – June 2018

African-American Youth July 2018


Gang Deconstruction August 2018

Social Impact Investing September 2018

Opportunity Youth: October 2018

Disenfranchised Young People

The Economic Impact of Social November 2018

of Social Programs Development

Gun Control December 2018

2019

The U.S. Stock Market January 2019

Prison-Based Gerrymandering February 2019

Literacy-Based Prison Construction March 2019

Children of Incarcerated Parents April 2019

Page 144 of 161

African-American Youth in The May 2019

Juvenile Justice System

Racial Profiling June 2019

Mass Collaboration July 2019

Concentrated Poverty August 2019

De-Industrialization September 2019

Overcoming Dyslexia October 2019

Overcoming Attention Deficit November 2019

The Gift of Adversity December 2019

2020

The Gift of Hypersensitivity January 2020

The Gift of Introspection February 2020

The Gift of Introversion March 2020

The Gift of Spirituality April 2020

The Gift of Transformation May 2020

Property Acquisition for

Organizational Sustainability June 2020

Investing for Organizational

Sustainability July 2020

Biblical Law & Justice TLFA August 2020

Gentrification AF September 2020

Environmental Racism NpA October 2020

Law for The Poor AF November 2020

…

Page 145 of 161

2021

Biblically Responsible Investing TLFA – January 2021

International Criminal Procedure LMI – February 2021

Spiritual Rights TLFA – March 2021

The Theology of Missions TLFA – April 2021

Legal Evangelism, Intelligence,

Reconnaissance & Missions LMI – May 2021

The Law of War LMI – June 2021

Generational Progression AF – July 2021

Predatory Lending AF – August 2021

The Community Assessment Process NpA – September 2021

Accountability NpA – October 2021

Nonprofit Transparency NpA – November 2021

Redefining Unemployment AF – December 2021

2022

21 st Century Slavery AF – January 2022

Acquiesce to Righteousness TLFA – February 2022

ComeUnity Capacity-Building NpA – March 2022

Nonprofit Organizational Assessment NpA – April 2022

Debt Reduction AF – May 2022

Case Law, Statutory Law,

Municipal Ordinances and Policy ALG – June 2022

Organizational Dysfunction NpA - July 2022

Institutional Racism Collab US – August 2022

Page 146 of 161

The Ripple Effects of Ministry TLFA - September 2022

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 NpA – October 2022

Organized Crime (In The New Millennium) ALG – May 2022

Nonprofit Marketing NpA – June 2022

The Uniform Code of Military Justice AF – July 2022

Community Policing NpA – August 2022

Wills, Trusts & Estates AF – September 2022

International Incidents Series

I. Ten Conflicts to Watch In

The New Millennium LMI – October 2022

II. International Hotspots LMI – November 2022

III. International Cyber Terrorism LMI – December 2022

The Cost Ineffectiveness of TJP August 2023

Mandatory Minimum Sentencing

In The U.S.

2023

I. International Sex Trafficking LMI – January 2023

II. Brexit LMI – February 2023

III. Global Jihad LMI – March 2023

IV. The Global Economy LMI – April 2023

Judicial Mistakes ALG May 2023

The Political Dynamics of Justice TJP June 2023

Reform in The U.S.

The Violent Crime Control and

Law Enforcement Act of 1994 TJP July 2023

The Cost Ineffectiveness of TJP August 2023

Mandatory Minimum Sentencing

In The U.S.

Israelites, Phafisees & Sadducees TLFA September 2023

In The 21 st Century Church

Page 147 of 161

Social Justice Activism TJP October 2023

Page 148 of 161

The e-Advocate Quarterly

Special Editions

Crowdfunding Winter-Spring 2017

Social Media for Nonprofits October 2017

Mass Media for Nonprofits November 2017

The Opioid Crisis in America: January 2018

Issues in Pain Management

The Opioid Crisis in America: February 2018

The Drug Culture in the U.S.

The Opioid Crisis in America: March 2018

Drug Abuse Among Veterans

The Opioid Crisis in America: April 2018

Drug Abuse Among America’s

Teens

The Opioid Crisis in America: May 2018

Alcoholism

The Economic Consequences of June 2018

Homelessness in The US

The Economic Consequences of July 2018

Opioid Addiction in America

Page 149 of 161

The e-Advocate Journal

of Theological Jurisprudence

Vol. I - 2017

The Theological Origins of Contemporary Judicial Process

Scriptural Application to The Model Criminal Code

Scriptural Application for Tort Reform

Scriptural Application to Juvenile Justice Reformation

Vol. II - 2018

Scriptural Application for The Canons of Ethics

Scriptural Application to Contracts Reform

& The Uniform Commercial Code

Scriptural Application to The Law of Property

Scriptural Application to The Law of Evidence

Page 150 of 161

Legal Missions International

Page 151 of 161


Vol. I 2015

I

II

God’s Will and The 21 st Century

Democratic Process

The Community

Engagement Strategy

Q-1 2015

Q-2 2015

III Foreign Policy Q-3 2015

IV

Public Interest Law

in The New Millennium

Q-4 2015

Vol. II 2016

V Ethiopia Q-1 2016

VI Zimbabwe Q-2 2016

VII Jamaica Q-3 2016

VIII Brazil Q-4 2016

Vol. III 2017

IX India Q-1 2017

X Suriname Q-2 2017

XI The Caribbean Q-3 2017

XII United States/ Estados Unidos Q-4 2017

Vol. IV 2018

XIII Cuba Q-1 2018

XIV Guinea Q-2 2018

XV Indonesia Q-3 2018

XVI Sri Lanka Q-4 2018

Page 152 of 161

Vol. V 2019

XVII Russia Q-1 2019

XVIII Australia Q-2 2019

XIV South Korea Q-3 2019

XV Puerto Rico Q-4 2019


Vol. VI 2020

XVI Trinidad & Tobago Q-1 2020

XVII Egypt Q-2 2020

XVIII Sierra Leone Q-3 2020

XIX South Africa Q-4 2020

XX Israel Bonus

Vol. VII 2021

XXI Haiti Q-1 2021

XXII Peru Q-2 2021

XXIII Costa Rica Q-3 2021

XXIV China Q-4 2021

XXV Japan Bonus

Vol VIII 2022

XXVI Chile Q-1 2022

Page 153 of 161

The e-Advocate Juvenile Justice Report

______

Vol. I – Juvenile Delinquency in The US

Vol. II. – The Prison Industrial Complex

Vol. III – Restorative/ Transformative Justice

Vol. IV – The Sixth Amendment Right to The Effective Assistance of Counsel

Vol. V – The Theological Foundations of Juvenile Justice

Vol. VI – Collaborating to Eradicate Juvenile Delinquency

Page 154 of 161

The e-Advocate Newsletter

Genesis of The Problem

Family Structure

Societal Influences

Evidence-Based Programming

Strengthening Assets v. Eliminating Deficits

2012 - Juvenile Delinquency in The US

Introduction/Ideology/Key Values

Philosophy/Application & Practice

Expungement & Pardons

Pardons & Clemency

Examples/Best Practices

2013 - Restorative Justice in The US

2014 - The Prison Industrial Complex

25% of the World's Inmates Are In the US

The Economics of Prison Enterprise

The Federal Bureau of Prisons

The After-Effects of Incarceration/Individual/Societal

The Fourth Amendment Project

The Sixth Amendment Project

The Eighth Amendment Project

The Adolescent Law Group

2015 - US Constitutional Issues In The New Millennium

Page 155 of 161

2018 - The Theological Law Firm Academy

The Theological Foundations of US Law & Government

The Economic Consequences of Legal Decision-Making

The Juvenile Justice Legislative Reform Initiative

The EB-5 International Investors Initiative

2017 - Organizational Development

The Board of Directors

The Inner Circle

Staff & Management

Succession Planning

Bonus #1 The Budget

Bonus #2 Data-Driven Resource Allocation

2018 - Sustainability

The Data-Driven Resource Allocation Process

The Quality Assurance Initiative

The Advocacy Foundation Endowments Initiative

The Community Engagement Strategy

2019 - Collaboration

Critical Thinking for Transformative Justice

International Labor Relations

Immigration

God's Will & The 21st Century Democratic Process

The Community Engagement Strategy

The 21st Century Charter Schools Initiative

2020 - Community Engagement

Page 156 of 161

Extras

The Nonprofit Advisors Group Newsletters

The 501(c)(3) Acquisition Process

The Board of Directors

The Gladiator Mentality

Strategic Planning

Fundraising

501(c)(3) Reinstatements

The Collaborative US/ International Newsletters

How You Think Is Everything

The Reciprocal Nature of Business Relationships

Accelerate Your Professional Development

The Competitive Nature of Grant Writing

Assessing The Risks

Page 157 of 161

Page 158 of 161

About The Author

John C (Jack) Johnson III

Founder & CEO – The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.

________

Jack was educated at Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Rutgers

Law School, in Camden, New Jersey. In 1999, he moved to Atlanta, Georgia to pursue

greater opportunities to provide Advocacy and Preventive Programmatic services for atrisk/

at-promise young persons, their families, and Justice Professionals embedded in the

Juvenile Justice process in order to help facilitate its transcendence into the 21 st Century.

There, along with a small group of community and faith-based professionals, “The Advocacy Foundation, Inc." was conceived

and developed over roughly a thirteen year period, originally chartered as a Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Educational

Support Services organization consisting of Mentoring, Tutoring, Counseling, Character Development, Community Change

Management, Practitioner Re-Education & Training, and a host of related components.

The Foundation’s Overarching Mission is “To help Individuals, Organizations, & Communities Achieve Their Full Potential”, by

implementing a wide array of evidence-based proactive multi-disciplinary "Restorative & Transformative Justice" programs &

projects currently throughout the northeast, southeast, and western international-waters regions, providing prevention and support

services to at-risk/ at-promise youth, to young adults, to their families, and to Social Service, Justice and Mental

Health professionals” in each jurisdiction served. The Foundation has since relocated its headquarters to Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, and been expanded to include a three-tier mission.

In addition to his work with the Foundation, Jack also served as an Adjunct Professor of Law & Business at National-Louis

University of Atlanta (where he taught Political Science, Business & Legal Ethics, Labor & Employment Relations, and Critical

Thinking courses to undergraduate and graduate level students). Jack has also served as Board President for a host of wellestablished

and up & coming nonprofit organizations throughout the region, including “Visions Unlimited Community

Development Systems, Inc.”, a multi-million dollar, award-winning, Violence Prevention and Gang Intervention Social Service

organization in Atlanta, as well as Vice-Chair of the Georgia/ Metropolitan Atlanta Violence Prevention Partnership, a state-wide

300 organizational member violence prevention group led by the Morehouse School of Medicine, Emory University and The

Original, Atlanta-Based, Martin Luther King Center.

Attorney Johnson’s prior accomplishments include a wide-array of Professional Legal practice areas, including Private Firm,

Corporate and Government postings, just about all of which yielded significant professional awards & accolades, the history and

chronology of which are available for review online at LinkedIn.com. Throughout his career, Jack has served a wide variety of

for-profit corporations, law firms, and nonprofit organizations as Board Chairman, Secretary, Associate, and General Counsel

since 1990.


Clayton County Youth Services Partnership, Inc. – Chair; Georgia Violence Prevention Partnership, Inc – Vice Chair; Fayette

County NAACP - Legal Redress Committee Chairman; Clayton County Fatherhood Initiative Partnership – Principal

Investigator; Morehouse School of Medicine School of Community Health Feasibility Study Steering Committee; Atlanta

Violence Prevention Capacity Building Project Partner; Clayton County Minister’s Conference, President 2006-2007; Liberty In

Life Ministries, Inc. Board Secretary; Young Adults Talk, Inc. Board of Directors; ROYAL, Inc Board of Directors; Temple

University Alumni Association; Rutgers Law School Alumni Association; Sertoma International; Our Common Welfare Board of

Directors President 2003-2005; River’s Edge Elementary School PTA (Co-President); Summerhill Community Ministries

(Winter Sports Athletic Director); Outstanding Young Men of America; Employee of the Year; Academic All-American -

Basketball; Church Trustee; Church Diaconate Ministry (Walking Deacon); Pennsylvania Commission on Crime & Delinquency

(Nominee).

Page 159 of 161


Page 160 of 161

Page 161 of 161

Social Justice Activism

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?