A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition

By A. Walsh. 2001

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimization (2018, background): “Our work differs in considering Rawlsian fairness for distributive justice (Rawls, 2009).”
Existential risks: analyzing human extinction scenarios and related hazards (2002, unknown): “26 Following John Rawls [102], the term “maximin” is also use in a different sense in welfare economics, to denote the principle that (given some important constraints) we should opt for the state that optimizes the expectation of the least well-off classes.”
Distributional effects of transport policies on inequalities in access to opportunities in Rio de Janeiro (2019, background): “This convergence in the literature has been largely influenced by or is in line with the theory of justice proposed by John Rawls (Rawls, 1999, 2001).”
Future accessibility impacts of transport policy scenarios: Equity and sensitivity to travel time thresholds for Bus Rapid Transit expansion in Rio de Janeiro (2019, unknown): “…or academics about what makes a transport investment equitable, an egali-tarian-prioritarian view of justice like the one developed by John Rawls (1999, 2001) is increasingly in ﬂ uential among academics (Lucas et al., 2015; Martens, 2012; Pereira, Schwanen, et al., 2017a; van Wee &…”
Toward a theory of business (2015, background): “Popularized by Rawls (1971/1999, 1993/2005), the term ‘‘overlapping consensus’’ denotes how people who support different underlying normative doctrines, including different religious doctrines, can still agree on speciﬁc principles of justice.”
A glimpse through the veil of ignorance: equality of opportunity and support for redistribution (2010, background): “In Rawls' terminology, the latter quality is referred to as “equality as careers open to talents” while combination of the two constitutes “equality of fair opportunity” (Rawls, 1999, p. 57).”