Study On The Measurement In Justice Of Public Decision-making In China

Justice is not only a sublime goal pursued by mankind but also an important ethics norm of public decision-making.Throughout history,many scholars have made different interpretations toward justice based on different era backgrounds.By summing up the contemporary scholars’ definition of justice,we can draw the abstract meaning of justice,that is,"equal treatment among subjects".Justice embodies the ideal pursuit of people,but when it is considered as characteristics of public decision-making in a particular era,it becomes an objective ethics norm that constrains public decision-making and leads the public decision-making to a higher ethical level.The higher the degree of justice in public decision-making,the more recognition and support they will get from members of the community,which is conducive to the stability of the regime and social harmony.However,it has occurred time to time that there is a obvious deviation from "justice" in the field of public decision-making in China at present,and the justice of public decision-making is facing severe challenges.At the same time,the conclusions of the justice assessment based on their respective positions of different interest groups may be quite different,which not only causes the public decision-makers confused resulting in doing nothing,but also influences the final realization of the justice of public decision-making.Therefore,it is necessary and urgent for scholars to explore objective evaluation and measurement standards about the justice of public decision-making from the micro-level.The key to objectively evaluate and measure the justice degree of public decision-making is to construct an effective measure model.The dimension of justice is the basis of constructing model.Nancy Fraser,the famous political philosopher,creatively put forward the three dimensions of Justice:distribution,recognition and representation,and is widely cited by domestic and foreign scholars.This study is based on the division of Fraser’s justice dimension,and brings the emerging environmental issues in recent years into the scope of justice considerations,thus forming the four dimensions of justice.In order to deeply understand the universal principles of justice involved in each dimension,this study makes a comprehensive analysis of the relevant classical justice theory;Based on the four dimensions of justice and the principle of justice proposed by classical theory,this study has designed 20 indicators which embody the justice degree of public decision-making,and put forward the relevant research hypothesis.In addition,by using the questionnaire survey to obtain the data of justice evaluation about public decision-making,and bringing the empirical research data into the multiple linear regression model,this study finally tests research hypothesis and extracts 15 measure indicators of justice degree about public decision-making.And it finally constructs the justice measurement model of public decision-making after using the analytic hierarchy process to judge and weigh each indicator.In order to verify the interpretation effect of the model in practice,this study selects two cases of public decision-making of NIMBY projects in Wuhan to carry out empirical analysis,and the results show that the measurement model is scientific and reasonable.It has great theoretical and practical value that specify the abstract idea of philosophy of justice as an operational evaluation framework.In theory,this study proposes the dimensions of justice,and combines the practical problems of public decision-making to design the evaluation framework of justice about public decision-making,which is of great significance for promoting the theory construction about the justice of public decision-making.In practice,the justice measurement model of public decision-making is not only conducive to lead different evaluation subjects to evaluate public decision-making behavior scientifically and rationally,but also provides a management tool of justice for public decision makers.It is conducive to the justice detection,justice comparison and justice revision of public decision-making.