What is the distinction between procedural justice and substantive justice?

• A. Procedural justice concerns fairness of processes; substantive justice concerns fairness of outcomes; policy should balance both to ensure legitimacy and equity.
• B. Procedural justice is about outcomes; substantive justice is about processes.
• C. They are the same concept.
• D. Procedural justice concerns fairness of outcomes; substantive justice concerns fairness of processes.

Answer: (B)

Procedural justice focuses on how decisions are made—the fairness of the process itself. That means fair rules, consistent application, an opportunity for people to present their side, unbiased decision-makers, and transparency about what is happening. Substantive justice, in contrast, is about the fairness of the outcomes—whether the results are just, such as fair distributions of benefits and burdens and proper protection of rights.

This distinction is why the correct view emphasizes both sides: a decision can follow a fair process yet yield an unfair result, or produce a fair outcome but through a biased or opaque procedure. Balancing fair procedures with fair outcomes helps legitimize the process and promote actual equity.

The other statements mix up the roles: procedural justice is not primarily about outcomes, and substantive justice is not primarily about processes. They are not the same concept; they address different aspects of fairness—how decisions are reached versus what the decisions produce. For example, a procedure may be fair in its steps, but the resulting distribution could still be unjust, or a highly desirable outcome could be achieved through a flawed process. Understanding the distinction helps you evaluate both the legitimacy of decision-making and the justice of the results.