The priority of justice: A framework approach to ethics in program evaluation

Abstract

The situations of evaluation are inevitably complex and various, often involving conflicts between ethical principles as well as among aims or stakeholders. To meet this challenge, evaluators and stakeholders need an interpretive framework to clarify the issues at hand and open the way to workable solutions. This paper provides a three-part framework of justice to guide practitioners in this interpretive task. First, evaluation is instituted to serve the public with fidelity to the values, standards, and ideals that characterize it as a profession and as an office deserving the public trust, here called public justice. Second, these requirements evoke and entail the more general demands of fair process, mutual respect, and right action known as procedural justice. Third, the operations of office and just process must serve the public good, meeting the demands of distributive justice that govern the allocation of goods and benefits. This framework takes as a starting point the priority of justice as articulated by John Rawls: “Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is to thought. A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well-arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust” (1971, p. 3).