OIT - Social Justice - The Historical Evolution of a Shared Ideal

X Social Justice The Historical Evolution of a Shared Ideal Authors / Suarez Dillon Soares Sergei, Sgroi Silvia

May / 2026 ILO Working Paper 172© International Labour Organization 2026 Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. See: https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The user is allowed to reuse, share (copy and redistribute), adapt (remix, transform and build upon the original work) as detailed in the licence. The user must clearly credit the ILO as the source of the material and indicate if changes were made to the original content. Use of the emblem, name and logo of the ILO is not permitted in connection with translations, adaptations or other derivative works. Attribution – The user must indicate if changes were made and must cite the work as follows: Sergei, S., Silvia, S. Social Justice: The Historical Evolution of a Shared Ideal. ILO Working Paper 172.

Geneva: International Labour Office, 2026.© ILO.

Translations – In case of a translation of this work, the following disclaimer must be added along with the attribution: This is a translation of a copyrighted work of the International Labour Organization (ILO). This translation has not been prepared, reviewed or endorsed by the ILO and should not be considered an official ILO translation. The ILO disclaims all responsibility for its content and accuracy. Responsibility rests solely with the author(s) of the translation. Adaptations – In case of an adaptation of this work, the following disclaimer must be added along with the attribution: This is an adaptation of a copyrighted work of the International Labour Organization (ILO). This adaptation has not been prepared, reviewed or endorsed by the ILO and should not be considered an official ILO adaptation. The ILO disclaims all responsibility for its content and accuracy. Responsibility rests solely with the author(s) of the adaptation. Third-party materials – This Creative Commons licence does not apply to non-ILO copyright materials included in this publication. If the material is attributed to a third party, the user of such material is solely responsible for clearing the rights with the rights holder and for any claims of infringement. Any dispute arising under this licence that cannot be settled amicably shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). The parties shall be bound by any arbitration award rendered as a result of such arbitration as the final adjudication of such a dispute. For details on rights and licensing, contact: rights@ilo.org. For details on ILO publications and digital products, visit: www.ilo.org/publns.

ISBN 9789220434314 (print), ISBN 9789220434321 (web PDF), ISBN 9789220434338 (epub), ISBN 9789220434345 (html). ISSN 2708-3438 (print), ISSN 2708-3446 (digital) https://doi.org/10.54394/00034054

The designations employed in ILO publications, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the ILO concerning the legal status of any country, area or territoryor of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. See: www.ilo. org/disclaimer. The opinions and views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views or policies of the ILO. Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the ILO, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval. Information on ILO publications and digital products can be found at: www.ilo.org/researchand-publications ILO Working Papers summarize the results of ILO research in progress, and seek to stimulate discussion of a range of issues related to the world of work. Comments on this ILO Working Paper are welcome and can be sent to research@ilo.org.

Authorization for publication: Caroline Fredrickson, Director, Research Department ILO Working Papers can be found at: www.ilo.org/research-and-publications/working-papers Suggested citation: Sergei, S., Silvia, S. 2026. Social Justice: The Historical Evolution of a Shared Ideal, ILO Working Paper 172 (Geneva, ILO). https://doi.org/10.54394/0003405401 ILO Working Paper 172

Abstract This article traces how the idea of social justice evolved from early human practices of care to a global political ideal. Empathy and mutual aid are ancient, evident both in theory and in practice since the dawn of humanity, and institutions extending care beyond kinship networks are at least as old as writing. Yet the modern conception of social justice emerged with Enlightenment thought, rising prosperity, and the upheavals of industrialization, and has since been reshaped by diverse cultures and institutions. The article examines how social justice influenced major revolutions, inspired anti-colonial and civil rights movements, and guided the development of welfare states and international organizations such as the ILO. Despite major progress, profound inequalities persist, requiring renewed commitment to rights, solidarity, and inclusive public reasoning to advance social justice in the twenty-first century. About the authors Sergei has worked at the Institute for Applied Economic Studies (Ipea) in Brasília since 1998 and has been at the IPC-IG since 2015. His work has been on inequality, poverty, education, racial discrimination, social protection, and the labour market. He has been at the ILO since 2020 and is now in the Research Department. Silvia is a 26-year-old public policy and international development professional. She has built her

discrimination, social protection, and the labour market. He has been at the ILO since 2020 and is now in the Research Department. Silvia is a 26-year-old public policy and international development professional. She has built her experience across both national and international institutions, working in the public sector in Italy and within UN organizations. She has contributed to research on inequality at the International Labour Organization (ILO) in the Research Department and is currently working with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in the Nutrition Department, strengthening her expertise in policies for sustainable agri-food systems and inclusive development."02 ILO Working Paper 172 Abstract 01 About the authors 01 X Introduction 03 X 1 The idea of social justice: a brief historical overview 05 X 2 Refinement, evolution and redefinition of the concept of social justice 10 Utilitarianism 10 Marxism 10 Liberalism 11 X 3 Social justice in practice: worldwide revolutions and the construction of the early welfare state 13 X 4 The twentieth century: social justice and the creation of the multilateral system 17 X Conclusion 22 Social justice in the twenty-first century 22 References 23 Acknowledgements 26 Table of contents03 ILO Working Paper 172 X Introduction In the Georgian Lesser Caucasus Mountains, bordering Armenia and about ninety kilometres from the capital Tbilisi, there is a small town called Dmanisi. In this cold and windswept place there is a cemetery adjacent to a medieval cathedral. Archaeologists digging in the cemetery in the eighties and nineties came upon some bones much older than the early medieval remains they had been excavating. In fact, they unearthed a series of skulls about 1.8 million years old belonging to an archaic human species1 known as Homo erectus. These human ancestors led extremely difficult lives. The teeth of almost all individuals found in the various sites from this period show periods of starvation. Lives were often short, as can

belonging to an archaic human species1 known as Homo erectus. These human ancestors led extremely difficult lives. The teeth of almost all individuals found in the various sites from this period show periods of starvation. Lives were often short, as can be seen by the many child skeletons found.2 The Dmanisi skulls belonged to hunter-gatherers whose diet was heavy on meat and one of the skulls belonged to an older adult who had lost all his teeth long before his death. While it is impossible to assert with certainty the circumstances of his life, he was probably helped by his companions for many years, including by chewing his food for him, allowing him to survive years longer than might otherwise have been possible (Rightmire et al. 2017). Whether due to compassion or a sense of duty, he was cared for. Archaeological sites that show humans going to great lengths to care for each other are not exceptional. Neanderthals in Shanidar Cave in Iraq show signs of injuries so severe it likely impeded their ability to walk for many months or even years. Yet the evidence suggests they were cared for by others in their group until they recovered (Trinkaus and Zimmerman 1982). Similarly, a Neanderthal child found in Sima de los Huesos in Spain and a young adult Homo sapiens found in Salé, Morocco, both showed signs of congenital diseases that would have likely immobilized them, which means that they were cared for their entire lives (Hublin 2009). Even in conditions at the edge of survival, humans have always found ways to support and care for one another. This has, of course, coexisted with the human capacity for cruelty and indifference to suffering, particularly regarding those not considered “us”, but the human capacity for empathy, a sense of duty by the stronger to the weaker and a sense of shared destiny have always been among our defining features. Today humans have expanded to all corners of the globe and created societies that are prosperous in ways that our ancestors could only have wondered at. Yet despite these accomplishempathy, a sense of duty by the stronger to the weaker and a sense of shared destiny have always been among our defining features. Today humans have expanded to all corners of the globe and created societies that are prosperous in ways that our ancestors could only have wondered at. Yet despite these accomplishments, modern humans have also created inequalities that must have baffled the Dmanisi humans. How would one explain societies that have more than enough food to waste yet still allow some of their members to go hungry? But humans have never given up on caring for each other. The human capacity for compassion, to put oneself in another’s place, is what underlies social justice. But empathy and compassion work better in small human communities where everyone knows each other. As societies become larger and more complex, people affected by each other’s actions will fall further and further 1 “Archaic humans” is a term used to refer to people who belong to the genus “homo” – and are therefore humans – but are not classified as Homo sapiens (modern humans). The archaic humans in Dmanisi had brains smaller than ours and were also shorter than us, but they were humans. 2 The child skeletons are not from Dmanisi itself, but palaeolithic sites are rife with child skeletons.04 ILO Working Paper 172 from each other’s empathy circles (Sahlins 1954).3 In a large complex society, compassion must be reinforced (and in some cases even partially replaced) with rights and guaranteed by institutions.4 Rights and the institutions that guarantee them, even if premised on human compassion, are the fundamental basis for social justice in complex societies. Rights and institutions are also seen in an incipient form in early complex societies and the philosophical thought that underlies them from very early in history, as detailed below. In today’s world we discuss the right to food, to shelter, to medical care, to knowledge, to a voice and to decent work, among many other rights. The debates over how the benefits and burdens of society are shared constitute the quest for what we call social justice.

them from very early in history, as detailed below. In today’s world we discuss the right to food, to shelter, to medical care, to knowledge, to a voice and to decent work, among many other rights. The debates over how the benefits and burdens of society are shared constitute the quest for what we call social justice. 3 An “empathy circle” refers to the fact human beings usually find it easier to empathise with those closest to them. Empathy usually comes easier to members of one’s own family, tribe, city and so on. Sahlins did not use the term “empathy,” talking instead about positive and negative reciprocity, but the meaning is the same. 4 Evidently, not all institutions work towards a more just world. History is littered with exploitative institutions such as feudal servitude, slavery, monopolies and oligopolies, debt bondage and disenfranchisement, to name just a few.05 ILO Working Paper 172 X 1 The idea of social justice: a brief historical overview

Philosophical views on social justice can be influenced by contextual variables such as time, place, culture, and socio-economic conditions among others. But elements of what we would call today social justice are present in almost all philosophical traditions. In Eastern Asia, the Confucian ideal of “Benevolence” or “humanity” (ren,仁）emphasizes compassion and intolerance of human suffering (Chen 2024). According to Mencius, a truly benevolent government should prioritize the needs and interests of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. The Book of Rites, one of the pillars of the Confucian Canon, lays out what such good governance entails:  A competent provision was secured for the aged till their death, employment for the able bodied, and the means of growing up to the young. They showed kindness and compassion to widows, orphans, childless men, and those who were disabled by disease, so that they were all sufficiently maintained. Book of Rites, Book VII, The Li Yun

bodied, and the means of growing up to the young. They showed kindness and compassion to widows, orphans, childless men, and those who were disabled by disease, so that they were all sufficiently maintained. Book of Rites, Book VII, The Li Yun The Buddhist Sutta-Nipata emphasizes that those who have power also bear corresponding responsibility for those who have less power. According to Buddha, the mother is responsible for her child not because she has given birth to the child, but because it is in her power to do for the child what the child cannot (Sen 2010, Pp 205-206). In the Greek tradition, Plato devoted significant attention to social justice, even if he never used the term. His most famous dialogue, The Republic, can be understood as a foundational text on social justice, examining the distribution of wealth, the relationship between happiness and material conditions and the ideal structure of governance. Like many of his works, it offers few definitive conclusions, but it raises enduring and still-relevant questions about what a just society should look like. Building on the foundations laid by his teacher Plato, Aristotle approached the question of social justice in a more systematic and prescriptive manner. He distinguished between two forms of justice: corrective and distributive. Corrective justice concerns the rectification of wrongs—what we might now call criminal justice—and is of limited relevance to the present discussion. More pertinent is distributive justice, which focuses on how honour, power and wealth should be allocated. According to Aristotle, such distribution should be based on merit5 rather than need (Aristotle and Ross 2005). Although his views were shaped by the values of his time and fall far short of contemporary understandings of social justice, Aristotle's work marks a significant early effort to frame justice as a question of how individuals relate to the larger society. Arab philosopher and historian Ibn Khaldoun introduces the concept of asabiyyah, or social cohesion, which he associates with morality and human values. He argues that poverty is a result of lack of social cohesion. “All human beings must co-operate ... But what is obtained by the

Arab philosopher and historian Ibn Khaldoun introduces the concept of asabiyyah, or social cohesion, which he associates with morality and human values. He argues that poverty is a result of lack of social cohesion. “All human beings must co-operate ... But what is obtained by the 5 And applicable only to citizens, not slaves or women.06 ILO Working Paper 172 cooperation of a group of human beings satisfies the need of a number many times greater than themselves. (Mohamed 2017)” Ibn Khaldoun thus viewed poverty as a scourge that could be eliminated through social action. Ibn Khaldoun also was one of the first to put forth the idea that injustice threatens civilizations. Across the world’s major religious traditions, duties by the stronger to the weaker have been framed not just as a political or philosophical concept but as sacred obligations. The holy books of the great monotheistic religions such as the Talmud, the Bible and the Quran are filled with references to distribution, fairness and, in some cases, societal formulations that come very close to social justice. The Christian thinker Thomas Aquinas saw justice as the medium that binds individuals together in a society (Dierksmeier 2011). Without justice, a society is no more than bands of criminals seeking to impose their will on each other. Zakat, one of the five pillars of Islam, mandates each individual to give a share of his wealth to the less fortunate. Hinduism, Buddhism and Jain philosophies share the concept of “Daan,” which means selfless charity to others without expecting rewards. These moral imperatives also found their way into the legal codes of early civilizations. Hammurabi’s code (1755 BC), well-known today for its cruel elements, also contained provisions that address economic vulnerability. For example, farmers whose crops are wiped away by floods pay neither their debts nor interest in that year (Hammurabi 2007). Not only does this provision deal with social justice but also put human labour as central to the reciprocal obligations that define it. These historical concerns about distribution were not only theoretical, but can also be seen in

their debts nor interest in that year (Hammurabi 2007). Not only does this provision deal with social justice but also put human labour as central to the reciprocal obligations that define it. These historical concerns about distribution were not only theoretical, but can also be seen in social practices in antiquity. Aztec writings tell of a building in their capital city Tenochtitlan that was used exclusively for food storage to be distributed to those in need (Aguilar-Moreno 2007). Similar practices are well documented in Pharaonic Egypt (Bardonová 2019), Han China and the Roman Empire. In both Han China and the Roman Empire, in times of famine the wealthy were legally bound to help with distribution efforts, supplementing governmental efforts (Kim 2021). While attention to fair distribution in emergencies can be found in these early societies, issues relating to paid work and compensation were addressed less consistently. There are few recorded laws or practices on working hours or earnings, but some shards of evidence can nonetheless be found. The law-book of Daduša from Ešnunna in Sumer stipulates that wages of textile workers must be based on the weight of the garments they produced and there are indications that workers who built the great monuments of Mesopotamia and Egypt were relatively well paid waged workers (Steinkeller and Hudson 2015). Still, these early systems and ancient sources all fall far short of the modern view of social justice, which requires fairness for all human beings. Exclusions of large groups such as women and slaves are common, poverty is accepted as a permanent feature of human societies, the poor are time and again held responsible for their plight, and the solutions to social ills are frequently left to private charity and not institutions based on rights (Fleischacker 2004). Evidently there is immense variation in views, actions, laws and social thought – Sutta Nipata’s claims to universal compassion and the responsibility of the powerful for the powerless are a far cry from Aristotle’s defence of slavery – but nowhere do you find a statement of social justice as we understand it07 ILO Working Paper 172

immense variation in views, actions, laws and social thought – Sutta Nipata’s claims to universal compassion and the responsibility of the powerful for the powerless are a far cry from Aristotle’s defence of slavery – but nowhere do you find a statement of social justice as we understand it07 ILO Working Paper 172 today: a fair and full distribution of benefits and burdens among all human beings. And of course, these laws and social thought did not imagine a globalized world in which capitalism is the dominant economic system.6 This was to come later, and it was to come in a particular time and place. The Enlightenment and political and industrial revolutions In 1794, a fifty-year old mathematician named Nicolas de Condorcet lay dying of hunger and neglect in a French revolutionary prison. Shortly before his death, he finished an appeal for a new society without hunger or poverty. This appeal was called Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain and was backed up with numbers on income, revenue and costs, showing that, in theory, a society without want was not only desirable but possible. Across the English Channel, another writer, Thomas Paine, was publishing an equivalent appeal, Agrarian Justice, drawing on new data on production and population that were becoming increasingly available to argue that it was possible to lift all citizens of the United Kingdom out of poverty. Both thinkers, using newly emerging statistical tools, demonstrated that material abundance — if distributed fairly — could ensure a dignified life for all. Three years after the death of Condorcet, François Noel “Gracchus” Babeuf was guillotined for leading a conspiracy to establish a society along the lines argued for in the Tableau and in Agrarian Justice. While Babeuf’s conspiracy did not come even close to fruition, the “social question” was to dominate the revolutions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Political rights alone were increasingly seen as insufficient to peasants and workers dying from cold, hunger and overwork in fields and early factories. A new concept, later called social justice, was taking shape. This concept

dominate the revolutions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Political rights alone were increasingly seen as insufficient to peasants and workers dying from cold, hunger and overwork in fields and early factories. A new concept, later called social justice, was taking shape. This concept demanded not just political equality but a fair distribution of burdens and benefits across society. But Condorcet and Paine did not write in a vacuum. Two transformations were underway which opened the space for their contributions. The first was conceptual and the second material. Condorcet and Paine were heirs to a host of Enlightenment philosophers such as John Locke, Montesquieu, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Olympe de Gouges, Immanuel Kant, Mary Wollstonecraft and Adam Smith. These thinkers had been for a century challenging the divine and traditional foundations of hierarchy in Europe and proposing instead a new society based upon liberty, reason and the premise of equality. While their critique was initially against inherited privileges of the aristocracy, it was later extended to class and the exclusion of the working classes from civil rights and political participation. The Enlightenment critique of social stratification began to change public sentiment. While in the beginning of the eighteenth century, European writers warned darkly against lowborn people aspiring to “a degree beyond that which belongs to them,” formerly casually accepted terms like “the better sort of people” became morally suspect by the century's end (Fleischacker 2004). This change must be taken in context. During the period in which attitudes on class were changing, racism, sexism and colonialism were rampant. Slavery was widespread and social rights were few and far between. What is relevant is that the old ideas of hierarchical societies as natural or 6 Trade and finance have existed for centuries. While global trade only began in earnest in the 17th and 18th century, inter-regional trade had been going on for centuries prior to this.08 ILO Working Paper 172 given by God were increasingly on the defensive. Equality between men and women was often absent from many Enlightenment works, in spite of the efforts of the early feminists Olympe de

trade had been going on for centuries prior to this.08 ILO Working Paper 172 given by God were increasingly on the defensive. Equality between men and women was often absent from many Enlightenment works, in spite of the efforts of the early feminists Olympe de Gouges and Mary Wollstonecraft and their later inheritors such as Beatrice Webb and J.S. Mill.7 Likewise, slavery would not be legally abolished in Europe and its colonies for another century, but the ideas in circulation in Europe and increasingly elsewhere clearly pointed to another world being possible. This questioning of hierarchical society was influenced by European contact with other cultures (Graeber and Wengrow 2021), as well as from Greco-Roman ideas, many arriving via the Islamic world. Indeed, some of the Enlightenment philosophers explicitly acknowledged the influence of other cultures in their writings. Thinkers such as Kandiaronk, a chief of the Huron people whose thoughts were published by French explorer and philosopher the Baron Louis-Armand Lahontan, did not just defend their own traditions but also analysed and criticized European societies. Montesquieu also used the perspective of non-Europeans to criticize European societies. The great navigations and the confrontation with alternative systems of thought were a crucial component of the Enlightenment (Graeber and Wengrow 2021). Accompanying the Enlightenment’s challenges to existing hierarchies was a material transformation which constitutes the second precondition for executable social justice in a market economy: increasing levels of prosperity and the birth of social statistics to assess its levels. The Industrial Revolution began in Britain in the eighteenth century and spread over the course of the nineteenth into other Western European countries and the United States. Table 1 shows GDP per capita in the United Kingdom in two centuries before the Enlightenment (1600 and 1700) and at the publication dates of some relevant works that laid the philosophical foundations to social justice.8 X Table 1 GDP per capita in the UK and publication dates of enlightenment works Year Author/Work UK GDP per capita in 2011 prices 1600 1,691 1700 2,412

publication dates of some relevant works that laid the philosophical foundations to social justice.8 X Table 1 GDP per capita in the UK and publication dates of enlightenment works Year Author/Work UK GDP per capita in 2011 prices 1600 1,691 1700 2,412 1762 J. J. Rousseau. The Social Contract 2,917 1776 Adam Smith. Wealth of Nations 2,962 1780 J. Bentham. Principles of Morals 3,049 1787 Immanuel Kant. Critique of Pure Reason 2,898 1795 Nicolas de Condorcet. Tableau Historique 3,207 1797 Thomas Paine. Agrarian Justice 3,167 1859 J. S. Mill. On Liberty 5,031 1875 Karl Marx. Critique of the Gotha Program 5,950

Source: Madison Project. 7 Mary Wollstonecraft was also vehemently opposed to other exclusions from the pool of those who have human rights, such as slaves.

She condemned the American Revolution for its lopsided fight for the liberty of only some while ignoring the liberty of others (Sen 2005). 8 These are all western European authors, but the concept of social justice burst out into the Americas, Asia and Africa as well.09 ILO Working Paper 172 When Rousseau published The Social Contract in 1762, GDP per capita in the United Kingdom was about 20% higher than in 1700 and about 70% higher than in 1600.9 It grew throughout the nineteenth century to the present day, creating an ever greater surplus that could be, in principle, used to right distributive wrongs. Yet until the late nineteenth century the fruits of these productivity increases were almost entirely appropriated by a small group of people. The benefits of industrialization accrued to a narrow elite, while the working classes endured long hours, hazardous conditions and poverty. In addition, slavery, colonialism and other primitive forms of exploitation were still rampant and growing throughout the nineteenth century. But with improvements in statistics and accounting, authors such as Condorcet and Paine could

fits of industrialization accrued to a narrow elite, while the working classes endured long hours, hazardous conditions and poverty. In addition, slavery, colonialism and other primitive forms of exploitation were still rampant and growing throughout the nineteenth century. But with improvements in statistics and accounting, authors such as Condorcet and Paine could do the arithmetic and show that it was possible to improve the lives of wide swathes of society. The arithmetic of social justice did not go unchallenged. Writers such as Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo reasoned that a society without want was impossible. Their arguments, though entirely logical, were premised on an antiquated and highly prejudiced view of the poor that predicted that any income gains would be erased through unfettered population growth, thus limiting any material gains for that class. But Malthus a