The Justice of Land in a Land of Injustice

处理与殖民主义、种族主义和资本主义扩张有关的历史性土地剥夺的后果困扰着世界各地的许多国家。土地和解问题在南非最为重要。该国今天面临着各种土地问题，这些问题源于该国剥夺土地的历史，从城市无地者“掠夺土地”，到农场工人努力争取土地所有权，再到“剩余人口”对他们在种族隔离时期被政府行动剥夺的土地提出权利要求。土地和解提出并说明了许多与过渡时期司法和司法心理学等新兴跨学科领域有关的重要理论问题。一般来说，正义研究认为，人们判断法律和政治是否符合他们的公平标准。这种判断是重要的，因为被认为是不公正的法律的和政治机构不太可能被赋予合法性，而没有合法性，遵守就成了问题（即，它可能与成本和收益的计算更加密切相关）-也许因此加剧了非法侵占土地等行为。 在政治制度一级，本项目将审查土地和解，据推测，当法律与精英和大众的偏好相吻合时，土地和解最为有效。在微观层面（本研究的层面），本研究考察了对土地和解政策的偏好。这些偏好被假设为来自（1）问题土地如何在正义的四个子维度方面得到框架（2）工具性利益，特别是反映在各种形式的土地剥夺的经验;（3）基本文化价值观，特别是个人主义（预计在欧洲血统的人中最常见）与集体主义（在非洲人中可能占主导地位）。此外，首席调查员将调查（4）南非人是否赞成土地入侵，并有可能在未来加入这类运动。研究设计的主要组成部分是对南非精英和大众成员的抽样调查。调查采用了各种创新技术，包括说服力实验、使用旨在评估司法的竞争层面对土地和解偏好的作用的实验性小插曲，以及对特别了解情况的受访者进行后续深入访谈。

Dealing with consequences of historical land dispossessions associated with colonialism, racism, and capitalist expansion dogs a variety of countries throughout the world. Nowhere is the issue of land reconciliation more important than in South Africa. That country today confronts a variety of land issues flowing from the country's history of land dispossessions, ranging from "land grabs" by the urban landless, to efforts by farm workers to achieve rights of ownership to their land, to claims by "surplus people" to land from which they were removed by government actions under apartheid. Land reconciliation raises and illustrates many significant theoretical issues related to the emerging interdisciplinary fields of transitional justice and justice psychology. Generally speaking, justice research argues that people judge law and politics by whether they comport with their standards of fairness. Such judgments are important since legal and political institutions perceived to be unjust are unlikely to be accorded legitimacy, and without legitimacy, compliance becomes problematical (i.e., it may become more closely related to calculations of costs and benefits) -- perhaps thereby exacerbating behaviors such as illegal land invasions. At the level of the political system, this project will examine land reconciliation, which is hypothesized to be most effective when law and elite and mass preferences coincide. At the micro-level (the level of this research), this study examines preferences on land reconciliation policies. These preferences are hypothesized to flow from (1) how issues land get framed in terms of the four sub-dimensions of justice (distributive, procedural, retributive, and restorative); (2) instrumental interests, especially as reflected in experiences with various forms of land dispossession; and (3) basic cultural values, in particular individualism (expected to be most common among those of European ancestry) versus collectivism (which may predominate among Africans). In addition, the principal investigator will investigate (4) whether South Africans approve of land invasions and are likely to join such movements in the future. The principal component of the research design is a survey of samples of both South African elites and members of the mass public. The survey incorporate a variety of innovative techniques, including persuasibility experiments, the use of experimental vignettes designed to assess the role of competing dimensions of justice on preferences for land reconciliation, and follow-up in-depth interviews with especially knowledgeable respondents.