This paper presents an alternative to the predominant equity theory for studying the concept of fairness in social relationships. According to the equity theory, or merit principle, fairness in social relationships occurs when rewards, punishments, and resources are allocated in proportion to one's input or contributions. The basic problems of this theory are that it employs a unidimensional concept of fairness and that it emphasizes only the fairness of distribution, ignoring the fairness of procedure. In contrast, the alternative to this theory is based on two justice rules, the distributional and the procedural. Distribution rules follow certain criteria: the individual's contributions, his needs, and the equality theory. These criteria are considered relative to the individual's role within the particular setting or social system. A justice judgment sequence estimates the individual's deservingness based on each rule. Final judgments evolve from a rule-combination equation. Preceding the final distribution of reward, a cognitive map of the allocative process is constructed. Fairness is judged in terms of the procedure's consistency, prevention of personal bias, and its representativeness of important subgroups. Opportunities to apply this concept of fairness exist in field studies of censorship, participatory decision making, equal opportunity, and representativeness of social institutions. (KC)