This concerns electoral principles and policies, not principles of justice and social policies. Since the author’s principle refers only to social policies, this example is irrelevant.

This example concerns land distribution, not social policies. There’s no indication the states’ social policies are the reason they devote different amounts of land to forestry.

This gets the desired structure backward. It refers to states with different principles but similar outcomes, whereas the author argues states with similar principles will have different policy details.

This is an example of the point argued by the author. It shows two states with similar principles of justice can have social policies with different details.

This gets the desired structure backward. It refers to states with different principles of justice but similar policies, whereas the author argues states with similar principles of justice will have differences in their policies.