This study proposed a theoretical framework of "spatial justice perception-psychological transformation-behavior formation." Using multisource data, including semi-structured interviews, participatory observations, and secondary materials, the research applied a constructing grounded theory approach involving a four-level coding analysis: initial coding, focused coding, axial coding, and theoretical coding. By deconstructing individuals’ perceptions of spatial injustice, this study reconstructed the dimensions of spatial justice and examined the differences in perceptions and behavioral mechanisms between tourists and local residents. The key findings are as follows: (1) Both tourists and residents derive their spatial justice perceptions from issues of spatial injustice, which are reconstructed in four core dimensions: distributive justice, procedural justice, recognition justice, and restorative justice. For tourists, the psychological transformation mechanism operates as follows: perceptions of distributive, recognition, and restorative injustice trigger disappointment in service value, alienation in the cultural experience, and a sense of lack of ecological education, leading to imbalanced spatial value perception. Perceptions of distributive and recognition injustice shape cognitive biases such as deviation from group preferences and a lack of cultural respect, resulting in conflicts with spatial discipline. Perceptions of distributive and restorative injustice weaken behavioral confidence and decision-making autonomy, causing diminished spatial agency. For residents, perceptions of distributive, recognition, and restorative injustice induce survival anxiety, cultural anxiety, increased economic burden, reinforced doubts about fairness, and a heightened sense of deprivation, leading to perceived spatial survival pressure. Perceptions of procedural injustice foster intergroup opposition, intensify value conflicts, and erode group trust, resulting in a torn spatial identity. Perceptions of procedural and restorative injustice jointly reduce decision autonomy and undermine developmental confidence, leading to reduced spatial empowerment. (2) Structural differences exist between tourists and residents in spatial justice perception and behavior, rooted in the profound tension between two spatial attributes—"paradise" vs "homeland"—and their respective subject positions. Tourists who occupy transient, consumption-oriented positions prioritize experiential rights. They often expressed dissatisfaction through negative word-of-mouth, passive participation, on-site compensation, or rule-breaking adventures. Their negative behaviors generate short-term public opinion and operational pressure, whereas their long-term effects can undermine destination attractiveness. Residents situated in fixed livelihood-dependent positions emphasize their rights to survival, development, and culture. They tend to adopt resistance measures, such as boycotts, collective action, external appeals, covert resistance, and strategic gaming. Their negative actions easily provoke governance conflicts and social risks, potentially undermining the legitimacy of governance in the long term. This study contributes theoretically by deconstructing differences in spatial justice perceptions between tourists and residents of Potatso National Park, and deepens the connotation of spatial justice theory in ecological conservation contexts, complementing existing research focused on urban development. Second, it innovatively proposes "restorative justice" as a key dimension in ecological conservation, defining it as "dismantling structural roots of injustice through systematic intervention to halt the reproduction of spatial conflicts and achieve sustainable reconciliation of eco-social relations." Finally, moving beyond macro-structural perspectives, this study constructed a micro-level analytical framework, offering new theoretical tools to analyze the psychological formation of spatial justice and advance national park governance. Practically, this study systematically identifies real-world issues in Potatso National Park’s conservation and management, analyzes the underlying mechanisms, and proposes targeted, multi-dimensional governance strategies tailored to different stakeholders. This study provides concrete pathways for enhancing park governance effectiveness.