Search

In this paper I compare and critically evaluate Sreenivasan's and Pogge's conceptions of global justice. While Sreenivasan holds that all the currently existing theories of global justice agree that wealthy countries should transfer at least a portion of their wealth to the poor, Pogge claims that all the currently existing theories of global justice agree that wealthy countries should stop harming poor ones in the first place. In this paper I shall try to show (i) that Sreenivasan's proposal, as presented in his articles, is broad enough to be acceptable by some international distributive justice theories, but not all of them, (ii) that Pogge's proposal is broader than Sreenivasan, in the sense that it aims to gain support from all the different conceptions of international distributive justice, but it depends on the claim that developed countries are currently harming the global poor--a claim that I will try to defend--, and (iii) that Pogge's and Sreenivasan's view are compatible. In fact, if Sreenivasan added Pogge's central claim of his argument to his own proposal, the scope of theories that he could gain support from would be much broader. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The life of a Third World international lawyer is devoted to resistance to the norms of international law designed by agents with power to promote the interests of the powerful sections of the international community. Increasingly the instrumental norms of international law are fashioned through the use of private power, making the positivist claim that public international law is a law between states illusory. The task of this paper is to identify a framework of common concerns so that a collectivity of Third World lawyers can work together, examine how mechanisms of power can be countered, and devise a confrontational strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The paper deals with selected dimensions of the global justice, especially those that are connected with the concept of hospitality. It introduces and elaborates the concept of agents of justice as developed by Onora O'Neill and situates its importance in the global justice perspective. The aim is to defend the right to hospitality, develop the notion of an agent of hospitality and in relation to it develop a framework of correlated duties and responsibilities that these have within the cosmopolitan justice perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

James'sFairness in Tradeseeks to offer an account of fair trade that is “internal” to an existing practice he describes as “mutual market reliance.” This paper distinguishes several senses of the distinction between “internal” and “external” that occur in the book and asks how, in its various senses, the distinction shapes and influences judgments about the fairness of the practice. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The discussion on global justice, i.e. the discussion on the transformation of the economic and political relationships between the richest and poorest societies, is vital for public health today for two reasons. First, because there is a well-documented increase in health inequalities which resulted from the process of economic globalization; and second, because two approaches for managing these health inequalities have become particularly visible and are fully related to the field of work of social health: the social determinants of health approach, proposed by the WHO, and the social determination of health approach proposed by Latin American Social Medicine. In this sense, this paper aims to analyze the views on global justice that each of these approaches adopts as well as their proposals for managing the health inequities that are generated in each case. We concluded that the texts of the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health do not question or demand a change in the global economic and political relationships, whereas Latin American Social Medicine considers that, in order to advance in the elimination of global inequalities, an ethical questioning and a global restructuring of the power relationships are mandatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses some of the proposals existing in the contemporary debate about justice. In the first part, John Rawls' theory of justice at the international level is presented. In the second part, Jürgen Habermas' human rights approach is presented along with a discussion questioning the arguments advanced by these authors to oppose the cosmopolitan idea of a transformation of the international order on the basis of the demands of global economic justice. Finally, the last part shows the limits and views of Thomas Pogge's global justice proposal [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the concern for distributive justice might be universal rather than contingent on a morally optional relationship, but limited in the demands it places upon us where a reasonable assurance of reciprocity is lacking. Principles of distributive justice apply wherever people are interacting, even if they have no choice but to interact, but are grounded in the goal of constituting relationships of mutual recognition as equals, and so partly conditional on compliance by others. On this view, there is no unilateral duty to share the benefits of cooperation fairly, only a unilateral duty to help establish institutions that will permit fair sharing with a reasonable assurance of reciprocity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper asks whether David Miller's minimalist theory of human rights is coherent with his claim that obligations of global justice involve obligations to provide people with a minimally decent life. I argue that there is a justice gap in Miller's theory: the structure of his distinction between basic and societal needs is such that people will be left below the level of minimal decency even when obligations of justice are met. Miller can either bite this bullet or look for alternative sources of obligations of justice. I take up the second option by arguing that there can be obligations of global justice to build institutions that enable societies to generate income and wealth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thomas Pogge's Global Resources Dividend relies on a flat tax on the use of natural resources to fund the eradication of world poverty. Hillel Steiner's Global Fund taxes the full rental value of owned natural resources and distributes the proceeds equally. The paper compares the Dividend and the Fund and defends the Global Share, a novel proposal that taxes either use or ownership, does so (when possible) progressively, and distributes the revenue according to a prioritarian rather than a sufficientarian or egalitarian principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores understandings of gender equality and education and the nature of global goal and target setting, drawing on empirical data collected in central and local government departments in Kenya and South Africa reflecting on their implementation of Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 1, concerned with poverty, MDG 2, concerned with education, and MDG 3, concerned with gender equality. The study raises questions about the ownership of the MDGs and the reasons for the kinds of changes in meaning about gender and rights made by differently situated officials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent emergence of global justice networks (GJNs) to counter neoliberal globalization has been an important political and geographical phenomenon. Much has been written about the emergence of a new global civil society, centred upon a new 'network' ontology. In engaging with these debates in this paper, our purpose is to develop a more critical spatial perspective. We argue that issues of space and place are critical in understanding the operation of GJNs and their potential to contribute to an alternative global politics. Spatially, the global linkages of GJNs can be seen as creating cultural and spatial configurations that connect places with each other in opposition to neoliberalism. However, the individual movements that comprise networks, while not necessarily place-restricted, remain heavily territorialized in their struggles. Additionally, networks evolve unevenly over space. Some groups and actors within them are able to develop extensive translocal connections and associations whereas others remain relatively more localized. Potential conflicts arise from such complex geographies, which only become evident through analysing the operation and evolution of different networks. This leads us to focus not solely on the transnational character of networks but also upon how the global is enacted through the localized practices of movements within them, in considering the potential for GJNs to form more sustainable political alternatives to neoliberalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]