How Should the Benefits and Burdens Arising from the Eurozone Be Distributed amongst Its Member States?

Daimon Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.6018/daimon.488951
Josep Ferret Mas
{"title":"How Should the Benefits and Burdens Arising from the Eurozone Be Distributed amongst Its Member States?","authors":"Josep Ferret Mas","doi":"10.6018/daimon.488951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article asks how the costs and benefits of operating a monetary union should be distributed amongst its more and less competitive members, taking as an example the operation of the European Monetary Union (EMU or Eurozone). Drawing on existing domestic and transnational justice debates, I resist both a purely procedural and a purely distributive view. The former assumes treaties against a fair background can make any distribution fair and disregards how individual citizens are likely to fare depending on how a monetary union is organized. The latter requires justice amongst Eurozone co-citizens, and it neglects the value of member state’s choices and attitudes towards risk. Instead, I defend a view of the EMU as an association of free self-determining states. I also argue that a variety of factors are relevant to this problem, including the need to protect less competitive states from ‘domination’, or inappropriate forms of control by their co-members, and to protect citizens from various forms of deprivation even if their own governments are willing to expose them to the relevant risks.\n This article asks how the costs and benefits of operating a monetary union should be distributed amongst its more and less competitive members, taking as an example the operation of the European Monetary Union (EMU or Eurozone). Drawing on existing domestic and transnational justice debates, I resist both a purely procedural and a purely distributive view. The former assumes treaties against a fair background can make any distribution fair and disregards how individual citizens are likely to fare depending on how a monetary union is organized. The latter requires justice amongst Eurozone co-citizens, and it neglects the value of member state’s choices and attitudes towards risk. Instead, I defend a view of the EMU as an association of free self-determining states. I also argue that a variety of factors are relevant to this problem, including the need to protect less competitive states from ‘domination’, or inappropriate forms of control by their co-members, and to protect citizens from various forms of deprivation even if their own governments are willing to expose them to the relevant risks.","PeriodicalId":516838,"journal":{"name":"Daimon","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Daimon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6018/daimon.488951","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article asks how the costs and benefits of operating a monetary union should be distributed amongst its more and less competitive members, taking as an example the operation of the European Monetary Union (EMU or Eurozone). Drawing on existing domestic and transnational justice debates, I resist both a purely procedural and a purely distributive view. The former assumes treaties against a fair background can make any distribution fair and disregards how individual citizens are likely to fare depending on how a monetary union is organized. The latter requires justice amongst Eurozone co-citizens, and it neglects the value of member state’s choices and attitudes towards risk. Instead, I defend a view of the EMU as an association of free self-determining states. I also argue that a variety of factors are relevant to this problem, including the need to protect less competitive states from ‘domination’, or inappropriate forms of control by their co-members, and to protect citizens from various forms of deprivation even if their own governments are willing to expose them to the relevant risks. This article asks how the costs and benefits of operating a monetary union should be distributed amongst its more and less competitive members, taking as an example the operation of the European Monetary Union (EMU or Eurozone). Drawing on existing domestic and transnational justice debates, I resist both a purely procedural and a purely distributive view. The former assumes treaties against a fair background can make any distribution fair and disregards how individual citizens are likely to fare depending on how a monetary union is organized. The latter requires justice amongst Eurozone co-citizens, and it neglects the value of member state’s choices and attitudes towards risk. Instead, I defend a view of the EMU as an association of free self-determining states. I also argue that a variety of factors are relevant to this problem, including the need to protect less competitive states from ‘domination’, or inappropriate forms of control by their co-members, and to protect citizens from various forms of deprivation even if their own governments are willing to expose them to the relevant risks.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧元区带来的利益和负担应如何在成员国之间分配?
本文以欧洲货币联盟(EMU 或欧元区)的运作为例,探讨了如何在竞争力较强和较弱的成员国之间分配货币联盟运作的成本和收益。借鉴现有的国内和跨国司法辩论,我反对纯粹的程序性观点和纯粹的分配性观点。前者假定在公平背景下的条约可以使任何分配公平,而忽视了公民个人可能因货币联盟的组织方式而受到的影响。后者则要求欧元区共同公民之间的公正,它忽视了成员国的选择价值和对风险的态度。相反,我认为欧洲货币联盟是自由自决国家的联合体。我还认为,与这一问题相关的因素有很多,包括需要保护竞争力较弱的国家免受 "支配",或共同成员国不恰当形式的控制,以及保护公民免受各种形式的剥夺,即使他们自己的政府愿意让他们面临相关风险。本文以欧洲货币联盟(EMU 或欧元区)的运作为例,探讨如何在竞争力较强和较弱的成员之间分配货币联盟运作的成本和收益。借鉴现有的国内和跨国司法辩论,我反对纯粹的程序性观点和纯粹的分配性观点。前者假定在公平背景下的条约可以使任何分配公平,而忽视了公民个人可能因货币联盟的组织方式而受到的影响。后者则要求欧元区共同公民之间的公正,它忽视了成员国的选择价值和对风险的态度。相反,我认为欧洲货币联盟是自由自决国家的联合体。我还认为,与这一问题相关的因素有很多,包括需要保护竞争力较弱的国家免受 "支配",或共同成员国不恰当形式的控制,以及保护公民免受各种形式的剥夺,即使他们自己的政府愿意让他们面临相关风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
La violencia de la voluntad general. Sobre la crítica a Rousseau en la Fenomenología del espíritu de Hegel El embrollo causal del naturalismo biológico Fetichismo y lucha de clases en Slavoj Zizek Desencantamiento y post-fotografía: apuntes sobre la imagen contemporánea y la muerte Hacia una ética sentipensante: cultivando experiencias encarnadas de bienestar solidario
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1