Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0011
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter explores the corporation as a subject of moral and political theory. Companies have been neglected as a subject of political philosophy and of theories of trade in particular. This chapter defends the idea that firms are actors with moral responsibilities and subject to trade justice. It identifies questions about both the moral requirements applying to the corporation’s internal structure, including treatment of employees, and its responsibility to outside actors, including communities, other firms, or states as matters of trade justice. Firms ought to refrain from violations, and they ought to respect and they ought to support the principles of trade justice. Arguments that firms are, morally speaking, off the hook in matters of trade justice do not succeed. With regards to trade, arguments about market pressure, adversarial practices, obligations to shareholders and a division of labor fail. The chapter introduces a case study about Nike that allows the formulation of several questions about obligations of firms that the remaining chapters answer.
{"title":"Theorizing the Firm","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0011","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the corporation as a subject of moral and political theory. Companies have been neglected as a subject of political philosophy and of theories of trade in particular. This chapter defends the idea that firms are actors with moral responsibilities and subject to trade justice. It identifies questions about both the moral requirements applying to the corporation’s internal structure, including treatment of employees, and its responsibility to outside actors, including communities, other firms, or states as matters of trade justice. Firms ought to refrain from violations, and they ought to respect and they ought to support the principles of trade justice. Arguments that firms are, morally speaking, off the hook in matters of trade justice do not succeed. With regards to trade, arguments about market pressure, adversarial practices, obligations to shareholders and a division of labor fail. The chapter introduces a case study about Nike that allows the formulation of several questions about obligations of firms that the remaining chapters answer.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131281958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0005
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter captures trade justice in terms of exploitation, a proposal only as good as the underlying account of exploitation. Exploitation is one of the great buzzwords of political thinking on the left. The original Marxist notion was based on the labor theory of value, which most thinkers in that domain no longer endorse. But the kind of unfair advantage-taking the notion covers has continued to engage activists and philosophers alike. This chapter surveys the lay of the land, with a focus on recent work, and introduces a new proposal on exploitation. The proposal offers the most plausible response to disagreement between various conceptions of exploitation and identifies a structural unity across them. The chapter offers a proposal for how to think about exploitation that combines the advantages of competing conceptions while avoiding their shortcomings. Exploitation, on this general ecumenical account, is unfairness through power. The version that applies to trade characterizes exploitation as power-induced failure of reciprocity. Importantly, non-individual actors like groups or institutions may exploit or be exploited.
{"title":"Exploitation as Unfairness Through Power","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter captures trade justice in terms of exploitation, a proposal only as good as the underlying account of exploitation. Exploitation is one of the great buzzwords of political thinking on the left. The original Marxist notion was based on the labor theory of value, which most thinkers in that domain no longer endorse. But the kind of unfair advantage-taking the notion covers has continued to engage activists and philosophers alike. This chapter surveys the lay of the land, with a focus on recent work, and introduces a new proposal on exploitation. The proposal offers the most plausible response to disagreement between various conceptions of exploitation and identifies a structural unity across them. The chapter offers a proposal for how to think about exploitation that combines the advantages of competing conceptions while avoiding their shortcomings. Exploitation, on this general ecumenical account, is unfairness through power. The version that applies to trade characterizes exploitation as power-induced failure of reciprocity. Importantly, non-individual actors like groups or institutions may exploit or be exploited.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125604309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0001
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
Trade has made the world, but as far as philosophical thought is concerned, it remains elusive. What, if anything, about trade generates obligations, and what is the nature of these obligations? Can we identify a normative ground for trade-specific obligations while recognizing other grounds such as common humanity or shared citizenship? How should we think about such a ground in ideal theory, where everybody does as they ought to, and in non-ideal theory, where not everybody does? These are tough questions, partly because trade touches on many philosophical subjects but must also be properly understood historically and social-scientifically. This chapter casts light on both the political and historical significance of trade and its philosophical complexities. The chapter also introduces the major theses this book defends.
{"title":"The Political Significance and Philosophical Complexities of Trade","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0001","url":null,"abstract":"Trade has made the world, but as far as philosophical thought is concerned, it remains elusive. What, if anything, about trade generates obligations, and what is the nature of these obligations? Can we identify a normative ground for trade-specific obligations while recognizing other grounds such as common humanity or shared citizenship? How should we think about such a ground in ideal theory, where everybody does as they ought to, and in non-ideal theory, where not everybody does? These are tough questions, partly because trade touches on many philosophical subjects but must also be properly understood historically and social-scientifically. This chapter casts light on both the political and historical significance of trade and its philosophical complexities. The chapter also introduces the major theses this book defends.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121077349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0003
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter introduces the images-terminology used throughout the book and addresses Amoral Trade, Instrumental Trade, and Structural Equity, three competitors to the image the book adopts. Amoral Trade is the view that trade is an interaction among a myriad of individuals that does not let trade come up for (much) moral assessment in the first place. Instrumental Trade does give moral significance to trade, but only to the extent that trade helps with the pursuit of other goals. According to Structural Equity, each state may remove from the totality of trade gains what it could generate in autarky and the remaining surplus is divided equally among participating states. The chapter rejects these images and then introduces its own image, Trade-As-One-Ground, and offers some initial arguments for it.
{"title":"Images of Trade","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter introduces the images-terminology used throughout the book and addresses Amoral Trade, Instrumental Trade, and Structural Equity, three competitors to the image the book adopts. Amoral Trade is the view that trade is an interaction among a myriad of individuals that does not let trade come up for (much) moral assessment in the first place. Instrumental Trade does give moral significance to trade, but only to the extent that trade helps with the pursuit of other goals. According to Structural Equity, each state may remove from the totality of trade gains what it could generate in autarky and the remaining surplus is divided equally among participating states. The chapter rejects these images and then introduces its own image, Trade-As-One-Ground, and offers some initial arguments for it.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"75 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131486636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0007
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter theorizes the normative role of states in the global order generally and in trade specifically. One challenge for a theory of multiple grounds of justice is that an assignment of duties is not straightforward. A theory of global justice that recognizes multiple grounds requires a differentiated vocabulary to outline obligations for different agents, some designed to fit the role and importance of states for global justice, and some designed for other actors. The chapter develops the constrained agency perspective from Chapter 6 (which started to work with some of that vocabulary) for the role of the state within a pluralistic theory of global justice.
{"title":"The State as an Agent of Trade Justice","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter theorizes the normative role of states in the global order generally and in trade specifically. One challenge for a theory of multiple grounds of justice is that an assignment of duties is not straightforward. A theory of global justice that recognizes multiple grounds requires a differentiated vocabulary to outline obligations for different agents, some designed to fit the role and importance of states for global justice, and some designed for other actors. The chapter develops the constrained agency perspective from Chapter 6 (which started to work with some of that vocabulary) for the role of the state within a pluralistic theory of global justice.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124910030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0004
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter explores more systematically the image of trade that we propose in this book, which we call Trade-as-one-Ground. It does so by way of introducing the grounds-of-justice approach from Risse’s On Global Justice. That approach makes good on the claim that trade is one in several grounds, and indeed is one such ground. Technically the ground is not trade as such but subjection to the global trading system. The chapter explains this notion and explores why one should indeed regard it as one ground of justice. It also investigates differences between inquiries into fairness in trade and trade justice.
{"title":"Trade as One Ground of Justice","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores more systematically the image of trade that we propose in this book, which we call Trade-as-one-Ground. It does so by way of introducing the grounds-of-justice approach from Risse’s On Global Justice. That approach makes good on the claim that trade is one in several grounds, and indeed is one such ground. Technically the ground is not trade as such but subjection to the global trading system. The chapter explains this notion and explores why one should indeed regard it as one ground of justice. It also investigates differences between inquiries into fairness in trade and trade justice.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"23 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"113991086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0002
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter illuminates how developing countries have fared in postwar efforts to create a trade regime. After World War II, the Bretton Woods institutions were designed to help with economic betterment and avoid the repetition of such calamities as the world wars and the Great Depression. The world gradually outgrew the imperialist era and saw the creation of dozens of new states, which, however, were poorly integrated into the global economic system. An influential idea in the early stages of this system was to design a global New Deal including an effective and just trade regime to serve the poor. Subsequently ideas about a New International Economic Order became prominent, supported by dependency theories about the world economy. Before this historical canvas this chapter makes a philosophical plea for a New Deal for the world—a New Global Deal. It also touches on earlier intellectual responses to these developments, ranging from various versions of postwar intellectual radicalism to the emergence of the global justice literature in Western liberal philosophy to which this work belongs.
{"title":"Towards a New Global Deal","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter illuminates how developing countries have fared in postwar efforts to create a trade regime. After World War II, the Bretton Woods institutions were designed to help with economic betterment and avoid the repetition of such calamities as the world wars and the Great Depression. The world gradually outgrew the imperialist era and saw the creation of dozens of new states, which, however, were poorly integrated into the global economic system. An influential idea in the early stages of this system was to design a global New Deal including an effective and just trade regime to serve the poor. Subsequently ideas about a New International Economic Order became prominent, supported by dependency theories about the world economy. Before this historical canvas this chapter makes a philosophical plea for a New Deal for the world—a New Global Deal. It also touches on earlier intellectual responses to these developments, ranging from various versions of postwar intellectual radicalism to the emergence of the global justice literature in Western liberal philosophy to which this work belongs.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"348 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116532851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0010
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
WTO multilateralism has been under siege from many directions. In addition to those who support multilateralism in the domain of trade but argue it must come in a different guise (including the authors of this book) there are those who want to limit cooperation to a smaller number of, say, technologically advanced countries. There are also economic nationalists who barely believe in trade cooperation. This chapter adresses the negotiation of regional treaties prominent in the final years of the Obama administration. The Trump administration set back these efforts. Nonetheless, the attractiveness of mega-regionalism reveals a crisis in trade multilateralism that has arisen partly from the increasing unwillingness of less powerful states to accept whatever the powerful offer them, and partly from the increasing digital divide that undermines the extent to which trading partners have similar regulatory interests. The chapter raises worries about mega-regionalism diminishing the prospects of multilateralism in the service of trade justice.
{"title":"A Step in the Wrong Direction","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0010","url":null,"abstract":"WTO multilateralism has been under siege from many directions. In addition to those who support multilateralism in the domain of trade but argue it must come in a different guise (including the authors of this book) there are those who want to limit cooperation to a smaller number of, say, technologically advanced countries. There are also economic nationalists who barely believe in trade cooperation. This chapter adresses the negotiation of regional treaties prominent in the final years of the Obama administration. The Trump administration set back these efforts. Nonetheless, the attractiveness of mega-regionalism reveals a crisis in trade multilateralism that has arisen partly from the increasing unwillingness of less powerful states to accept whatever the powerful offer them, and partly from the increasing digital divide that undermines the extent to which trading partners have similar regulatory interests. The chapter raises worries about mega-regionalism diminishing the prospects of multilateralism in the service of trade justice.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133954242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0009
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
This chapter explores particular domestic obligations of states in the domain of trade, including obligations and prerogatives to protect their labor force and industries from competition and obligations that arise in the context of dealing with authoritarian regimes. The grounds-of-justice approach dilutes contrasts between domestic and foreign policy. Governments must attend to matters of domestic justice, as well as make appropriate contributions to the global advancement of human rights and to trade justice. There are additional duties of justice and other moral duties that apply to states in domains such as immigration, climate change, or protection of future generations. The state has obligations to protect its labor force and look after its vulnerable citizens. But it also has duties towards people elsewhere. The challenge is to reap gains of cooperation in trade, culture, education, environmental protection, among others, while respecting the world’s many local peculiarities and making sure those gains do not accrue only to a few. The grounds-of-justice approach offers guidance for how to pursue these tasks.
{"title":"Domestic Trade Policies in an Interconnected World","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0009","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores particular domestic obligations of states in the domain of trade, including obligations and prerogatives to protect their labor force and industries from competition and obligations that arise in the context of dealing with authoritarian regimes. The grounds-of-justice approach dilutes contrasts between domestic and foreign policy. Governments must attend to matters of domestic justice, as well as make appropriate contributions to the global advancement of human rights and to trade justice. There are additional duties of justice and other moral duties that apply to states in domains such as immigration, climate change, or protection of future generations. The state has obligations to protect its labor force and look after its vulnerable citizens. But it also has duties towards people elsewhere. The challenge is to reap gains of cooperation in trade, culture, education, environmental protection, among others, while respecting the world’s many local peculiarities and making sure those gains do not accrue only to a few. The grounds-of-justice approach offers guidance for how to pursue these tasks.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127535287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-03DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0006
Mathias Risse, G. Wollner
Exploitation generally is ubiquitous in human affairs, as is the specific injustice involved in exploitation in the domain of trade. This chapter explores how to respond to occurrences of exploitation. It develops a general perspective of constrained agency and an accompanying differentiated vocabulary to delineate obligations of particular agents. The chapter also offers a theory of stepping stones towards as well as of prices worth paying for the creation of a just world. Such an approach allows to distinguish between two kinds of cases: first, cases of exploitation that can be accepted temporarily on a decent progression from the current unjust state of the world to a more just one, and secondly, cases that cannot be put into perspective this way and that must be terminated forthwith. The chapter reflects on how to use such arguments properly since overusing them is tempting.
{"title":"The Moral Force of Exploitation","authors":"Mathias Risse, G. Wollner","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837411.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Exploitation generally is ubiquitous in human affairs, as is the specific injustice involved in exploitation in the domain of trade. This chapter explores how to respond to occurrences of exploitation. It develops a general perspective of constrained agency and an accompanying differentiated vocabulary to delineate obligations of particular agents. The chapter also offers a theory of stepping stones towards as well as of prices worth paying for the creation of a just world. Such an approach allows to distinguish between two kinds of cases: first, cases of exploitation that can be accepted temporarily on a decent progression from the current unjust state of the world to a more just one, and secondly, cases that cannot be put into perspective this way and that must be terminated forthwith. The chapter reflects on how to use such arguments properly since overusing them is tempting.","PeriodicalId":184406,"journal":{"name":"On Trade Justice","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126543936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：