Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice


Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice book. Happy reading Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Pocket Guide.
The Many Faces of Injustice

Gender, Work, and Economy. Heidi Gottfried. What is Political Sociology? Elisabeth S. Global Gender Issues in the New Millennium. Anne Sisson Runyan. Learning Activism. Aziz Choudry. Peter Levine. African Diaspora Identities. John A. Progressive Community Organizing. Loretta Pyles.

Women, Work, and Globalization. Bahira Sherif Trask. Democratic Accountability, Political Order, and Change. Johan P.

Euthanasia tactics: patterns of injustice and outrage

Confronting Injustice and Oppression. David Gil. Steven Vallas. Human Security. Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh. Institutional Racism. Shirley Better. The Child in International Political Economy.

The Modern World Context for Responsible Leadership

Alison M. Associative Democracy. Paul Hirst. Gender and Leadership in Unions. Gill Kirton. Democratic Professionalism. Albert W. Spaces of Contention. Byron Miller. City Futures. Doctor Edgar Pieterse. Advocacy Leadership. Gary L. Women in a Globalizing World. Angela Miles. The Aid Triangle. Malcolm MacLachlan. Political Sociology. Deric Shannon. Social Justice, Peace, and Environmental Education. Julie Andrzejewski. Displacement by Development. Peter Penz. Public Sociologies Reader. Judith Blau. Iraj Abedian. Global Governance and Biopolitics.

David Roberts. The Next Twenty-five Years. David Lee Featherman. Fair Work. Kory P. Keith Horton. Political Institutions and Practical Wisdom.

Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice, Moncrieffe

Maxwell A. Social Inequalities, Media, and Communication. Jan Servaes. Liberal Peacebuilding and Global Governance. How should responsibilities for improving this situation be allocated? In many ways, but here I pick out just a few that have received considerable attention in the philosophical literature. The current system of intellectual property rights is one troubling area.

There are a number of innovative proposals aimed at addressing these issues. One prominent example is the Health Impact Fund proposal developed by Thomas Pogge, which offers alternative ways to reward pharmaceutical companies, notably by how much impact they have on actually curing diseases Pogge The greater their impact, the larger the share of the rewards they would receive from the Health Impact Fund.

Companies would compete for the gold star rankings which could significantly affect consumption choices and thereby expected profits. In both cases the aim is to create important incentives for key players to care about how their products affect the global poor. There are many other issues that concern philosophers in the domain of global health.

There are increasingly worrying practices of experimentation on disadvantaged subjects in developing countries. Increasingly, clinical research has been outsourced to poor, developing countries with populations that are often highly vulnerable. We might wonder about whether these populations are being exploited and whether the participants have compromised abilities to consent to drug trials. In many cases the trials bring considerable health benefits that would not come their way were it not in the interests of pharmaceutical companies to do clinical research in those locations.

If sufficient benefits accrue for local populations some argue that these cases need not be of concern London New infectious diseases and the threat of pandemics are creating further questions about our responsibilities. Often the case is made that national interests in public health in developed countries mandate concern for infectious diseases that originate in developing countries. But more recently, this argument appears to have striking limitations. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa in raises questions about what we ought to do to help the victims who, because of the ways in which the disease spreads, are unlikely to threaten large segments of the population in affluent developed countries outside of Africa.

The national interests of affluent developed countries do not easily converge with public health demands in developing ones in this case and yet we might still have important responsibilities to assist. Discussion of natural resources often figure prominently in several topics of global justice. Some relevant questions include: Are national communities entitled to the resources they find on their territories?

Should principles of global justice apply to our arrangements for justly distributing natural resources? Charles Beitz was an early proponent of a resource distribution principle, according to which natural resources should be allocated such that each society is able to provide adequately for its population Beitz We saw in Section 2 that Rawls believes that resources are not important to prosperity in the ways many imagine.

Rather, institutional resilience matters more. By contrast, Thomas Pogge highlights the ways in which international practices concerning the distribution of resources create considerable obstacles for prosperity in developing countries. In short, these practices create incentives for the wrong kinds of people to take power through illegitimate means and to focus on retaining power at the expense of other goals governments should have, such as trying to improve the well-being of their citizens.

We need to modify these international practices so they do not create such an unfavorable environment.

go site In addition, Pogge proposes a Global Resources Dividend as one measure by which practices concerning natural resource distribution would work in some small way to the benefit of the global poor. On this Global Resources Dividend proposal there would be a small tax on resource extraction, payable by the consumers of resources, and available for projects that would assist in helping everyone to be able to meet their basic needs with dignity Pogge Leif Wenar is also concerned with prevailing practices governing the sale of natural resources and their products Wenar When consumers in wealthy states buy goods from developing countries, this is often similar to consciously receiving stolen goods.

Legitimate resource sales require general agreement from citizens. Evidence of agreement requires that: i owners must be informed about sales, ii owners must be able to express dissent freely should they have doubts about sales, and iii owners should be able to stop resource sales without fearing grave consequences such as violence and intimidation. For various reasons including strategic ones Thomas Pogge and Leif Wenar do not directly challenge the right of nations to own resources on their territories.

Policy recommendations, for instance, are much more likely to be effective if they can fit within the main structures of international conventions. The Global Fund would constitute a clearing house for payments and disbursements Steiner Appealing to accounts of ownership of resources, some philosophers draw out important implications for diverse global justice debates. Mathias Risse argues that we all, collectively, own the resources of the earth and this has profound implications for a range of global justice issues, including immigration.

Some theorists concerned with environmental issues also discuss our rights with respect to natural resources. Tim Hayward, for instance, argues that we have equal rights to ecological space Hayward This is often appealed to when there is a perception that we have exceeded our share, such as in levels of carbon emissions and consumption more generally. Accounts according to which we have equal rights to resources, land, ecological space and so on, are often accused of suffering from an important common problem.

It is difficult to defend a clear and compelling account of the value of resources as these can vary considerably in different social, cultural and technological contexts. But we need to be able to quantify resource values to some plausible extent, if we are to determine whether people are enjoying or exceeding their equal shares. There are a number of global justice problems that require remedying, and this raises the issue of remedial responsibilities. Who should do what to reduce global injustices?

Several different agents, groups, organizations and institutions could play a role. Which responsibilities should devolve to corporations, governments, consumers, citizens, international organizations or social movements? Several guidelines that are often discussed include issues concerning the contribution agents have made to a problem, their patterns of benefit from the problem, and their capacity to take constructive action now.

Two influential frameworks deserve more extended treatment, notably that of Iris Marion Young concerning a social connection model for allocating responsibilities for structural injustice and that of David Miller concerning remedial responsibility Young , Miller In contrast to the idea of responsibility as involving finding fault and individual liability, Iris Marion Young develops a forward-looking model which she argues is more appropriate. She draws on the idea that participation via institutions sometimes produces injustice, so we have particular responsibilities to address injustice.

We share responsibility for remedying injustice but we may have different degrees and kinds of responsibility.

What is Kobo Super Points?

She offers different parameters of reasoning that can help individuals and organizations decide what might make the most sense for them to do in efforts to remedy injustice, given that there are so many injustices, whereas time and resources are limited. Using the case study of the global apparel industry she illustrates how the fact that we are positioned differently can entail varying but important responsibilities for all who participate in activities that sustain sweatshops. There are at least four parameters that agents can use in their reasoning:.

In summary, Young encourages us to think about how we can best take responsibility for reducing structural injustice by reflecting on these four parameters—different positions of power, privilege, interest and collective ability. David Miller offers a tremendously influential connection theory of responsibility that also discusses our remedial responsibilities. There are six ways in which we can be connected to someone, P , who needs help and so be held remedially responsible for assisting.

These connections give rise to six ways in which remedial responsibility can be identified. In the global justice literature there are also important concerns about the distribution of responsibilities among collective and individual agents. Prominently, can we hold nations responsible for global injustices or remedying such injustices? This raises important questions about collective responsibility that are well treated elsewhere in this encyclopedia see the entry on collective responsibility.

Is it possible to have global justice in the absence of a world state? Hobbes argues that this is not possible since there is no global authority that can secure and enforce the requirements of justice. He presents the classic so-called realist case, which is highly influential in international politics, such that there is a state of nature in the international realm.

All states compete in pursuing their own advantage and since there is no global authority there can be no justice in international affairs. Others are more optimistic. Since we already have a high level of interaction among states, organizations and other agents, this has generated various norms and expectations about appropriate conduct which guide behavior in the international sphere Beitz Moreover, we have a strong interest in co-operation when this is necessary to deal practically with a range of problems that have global reach.

Global governance is concerned with how we manage interests affecting the residents of more than one state in the absence of a world state. There is already a high level of co-operation among a variety of networks, organizations and other groups of interested parties at the sub-state level, and this is powerfully influencing the redesign of best practice norms in particular domains Anne-Marie Slaughter Other change agents that can and have exercised considerable reform pressures include global social movements, such as the anti-sweatshop movement, the fair trade movement, and other ethical consumption movements.

Global activism has been an important source of incremental change. These simple examples show that much more is possible in the absence of a world state than realists acknowledge. For more on issues of world government, see the entry world government , which provides extended treatment of this issue. Philosophers are contributing in important ways to discussions of global justice policy issues.

As illustrations, in this entry we have canvassed several institutional reform proposals for addressing global injustices which have enjoyed widespread attention, both within the academy and beyond. There is also the innovative work of Leif Wenar concerning proposals for clean trade Section 9.

In addition to those illustrations already highlighted in this article, philosophers are also having an impact on policy discussions in a wide range of areas including climate change, reforming the United Nations, and suggesting the new priorities that should replace the Millennium Development Goals which expire in Philosophers have also contributed to influential international multi-disciplinary projects that seek alternative ways to measure quality of life or poverty Nussbaum and Sen , Pogge One area recently drawing increased attention concerns tax and accounting matters.

Philosophers have discussed rampant abusive tax practices by corporations and wealthy individuals and how this deprives developing countries of much-needed income for human development in developing countries. There has also been discussion of global income taxes, carbon taxes, financial transaction taxes and Tobin Taxes Moellendorf , Caney b, Brock Philosophers continue to make an important contribution to policy debates and this is also likely to be an area in which considerable useful future work on global justice will concentrate.

Global Economic Injustice 5. Global Gender Justice 6. Immigration 7. Global Environmental Issues 8. Global Health Issues 9. In general, a theory of global justice aims to give us an account of what justice on a global scale consists in and this often includes discussion of the following components: identifying what should count as important problems of global justice positing solutions to each identified problem identifying who might have responsibilities in addressing the identified problem arguing for positions about what particular agents or collections of agents ought to do in connection with solving each problem and providing a normative view which grounds 1 — 4.

A problem is often considered to constitute a global justice problem when one or more of the following conditions obtain: Actions stemming from an agent, institution, practice, activity and so on that can be traced to one or more states negatively affects residents in another state.

Institutions, practices, policies, activities and so on in one or more states could bring about a benefit or reduction in harm to those resident in another state. There are normative considerations that require agents in one state to take certain actions with respect to agents or entities in another. Such actions might be mediated through institutions, policies, or norms. We cannot solve a problem that affects residents of one or more states without co-operation from other states.

Principles to Guide Behavior in International and Global Matters What sorts of duties of justice, if any, exist among human beings who do not reside in the same country? He says: I believe that the causes of the wealth of a people and the forms it takes lie in their political culture and in the religious, philosophical, and moral traditions that support the basic structure of their political and social institutions, as well as in the industriousness and cooperative talents of its members … The crucial elements that make the difference are the political culture, the political virtues and civic society of the country Rawls , p.

Some key questions are: What principles should govern interactions among peoples at the global level? Prominently, can we hold nations responsible for global injustices or remedying such injustices? This raises important questions about collective responsibility that are well treated elsewhere in this encyclopedia see the entry on collective responsibility.

Is it possible to have global justice in the absence of a world state? Hobbes argues that this is not possible since there is no global authority that can secure and enforce the requirements of justice. He presents the classic so-called realist case, which is highly influential in international politics, such that there is a state of nature in the international realm. All states compete in pursuing their own advantage and since there is no global authority there can be no justice in international affairs. Others are more optimistic. Since we already have a high level of interaction among states, organizations and other agents, this has generated various norms and expectations about appropriate conduct which guide behavior in the international sphere Beitz Moreover, we have a strong interest in co-operation when this is necessary to deal practically with a range of problems that have global reach.

Global governance is concerned with how we manage interests affecting the residents of more than one state in the absence of a world state. There is already a high level of co-operation among a variety of networks, organizations and other groups of interested parties at the sub-state level, and this is powerfully influencing the redesign of best practice norms in particular domains Anne-Marie Slaughter Other change agents that can and have exercised considerable reform pressures include global social movements, such as the anti-sweatshop movement, the fair trade movement, and other ethical consumption movements.

Global activism has been an important source of incremental change. These simple examples show that much more is possible in the absence of a world state than realists acknowledge. For more on issues of world government, see the entry world government , which provides extended treatment of this issue. Philosophers are contributing in important ways to discussions of global justice policy issues. As illustrations, in this entry we have canvassed several institutional reform proposals for addressing global injustices which have enjoyed widespread attention, both within the academy and beyond.

There is also the innovative work of Leif Wenar concerning proposals for clean trade Section 9. In addition to those illustrations already highlighted in this article, philosophers are also having an impact on policy discussions in a wide range of areas including climate change, reforming the United Nations, and suggesting the new priorities that should replace the Millennium Development Goals which expire in Philosophers have also contributed to influential international multi-disciplinary projects that seek alternative ways to measure quality of life or poverty Nussbaum and Sen , Pogge One area recently drawing increased attention concerns tax and accounting matters.

Philosophers have discussed rampant abusive tax practices by corporations and wealthy individuals and how this deprives developing countries of much-needed income for human development in developing countries. There has also been discussion of global income taxes, carbon taxes, financial transaction taxes and Tobin Taxes Moellendorf , Caney b, Brock Philosophers continue to make an important contribution to policy debates and this is also likely to be an area in which considerable useful future work on global justice will concentrate.

Global Justice First published Fri Mar 6, Some Definitional Issues 1. Global Economic Injustice 5. Global Gender Justice 6. Immigration 7. Global Environmental Issues 8. Global Health Issues 9. In general, a theory of global justice aims to give us an account of what justice on a global scale consists in and this often includes discussion of the following components: identifying what should count as important problems of global justice positing solutions to each identified problem identifying who might have responsibilities in addressing the identified problem arguing for positions about what particular agents or collections of agents ought to do in connection with solving each problem and providing a normative view which grounds 1 — 4.

A problem is often considered to constitute a global justice problem when one or more of the following conditions obtain: Actions stemming from an agent, institution, practice, activity and so on that can be traced to one or more states negatively affects residents in another state. Institutions, practices, policies, activities and so on in one or more states could bring about a benefit or reduction in harm to those resident in another state.

There are normative considerations that require agents in one state to take certain actions with respect to agents or entities in another. Such actions might be mediated through institutions, policies, or norms.

Iris Marion Young

We cannot solve a problem that affects residents of one or more states without co-operation from other states. Principles to Guide Behavior in International and Global Matters What sorts of duties of justice, if any, exist among human beings who do not reside in the same country? He says: I believe that the causes of the wealth of a people and the forms it takes lie in their political culture and in the religious, philosophical, and moral traditions that support the basic structure of their political and social institutions, as well as in the industriousness and cooperative talents of its members … The crucial elements that make the difference are the political culture, the political virtues and civic society of the country Rawls , p.

Some key questions are: What principles should govern interactions among peoples at the global level? What are the causes of prosperity and are they traceable entirely to domestic factors or are international considerations relevant? What should count as the kind of prosperity or well-being that we are aiming to promote? What duties do we have to those peoples who do not yet have what they need for self-determination or prosperity?

If human rights serve an important role in world affairs, which rights should be on our list of those to endorse? What duties arise from such commitment? Can we properly hold nations to be entirely responsible for the well-being of their people and if so, in what kinds of conditions might this make sense? When we consider what we owe one another, do compatriots deserve special consideration? I trace some of the influential positions that have shaped answers to these questions next. Global Economic Injustice Possibly the next most prominent global justice issue after considerations of proper use of force concerns the impact of, and responsibilities created by, globalization.

Global Gender Justice The effects of poverty do not fall equally on men and women, nor on boys and girls. Immigration There are a large number of issues debated in the global justice literature concerning migration, whether temporary, permanent, legal or illegal. Global Environmental Issues Patterns of human behavior that destroy habitats, accelerate species extinction, exacerbate toxic levels of pollution, contribute to ozone layer destruction, or increase population levels are all issues of global environmental concern.

Global Health Issues One striking feature of the state of global health is that there are large inequalities in health outcomes and opportunities for health. There are at least four parameters that agents can use in their reasoning: Power: we have different levels of influence and capacities to change processes.

We should focus on those areas where we have greater capacities to change worrisome structural processes. This might mean focusing on a few key players who have both greater capacity to make changes themselves and to influence others. Privilege: some people have more privilege than others in relation to structures.

So middle-class clothing consumers have more discretionary income, choice and ability to absorb costs—they can change their clothing purchasing practices more easily than those who earn minimum wage, have little discretionary income, and little ability to absorb further costs. Interest: All who have an interest in changing oppressive structures have responsibilities in connection with remedying these.

In a nuanced analysis she argues that they might have responsibilities in certain contexts, such as to speak out about the harsh conditions in which they work. They must take some responsibility for resisting and challenging the structures. Without their participation the need for reforms may be rationalized away or reforms may not take the required form.

These obligations may not always exist, especially when the costs of resistance would require extraordinary sacrifices. Collective ability: In some cases we already have collective organization capacities and resources that are well established. Sometimes it just makes good practical sense to draw on these. So, for instance, sometimes student associations, faith-based organizations, unions, or stockholder groups already exercise significant power in being able to coordinate like-minded members who are willing to take certain actions.

She encourages us to harness organizational resources where doing so would prove effective. The Contribution to Public Policy Philosophers are contributing in important ways to discussions of global justice policy issues. Bibliography Abizadeh, A. Altman, A. Aquinas, T. Dyson ed. Banai, A. Ronzoni and C. Schemmel eds. Barry, B. Goodin eds. Barry, C. Herman and L. Tomitova eds. Pogge eds. Beitz, C. Bell, D.

Benatar, S. Blake, M. Zalta ed. Bohman, J. Brock, G. Brighouse eds. Moellendorf eds. Brooks, T. Brown, G. Held eds. Buchanan, A. Caney, S. Carens, J. Chatterjee, D. Coady, T. Cohen, J. Jaggar ed. Cole, P. Daniels, N. Benatar and G. Brock eds. Dobson, A. Doyle, M. Geneva: MSF. Dryzek, J. Freeman, S. Gardiner, S. Gehring, V. Goodin, R.

Gould, C. Hardin, G. Hassoun, N.

The Many Faces of Injustice

Hayward, T. Held, D. Held, V. Bell ed. Hobbes, T. Tuck ed. Jaggar, A. Follesdal and T. James, A. Kant, I. Reiss ed. Kleingeld, P. Kuper, A. New York: Routledge. Kuper ed. Lang, A. Liu, C. London, A. Luban, D. Mandle, J. Margalit, A. Martin, R.

Malden, MA: Blackwell. McKim, R. McMahan eds. McMahan, J. Mellow, D. Mill, J. Miller, D. Cohen and C. Wellman eds. Miller, R. Miscevic, N. Moellendorf, D. Moore, M. Moseley, A. Fieser and B. Dowden eds. Nagel, T. Nickel, J. Nowicka, M. Rovisco eds. Nussbaum, M. Nussbaum and J. Glover eds. Cohen ed. Sen eds. Jimenes ed.


  1. Fools;
  2. What is Responsible Leadership?!
  3. Book Detail;

Okin, S. Orend, B. Pogge, T. Chatterjee ed. Brock ed. Fleurbaey and M. Adler eds. Horton eds. Paul, MN: Paragon House. Primoratz, I. Rawls, J. Reidy, D. Risse, M. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rodin, D. Stahn and J.

Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice
Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice

Related Relational Accountability: Complexities of Structural Injustice



Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved