补贴、重新安置和社会公正

IF 0.9 Q3 ETHICS
S. Loriaux
{"title":"补贴、重新安置和社会公正","authors":"S. Loriaux","doi":"10.1515/mopp-2021-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines Risse and Wollner’s discussion and rejection of several strategies a) in favour of developed countries subsidising their producers, and b) against the relocation of firms operating on their territory. It argues that their critical review of these strategies remains incomplete and therefore not decisive. It starts by bringing into relief two blind spots in their moral assessment of subsidies. The first concerns the imperfect nature of the general duties of global justice they focus on; the second concerns their understanding of the relation between these duties and duties of social justice. While addressing these two difficulties, it presents another possible strategy in support of subsidies, which Risse and Wollner fail to examine: the ‘equal citizenship’ strategy. This strategy is mobilised again in an assessment of Risse and Wollner’s treatment of relocations. In this context, some doubts are raised about the remedy Risse and Wollner prescribe to overcome both social injustices and exploitative relocations ― namely, the domestic redistribution by governments of the gains of international trade. It is argued that such a redistribution is both insufficient to combat social exclusion and threatened by the very practice of trade liberalisation that Risse and Wollner seek to defend.","PeriodicalId":37108,"journal":{"name":"Moral Philosophy and Politics","volume":"12 1","pages":"107 - 124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Subsidies, Relocations, and Social Justice\",\"authors\":\"S. Loriaux\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/mopp-2021-0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article examines Risse and Wollner’s discussion and rejection of several strategies a) in favour of developed countries subsidising their producers, and b) against the relocation of firms operating on their territory. It argues that their critical review of these strategies remains incomplete and therefore not decisive. It starts by bringing into relief two blind spots in their moral assessment of subsidies. The first concerns the imperfect nature of the general duties of global justice they focus on; the second concerns their understanding of the relation between these duties and duties of social justice. While addressing these two difficulties, it presents another possible strategy in support of subsidies, which Risse and Wollner fail to examine: the ‘equal citizenship’ strategy. This strategy is mobilised again in an assessment of Risse and Wollner’s treatment of relocations. In this context, some doubts are raised about the remedy Risse and Wollner prescribe to overcome both social injustices and exploitative relocations ― namely, the domestic redistribution by governments of the gains of international trade. It is argued that such a redistribution is both insufficient to combat social exclusion and threatened by the very practice of trade liberalisation that Risse and Wollner seek to defend.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Moral Philosophy and Politics\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"107 - 124\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Moral Philosophy and Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2021-0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Moral Philosophy and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2021-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了Risse和Wollner对以下几种策略的讨论和反对:a)支持发达国家补贴其生产商,b)反对在其领土上经营的公司搬迁。它认为,他们对这些战略的批判性审查仍然不完整,因此不是决定性的。它首先揭示了他们对补贴的道德评估中的两个盲点。第一个问题涉及他们所关注的全球正义一般义务的不完善性质;第二个问题是他们对这些义务与社会正义义务之间关系的理解。在解决这两个困难的同时,它提出了另一种支持补贴的可能策略,这是Risse和Wollner未能研究的:“平等公民身份”策略。在Risse和Wollner对重新安置的处理的评估中,这个策略再次被调动起来。在这种情况下,有人对Risse和Wollner为克服社会不公正和剥削性重新安置而规定的补救措施提出了一些怀疑,即政府对国际贸易收益的国内再分配。有人认为,这种再分配不仅不足以对抗社会排斥,而且受到里斯和沃尔纳试图捍卫的贸易自由化实践的威胁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Subsidies, Relocations, and Social Justice
Abstract This article examines Risse and Wollner’s discussion and rejection of several strategies a) in favour of developed countries subsidising their producers, and b) against the relocation of firms operating on their territory. It argues that their critical review of these strategies remains incomplete and therefore not decisive. It starts by bringing into relief two blind spots in their moral assessment of subsidies. The first concerns the imperfect nature of the general duties of global justice they focus on; the second concerns their understanding of the relation between these duties and duties of social justice. While addressing these two difficulties, it presents another possible strategy in support of subsidies, which Risse and Wollner fail to examine: the ‘equal citizenship’ strategy. This strategy is mobilised again in an assessment of Risse and Wollner’s treatment of relocations. In this context, some doubts are raised about the remedy Risse and Wollner prescribe to overcome both social injustices and exploitative relocations ― namely, the domestic redistribution by governments of the gains of international trade. It is argued that such a redistribution is both insufficient to combat social exclusion and threatened by the very practice of trade liberalisation that Risse and Wollner seek to defend.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Moral Philosophy and Politics
Moral Philosophy and Politics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信