贸易正义、权力和制度——给里塞和沃尔纳的几个问题

IF 0.9 Q3 ETHICS
O. Suttle
{"title":"贸易正义、权力和制度——给里塞和沃尔纳的几个问题","authors":"O. Suttle","doi":"10.1515/mopp-2021-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While Risse and Wollner make an important contribution to theorising global justice and trade, I identify certain concerns with their approach and suggest an alternative that addresses these. First, I query their emphasis on subjection to the trade regime as a morally salient feature, suggesting their argument trades on an ambiguity, and fails to connect the trade regime, as a trigger, with their preferred account of trade-justice-as-non-exploitation. Second, I examine their treatment of the WTO, how they understand international organisations as inheritors of states’ obligations, and how far an organisation like the WTO can or should be self-consciously reoriented towards justice-as-non-exploitation. Third, I ask how their account is distinct from existing approaches, and whether it makes sense to apply the same conception of justice across diverse agents and institutions. I conclude by sketching an alternative approach, which makes the justification of states’ policies to outsiders the central problem of trade justice.","PeriodicalId":37108,"journal":{"name":"Moral Philosophy and Politics","volume":"108 1","pages":"147 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Trade Justice, Power and Institutions – Some Questions for Risse and Wollner\",\"authors\":\"O. Suttle\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/mopp-2021-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract While Risse and Wollner make an important contribution to theorising global justice and trade, I identify certain concerns with their approach and suggest an alternative that addresses these. First, I query their emphasis on subjection to the trade regime as a morally salient feature, suggesting their argument trades on an ambiguity, and fails to connect the trade regime, as a trigger, with their preferred account of trade-justice-as-non-exploitation. Second, I examine their treatment of the WTO, how they understand international organisations as inheritors of states’ obligations, and how far an organisation like the WTO can or should be self-consciously reoriented towards justice-as-non-exploitation. Third, I ask how their account is distinct from existing approaches, and whether it makes sense to apply the same conception of justice across diverse agents and institutions. I conclude by sketching an alternative approach, which makes the justification of states’ policies to outsiders the central problem of trade justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Moral Philosophy and Politics\",\"volume\":\"108 1\",\"pages\":\"147 - 171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-03\",\"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-2021-0017\",\"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-2021-0017","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

虽然Risse和Wollner对全球正义和贸易的理论化做出了重要贡献,但我认为他们的方法存在某些问题,并提出了解决这些问题的替代方案。首先,我质疑他们强调服从贸易制度是一个道德上显著的特征,这表明他们的论点是模糊的,未能将贸易制度作为一个触发因素,与他们偏爱的贸易正义即不剥削的说法联系起来。其次,我考察了他们对世贸组织的态度,他们如何理解国际组织是国家义务的继承者,以及像世贸组织这样的组织能够或应该在多大程度上自觉地重新定位于正义即不剥削。第三,我问他们的解释与现有的方法有何不同,以及在不同的主体和机构中应用相同的正义概念是否有意义。最后,我概述了另一种方法,将国家对外政策的正当性作为贸易公正的核心问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On Trade Justice, Power and Institutions – Some Questions for Risse and Wollner
Abstract While Risse and Wollner make an important contribution to theorising global justice and trade, I identify certain concerns with their approach and suggest an alternative that addresses these. First, I query their emphasis on subjection to the trade regime as a morally salient feature, suggesting their argument trades on an ambiguity, and fails to connect the trade regime, as a trigger, with their preferred account of trade-justice-as-non-exploitation. Second, I examine their treatment of the WTO, how they understand international organisations as inheritors of states’ obligations, and how far an organisation like the WTO can or should be self-consciously reoriented towards justice-as-non-exploitation. Third, I ask how their account is distinct from existing approaches, and whether it makes sense to apply the same conception of justice across diverse agents and institutions. I conclude by sketching an alternative approach, which makes the justification of states’ policies to outsiders the central problem of trade justice.
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