Year:

Forthcoming articles
  1. Theodore J. Everett & Bruce M. Everett (forthcoming). Justice and Gini Coefficients. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14528653.
    Gini coefficients, which measure gross inequalities rather than their unfair components, are often used as proxy measures of absolute or relative distributive injustice in Western societies. This presupposes that the fair inequalities in these societies are small and stable enough to be ignored. This article presents a model for a series of ideal, perfectly just societies, where comfortable lives are equally available to everyone, and calculates the Gini coefficients for each. According to this model, inequalities produced by age and other (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Malcolm Oswald (forthcoming). In a Democracy, What Should a Healthcare System Do? A Dilemma for Public Policymakers. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-13497670.
    In modern representative democracies, much healthcare is publicly funded or provided and so the question of what healthcare systems should do is a matter of public policy. Given that public resources are inevitably limited, what should be done and who should benefit from healthcare? It is a dilemma for policymakers and a subject of debate within several disciplines, but rarely across disciplines. In this paper, I draw on thinking from several disciplines and especially philosophy, economics, and systems theory. I conclude (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Fabian Wendt (forthcoming). Justice and Political Authority in Left-Libertarianism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14539698.
    From a left-libertarian perspective, it seems almost impossible for states to acquire political authority. For that reason, left-libertarians like Peter Vallentyne understandably hope that states without political authority could nonetheless implement left-libertarian justice. Vallentyne has argued that one can indeed assess a state’s justness without assessing its political authority. Against Vallentyne, I try to show that states without political authority have to be judged unjust even if they successfully promote justice. The reason is that institutions can be unjust independently from (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Preston J. Werner (forthcoming). Self-Ownership and Non-Culpable Proviso Violations. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-13496754.
    Left and right libertarians alike are attracted to the thesis of self-ownership (SO) because, as Eric Mack says, they ‘believe that it best captures our common perception of the moral inviolability of persons’. Further, most libertarians, left and right, accept that some version of the Lockean Proviso (LP) restricts agents’ ability to acquire worldly resources. The inviolability of SO purports to make libertarianism more appealing than its (non-libertarian) egalitarian counterparts, since traditional egalitarian theories cannot straightforwardly explain why, e.g. forced organ (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David Wiens (forthcoming). Natural Resources and Government Responsiveness. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-13496755.
    Pogge (2008) and Wenar (2008) have recently argued that we are responsible for the persistence of the so-called ‘resource curse’. But their analyses are limited in important ways. I trace these limitations to their undue focus on the ways in which the international rules governing resource transactions undermine government accountability. To overcome the shortcomings of Pogge’s and Wenar’s analyses, I propose a normative framework organized around the social value of government responsiveness and discuss the implications of adopting this framework for (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. S. Segall (forthcoming). In Defense of Priority (and Equality). Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14550966.
    In a recent article, Michael Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve argue that prioritarianism fails to account for the shift in moral significance in gains to individuals in interpersonal as compared to intrapersonal cases. In this article, I show that the priority view escapes this objection but in a way that deprives it of (some of) its anti-egalitarian stance. Despite Otsuka and Voorhoeve, prioritarianism, rightly understood, provides consistent and attractive recommendations in both single- and multi-person cases. Yet prioritarians, the article goes on (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Arash Abizadeh, Manish Pandey & Sohrab Abizadeh (forthcoming). Wage Competition and the Special-Obligations Challenge to More Open Borders. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14544286.
    According to the special-obligations challenge to the justice argument for more open borders, immigration restrictions to wealthier polities are justified because of special obligations owed to disadvantaged compatriots negatively impacted by the immigration of low-skilled foreign workers. We refute the special-obligations challenge by refuting its empirical premise and draw out the normative implications of the empirical evidence for border policies. We show that immigration to wealthier polities has negligible impact on domestic wages and that only previous cohorts of immigrants are (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Alexander Brown (forthcoming). Principles of Stakes Fairness in Sport. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14523525.
    Fairness in sport is not just about assigning the top prizes to the worthiest competitors. It is also about the way the prize structure itself is organised. For many sporting competitions, although it may be acceptable for winners to receive more than losers, it can seem unfair for winners to take everything and for losers to get nothing. Yet this insight leaves unanswered some difficult questions about what stakes fairness requires and which principles of stakes fairness are appropriate for particular (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Robert Huseby (forthcoming). Should the Beneficiaries Pay? Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-13506366.
    Many theorists claim that if an agent benefits from an action that harms others, that agent has a moral duty to compensate those who are harmed, even if the agent did not cause the harm herself. In the debate on climate justice, this idea is commonly referred to as the beneficiary-pays principle (BPP). This paper argues that the BPP is implausible, both in the context of climate change and as a normative principle more generally. It should therefore be rejected.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Stephen John (forthcoming). Efficiency, Responsibility and Disability: Philosophical Lessons From the Savings Argument for Pre-Natal Diagnosis. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-13505412.
    Pre-natal-diagnosis technologies allow parents to discover whether their child is likely to suffer from serious disability. One argument for state funding of access to such technologies is that doing so would be “cost-effective”, in the sense that the expected financial costs of such a programme would be outweighed by expected “benefits”, stemming from the births of fewer children with serious disabilities. This argument is extremely controversial. This paper argues that the argument may not be as unacceptable as is often assumed. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Alex Levitov (forthcoming). Human Rights, Self-Determination, and External Legitimacy. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-14544285.
    It is commonly supposed that (a) at least some states possess a moral right against external intervention in their domestic affairs and (b) all human rights violations give members of the international community reasons to undertake preventive or remedial action against offending states. No state, however, currently protects or could reasonably be expected to protect its subjects’ human rights to a perfect degree. In view of this reality, many have found it difficult to explain how any existing or readily foreseeable (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation