David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In E. Emanuel J. Millum (ed.), Global Justice and Bioethics. Oxford University Press 213-240 (2012)
Many people in the developing world access essential health services either partially or primarily through programs run by international non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Given that such programs are typically designed and run by Westerners, and funded by Western countries and their citizens, it is not surprising that such programs are regarded by many as vehicles for Western cultural imperialism. In this chapter, I consider this phenomenon as it emerges in the context of development and humanitarian aid programs, particularly those delivering medical treatment, nutrition and access to clean water. I argue that in order to avoid contributing to cultural imperialism, INGOs have a duty to ensure that they do not offer services in a way that requires their beneficiaries to choose between accessing essential health services and violating or otherwise undermining traditional norms and practices which have significance for their beneficiaries. Following Onora O'Neill, I argue that offers requiring such a choice are effectively “unrefuseable” and so coercive. INGOs therefore, must avoid making such offers, and can accomplish this by means of an iterated process of reciprocal negotiation under conditions of equality, in which both the INGOs’ and the beneficiaries’ deep values and concerns play a role. In essence, I claim that employing such a process is a requirement of procedural justice, given the non-ideal conditions in which INGOs must operate.
|Keywords||non-governmental organizations intercultural conflict non-ideal theory procedural justice coercion|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Scott Wisor (2012). How Should INGOs Allocate Resources? Ethics and Global Politics 5 (1):27-48.
Gopal Sreenivasan (2007). Health and Justice in Our Non-Ideal World. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (2):218-236.
Corey Brettschneider (2006). The Value Theory of Democracy. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (3):259-278.
Lisa L. Fuller (2012). Priority-Setting in International Non-Governmental Organizations: It is Not as Easy as ABCD. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):5-17.
Emanuela Ceva (2008). Impure Procedural Justice and the Management of Conflicts About Values. Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):5-22.
Lisa Fuller (2006). Justified Commitments? Considering Resource Allocation and Fairness in Médecins Sans Frontières-Holland. Developing World Bioethics 6 (2):59–70.
Martin Gustafsson (2004). On Rawls’s Distinction Between Perfect and Imperfect Procedural Justice. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34 (2):300-305.
Norman Daniels (2008). Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. Cambridge University Press.
Marcus Arvan (2008). A Nonideal Theory of Justice. Dissertation, University of Arizona
Emanuela Ceva (2007). Plural Values and Heterogeneous Situations. Considerations on the Scope for a Political Theory of Justice. European Journal of Political Theory 6 (3):359-375.
Rebecca A. Reisch (2011). International Service Learning Programs: Ethical Issues and Recommendations. Developing World Bioethics 11 (2):93-98.
Chockalingam Viswesvaran & Deniz S. Ones (2002). Examining the Construct of Organizational Justice: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of Relations with Work Attitudes and Behaviors. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 38 (3):193 - 203.
Cristina Lafont (2003). Procedural Justice?: Implications of the Rawls-Habermas Debate for Discourse Ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (2):163-181.
Annette Rid (2009). Justice and Procedure: How Does “Accountability for Reasonableness” Result in Fair Limit-Setting Decisions? Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (1):12-16.
Added to index2011-06-28
Total downloads164 ( #21,702 of 1,893,548 )
Recent downloads (6 months)80 ( #6,134 of 1,893,548 )
How can I increase my downloads?